upvote
The California Aqueduct delivers water from the western Sierras through the Central Valley and to Los Angeles. This is likely what NorCal refers to when they say SoCal is 'stealing our water'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Aqueduct

Would be interesting to see the relative amounts of use by LA and by agriculture in the Central Valley though.

reply
SoCal does, yes; about half the water going through the SWP from NorCal, or ~75% if you include Bakersfield/Kern as part of SoCal (though most would consider it Central Valley).

But SoCal isn't only LA. LA itself gets a bit less than half of their water from MWP, which manages the water from the SWP and the Colorado. About the same amount it gets from the the eastern Sierras. These are supposed to drop to ~10% of LA's water supply as recapture/recycling projects complete.

Or computed the other way around, LA only has rights to ~20% of the water managed by MWD. Of course water supply, distribution, and rights are all blended and traded around all the time, but generally speaking it's not "LA" using up that water from NorCal, the consumption is significantly more from the cities and farms that came after.

reply
This infographic basically explains it:

https://www.ppic.org/publication/water-use-in-california/

tl;dr: Urban water use is tiny. In NorCal, the vast majority of the water flows unimpeded to the sea. In the Central Valley, most water is used for agriculture. Agricultural water use in any one of the 3 major basins in the Central Valley is more than all urban areas in California combined. Unsurprisingly, urban use is the primary one in the SF and LA areas, but the absolute totals are very small compared to total CA water supplies.

reply
Owens valley is basically dried up from the water that LA takes. It's interesting as you drive in the towns in the Valley and you see all the LA Department of Water and Power offices over 200 miles from Los Angeles. The courts had to force the LA DWP to quit taking too much water from the streams that feed Mono Lake as it was in danger of drying out.
reply
Yep, Owens valley is basically an environmental disaster created by LA. So in the grand scheme of things, buying water from NorCal is better than stealing from the Owens valley through antiquated water rights.

But really, California (and really the entire Western US) needs a water rights governance overhaul. Right now the focus is all on urban water use, which is practically negligible compared to the agricultural water rights usage.

reply
That's a money play too. Some of the best farmland in the world is now the endless subarban Boston->DC corridor.

We created the miracle on the desert, and billions were made in real estate.

reply
Much easier to tell Joe homeowner he's not allowed to have a lawn than to close down the country club. Where would the rich relax then?
reply
The country club is also negligible compared to agriculture. Farmers are politically not an attractive punching bag though.
reply
It isn’t dried up, they maintain a certain water level in the various lakes.
reply
LA also gets water from the state water project which does come from northern california: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/Ca...
reply
they are saying that LA takes water from sources which would otherwise drain into the sacramento and san joaquin river delta. The video from this post mentions the California State Water Project which takes water from the Feather River (Oroville Dam) and distributes it along the Western edge of the central valley South to Bakersfield where it is then pumped over the mountains both towards Los Angeles and further East to San Bernardino and Riverside. It provides way more water to SoCal than the two Los Angeles-specific aqueducts from the Owens Valley on the Eastern side of the Sierras.
reply
deleted
reply
Old men yelling at the sky don't often seek rationality or nuance in their cries.
reply