I feel like the title of this article is misleading. The state orders have exceptions listed and the ranchers want to use these exceptions.
The Shasta River Water Association sent a letter to the Division of Water Rights Deputy Director Erik Ekdahl, informing the agency of plans to defy the curtailment order through exceptions listed by the order.
It just seems like a normal legal dispute about what exactly the rules are, rather than plain old "defiance".
But the state of california would pay for it and has a huge tax base. It wouldn't be cheap but isn't completely infeasible. Especially since water intensive agriculture tends to produce very expensive crops (nuts, avocados etc.). My back of the napkin is $20 billion capex based on existing water usage and existing desal plants.
Why do we need to grow nuts and avocados in California in the first place, during a drought? It is not like these are staple crops and are needed for humans to survive, right? If tax payers pay for any solution, what guarantees do they have that these solutions will end up only benefiting some rich farmers and not everyone?
Wouldn’t it be sensible to just stop growing water intensive crops in drought areas? Across the world I mean, not just California. Especially if those crops are “nice to have”?
Water Wars. Why don't Discovery make a show about these idiots.
Why can't I grow almonds in the middle of a desert?
Quora: Why is my dock 40 feet above water level of Lake Mead???
The East Coast loves these antics!!! Make it a show.
Those crazy Kalifornians.
Why they even denied Desalinization Plants would make a hilarious pilot episode...