If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gawker)   Had any fresh fruits and vegetables lately? How about some almonds or walnuts? California produces a huge percentage of this stuff, and the state just cut farm water supplies to ... zero   (gawker.com) divider line 222
    More: Scary, walnuts, vegetables lately, almonds, water supplies, fruits, farms  
•       •       •

8405 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Feb 2014 at 12:41 AM (30 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



222 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-01 03:00:50 PM

make me some tea: Lee Jackson Beauregard: OnlyM3: Thanks to the liberals who have been preventing reservoir construction.

Reservoirs aren't going to do jack if there's no water to put in them.

California has plenty of reservoirs.


Apparently not.  If they had plenty, they wouldn't be out of water would they?
 
2014-02-01 03:37:36 PM

Mr. Eugenides: make me some tea: Lee Jackson Beauregard: OnlyM3: Thanks to the liberals who have been preventing reservoir construction.

Reservoirs aren't going to do jack if there's no water to put in them.

California has plenty of reservoirs.

Apparently not.  If they had plenty, they wouldn't be out of water would they?


That's not accurate.  They do in fact have plenty of reservoirs.  They just lack any water to put in them.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-02-01 04:50:43 PM

Mister Peejay: Nexzus: As a citizen of the country north of the USA, incidentally containing 20% of the world's fresh water and .5% of the world's population: every time I hear about another water shortage in our neighbours to the south, I get a tiny bit more nervous.

This shiat only seems to be getting worse. People will biatch and moan and make-do over super-expensive or no oil. They may get shooty if you do the same with water.

I find it kinda funny (funny "duh" not funny "ha-ha") when people start mumbling about getting water from the Great Lakes.

Ever look at the Great Lakes watershed?  Most of it is in Canada.  That's Canadian water.


Then make sure it stays on your side. Otherwise, what makes its way over is in dispute.

/see how silly that sounds?
//because it is
 
2014-02-01 06:22:53 PM

give me doughnuts: Ronin_S: Rain barrels in every hardware store.


Several western states have some strict rules concerning rainwater collection.


I didn't realize that. They're begging people to collect their rainwater and have permeable driveways in Ontario because there are so many paved surfaces in the city that a major rain has a good chance of causing a flood.
 
2014-02-01 07:00:10 PM

Kahabut: Mr. Eugenides: make me some tea: Lee Jackson Beauregard: OnlyM3: Thanks to the liberals who have been preventing reservoir construction.

Reservoirs aren't going to do jack if there's no water to put in them.

California has plenty of reservoirs.

Apparently not.  If they had plenty, they wouldn't be out of water would they?

That's not accurate.  They do in fact have plenty of reservoirs.  They just lack any water to put in them.


Reservoir - water = Depression :)
 
2014-02-01 07:26:32 PM

CourtroomWolf: stirfrybry: http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/2014/01/19/drought-in-california-c o ol-pdo-and-warm-amo/

When the PDO is cool (which it is) and the AMO is warm (which it is) drought in California is going to happen.

Pop quiz: What are PDO and AMO?  (your blog sucks and the links are fake)


LOL you are retarded.
Go to NOAA if you really don't know what they are
 
2014-02-01 09:29:01 PM

UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: Kahabut: Mr. Eugenides: make me some tea: Lee Jackson Beauregard: OnlyM3: Thanks to the liberals who have been preventing reservoir construction.

Reservoirs aren't going to do jack if there's no water to put in them.

California has plenty of reservoirs.

Apparently not.  If they had plenty, they wouldn't be out of water would they?

That's not accurate.  They do in fact have plenty of reservoirs.  They just lack any water to put in them.

Reservoir - water = Depression :)



This concludes another episode of Algonquin Farking Round Table.
 
2014-02-01 09:43:19 PM

That Guy Jeff: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Maybe the fact that there's no water TO deliver might be a factor

/reservoirs ain't lookin' too good around here
//and damn little snow up top
///this is gonna suck hard come Summer

You live in California; be honest, it sucks in Spring, Fall, and Winter too.

Gyrfalcon:
I wonder how much water would be saved if we banned lawns--and ONLY lawns--in So Cal. I bet it would be a lot.

The answer: more than enough. It's farking stupid that people have lawns in deserts. And golf courses, being giant lawns, are the worst. They have both of them out here in Arizona too, which is extra stupid.

I've got a better solution though, that won't end up with  SWAT teams being used for code enforcement required. Simply stop subsidizing the cost of water. You see, I don't conserve water at all. I leave the sink running while I brush my teeth, I run the dishwasher as many times I need to, I take long showers. And the water usage part of my bill every month is $2. Literally $2. I could use ten times as much water as I do every month and the bill would still be negligible. There's absolutely no incentive to save water.

Now, I live in a freakin desert. There's no way the water I use actually costs $2. Somewhere along the line some asshat in the government decided to encourage growth or "help" the poor or more likely just wanted to play golf, and now water usage isn't remotely related to water costs. There's no reason not to use as much as you want, and all us jerks can have lawns and long showers and golf courses right up until nothing comes out of the tap.

So get rid of that crap. Let water cost what it actually costs, and you don't have to make any rules about water usage. Suddenly lawns are too expensive, people shut off the water the way they shut off lights, and golf courses go out of business. Best of all, if the cost of water goes up, the usage goes down and the water lasts longer. It's freakin' amazing what letting people see the actual cost of their stuf ...


Amen.  Could not be more right.  Don't subsidize anybody.  Not industry, farmers, golf courses, none of it.
 
2014-02-01 10:00:11 PM

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: Kahabut: Mr. Eugenides: make me some tea: Lee Jackson Beauregard: OnlyM3: Thanks to the liberals who have been preventing reservoir construction.

Reservoirs aren't going to do jack if there's no water to put in them.

California has plenty of reservoirs.

Apparently not.  If they had plenty, they wouldn't be out of water would they?

That's not accurate.  They do in fact have plenty of reservoirs.  They just lack any water to put in them.

Reservoir - water = Depression :)


This concludes another episode of Algonquin Farking Round Table.


Tune in next week to hear Dorothy Parker say, "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make her think."
 
2014-02-01 10:23:26 PM
Oil or water?
 
2014-02-01 11:01:36 PM
putting farms in deserts was never very smart
 
2014-02-02 12:21:53 AM

Louisiana_Sitar_Club: ElLoco: Louisiana_Sitar_Club: Gyrfalcon: I wonder how much water would be saved if we banned lawns--and ONLY lawns--in So Cal. I bet it would be a lot.

I bet it wouldn't.  If only there were some way to find out.  Oh yeah, the Googles.

UCLA Institute of Environment and Sustainability:


[www.environment.ucla.edu image 500x335]

Urban residential exterior (multi family and single family combined): 6%
Large Landscape 1%
Total: 7% (only a portion of which goes to grass.)

Yeah!  Get rid of those lawns!!!!!  I'm waaaaahhhrrrrrggarrbbllllle!

You have some sort of agenda going on here?  Gyrfalcon specifically mentions lawns in SoCal, so you go ahead and post a graph of the entire state of California when  right below the same graph you posted from the same link is a graph of lawns in SoCal.

Here... let me re-Google that for you:

Yeah!  Cherry-pick charted information to create a misleading presentation!!!!!  I'm waaaaahhhrrrrrggarrbbllllle!

I can't read that graph very well now that I'm on mobile but the issue at hand here is not enough water for agriculture in the state of California. You can either get your knickers in a twist over a small fraction of the state and come up with a local solution that does precisely jack shiat to address the problem or you can look at water availability on a scale that is germane to the discussion at hand. I chose to look at the data that speaks best to water allocation as it relates to California agriculture. You do whatever the fark you want.


Yes, the vast majority of the state's water is used for agriculture, but most of us can't do a whole lot about that.  Sure, we can push for laws that would require agribusiness to use water more wisely, but those sorts of changes usually take years.  Meanwhile, anyone who lives in California can reduce their own water usage wherever possible (replace lawns with xeriscaping, turn off the faucet when brushing teeth, etc.), and make a small but nonzero difference.
 
2014-02-02 12:38:27 AM

anfrind: Yes, the vast majority of the state's water is used for agriculture, but most of us can't do a whole lot about that. Sure, we can push for laws that would require agribusiness to use water more wisely, but those sorts of changes usually take years


I can remember our lawmakers pushing for better water practices for agribusiness in 1977, when I was a sophomore in high school. Instead we got the first attempt to force the Peripheral Canal down our throats. Pass the damned laws already, and MAKE the farkers obey. This shiat is old.
 
2014-02-02 01:46:58 AM
Interesting statement from the NWS:

...A PLETHORA OF RECORDS SET IN SACRAMENTO CALIFORNIA THROUGHOUT JANUARY 2014 DURING THIS HISTORIC DROUGHT...
JANUARY 2014 RE-WROTE THE RECORD BOOKS IN SACRAMENTO. HERE ARE THE HIGHLIGHTS, MANY RECORDS NEVER SEEN BEFORE IN THE CAPITAL CITY.
1. LONGEST DRY PERIOD DURING THE RAINY SEASON (NOV-MAR) FROM DEC 7, 2013 TO JAN 29, 2014, 52 DAYS. THE OLD RECORD WAS 44 DAYS FROM NOV 15, 1976 TO DEC 28, 1976 ( MEASURABLE RAIN)
2. THE THIRD DRIEST JAN IN HISTORY SINCE 1850 WITH 0.20 INCHES DATING BACK TO SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION RECORDS.
3. JAN PRECIPITATION ENDED WITH 0.20 INCHES. NORMAL IS 3.97 INCHES. THIS IS ONLY 5 PERCENT OF NORMAL.
4. JAN 2014 BROKE HIGHEST AVERAGE MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE WITH 66.1 DEGREES. THE OLD RECORD WAS 62.1 DEGREES SET IN 1976. AVERAGE MONTHLY MAXIMUM ONLY 55.1 DEGREES.
5. NEW ALL-TIME RECORD HIGH FOR THE MONTH OF JAN SET ON JAN 24, 2014 OF 79 DEGREES. THE OLD RECORD WAS 74 DEGREES ON JAN 31,1976.
6. JAN 2014 BROKE THE NUMBER OF DAYS WITH HIGH TEMPERATURES OF 70 DEGREES OR HIGHER AT 7 DAYS. THE PREVIOUS RECORD WAS 6 DAYS SET IN 1976.
7. TIED THE RECORD FOR CONSECUTIVE DAYS OF HIGH TEMPERATURES AT 70 DEGREES OR HIGHER WITH 3 DAYS IN JAN FROM JAN 23, 2014 TO JAN 25 2014. PREVIOUS RECORD WAS JAN 29, 1976 TO JAN 31, 1976.
8. RECORD HIGH TEMPERATURES SET ON 12 DIFFERENT DAYS IN JAN 2014
JAN 1....65 DEGREES....TIED RECORD SET IN 1887. JAN 2....66 DEGREES....BREAKS RECORD OF 65 SET IN 1940. JAN 3....66 DEGREES....BREAKS RECORD OF 64 SET IN 2012. JAN 7....65 DEGREES....TIED RECORD SET IN 2012. JAN 15...69 DEGREES....BREAKS RECORD OF 68 SET IN 2003. JAN 16...71 DEGREES....BREAKS RECORD OF 68 SET IN 1991. JAN 18...70 DEGREES....TIED RECORD SET IN 1976. JAN 20...71 DEGREES....BREAKS RECORD OF 69 SET IN 1976. JAN 23...71 DEGREES....BREAKS RECORD OF 69 SET IN 1948. JAN 24...79 DEGREES....BREAKS RECORD OF 7O SET IN 1984.(ALL-TIME)JAN JAN 25...74 DEGREES....BREAKS RECORD OF 71 SET IN 1899. JAN 28...70 DEGREES....TIED RECORD SET IN 1984.
9. EVERYDAY IN JAN 2014 THE DAYTIME HIGH TEMPERATURE WAS ABOVE NORMAL FOR THE MONTH, NORMAL HIGH RANGE IS 53 TO 57 DEGREES. JAN 2014 WAS 57 TO 79 DEGREES.
10. FINALLY, WE ARE HOPING FOR A FABULOUS FEB 2014. ALL-TIME RECORD FOR RAIN IN FEB IS 10.30 INCHES SET IN 1986.
HAVE A NICE WEEKEND!
SPECIAL NOTE: SACRAMENTO STATICAL DATA WAS USED DUE TO ITS LENGTHY HISTORY FOR RECORDS DATING BACK TO 1849 FOR PRECIPITATION AND 1877 FOR TEMPERATURES. SEVERAL OTHER LOCATIONS THROUGHOUT INTERIOR NORTHERN CALIFORNIA DID BREAK RECORDS, BUT DUE TO THE DETAILED DATA BASE FOR SACRAMENTO DETAILED INFORMATION WAS VERIFIED.
 
jvl
2014-02-02 01:48:57 AM

ElLoco: Yeah!  Cherry-pick charted information to create a misleading presentation!!!!!  I'm waaaaahhhrrrrrggarrbbllllle!


So you're saying if you ignore the farms and look at what water is used inside a city, very little of it is agriculture? Please tell me more!
 
2014-02-02 02:42:22 AM

make me some tea: Yeah, shiat's getting real here. This is Folsom Lake, which is a major part of the water supply for the Sacramento area. I took this pic a couple weekends ago.


Damn! I was there in September and it looked a little low but was still a lake! It emptied completely since then?! I'm in SF now and getting a little worried.
 
2014-02-02 02:58:46 AM

jvl: ElLoco: Yeah!  Cherry-pick charted information to create a misleading presentation!!!!!  I'm waaaaahhhrrrrrggarrbbllllle!

So you're saying if you ignore the farms and look at what water is used inside a city, very little of it is agriculture? Please tell me more!


Ok... ask yourself: Do I want grains and veggies for lunch for as long as possible, or should I come up with some good recipes for Kentucky bluegrass?"

It's your choice. Do what you want.
 
2014-02-02 08:53:41 AM

ElLoco: jvl: ElLoco: Yeah!  Cherry-pick charted information to create a misleading presentation!!!!!  I'm waaaaahhhrrrrrggarrbbllllle!

So you're saying if you ignore the farms and look at what water is used inside a city, very little of it is agriculture? Please tell me more!

Ok... ask yourself: Do I want grains and veggies for lunch for as long as possible, or should I come up with some good recipes for Kentucky bluegrass?"

It's your choice. Do what you want.


The point is that you can save water locally but it will have little to no effect on agriculture.  Saving water on the small scale is a good thing, sure.  But, as anfrind correctly point out above, getting rid of lawns will have little to know effect on agriculture.  Getting rid of lawns is not at all unreasonable in our situation.  But, it won't have a significant effect on agriculture.  Arguing to get rid of lawns to because it will have any real affect on agriculture makes you sound like your are utterly incapable of grasping the concept of scale.  Hell, maybe you are incapable, I don't know.
 
2014-02-02 09:47:17 AM
en.es-static.us

Flood Irrigation. This is how most of California's crops are watered.

en.es-static.us

Drip Irrigation. This is how California's crops should be watered. No evaporation, no over-watering, much less weeding, and a water-savings of 15-55%, with a crop gain of 18-50%. Citation (warning: PDF).
 
2014-02-02 10:17:59 AM

UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: anfrind: Yes, the vast majority of the state's water is used for agriculture, but most of us can't do a whole lot about that. Sure, we can push for laws that would require agribusiness to use water more wisely, but those sorts of changes usually take years

I can remember our lawmakers pushing for better water practices for agribusiness in 1977, when I was a sophomore in high school. Instead we got the first attempt to force the Peripheral Canal down our throats. Pass the damned laws already, and MAKE the farkers obey. This shiat is old.


Considering that one of the things that sank Jimmy Carter's presidency was that he told American to turn down the thermostat and put on a sweater, it doesn't come as a surprise to me that it could take 36+ years for the laws to catch up with the times.
 
2014-02-02 10:18:45 AM

anfrind: Considering that one of the things that sank Jimmy Carter's presidency was that he told America to turn down the thermostat and put on a sweater, it doesn't come as a surprise to me that it could take 36+ years for the laws to catch up with the times.


FTFM
 
2014-02-02 10:38:40 AM

anfrind: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: anfrind: Yes, the vast majority of the state's water is used for agriculture, but most of us can't do a whole lot about that. Sure, we can push for laws that would require agribusiness to use water more wisely, but those sorts of changes usually take years

I can remember our lawmakers pushing for better water practices for agribusiness in 1977, when I was a sophomore in high school. Instead we got the first attempt to force the Peripheral Canal down our throats. Pass the damned laws already, and MAKE the farkers obey. This shiat is old.

Considering that one of the things that sank Jimmy Carter's presidency was that he told American to turn down the thermostat and put on a sweater, it doesn't come as a surprise to me that it could take 36+ years for the laws to catch up with the times.


Good point. He's looking smarter and smarter every day. I still regret that I wasted my first voting opportunity on John Anderson.
 
Displayed 22 of 222 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report