Refuges water issues

TeamRoper

Well-Known Member
Oct 24, 2018
516
473
63
So this is a subject that pisses me off. Lack of water seems to delay refuges from being at full capacity almost every year.
for how long now? Seems like the last 10 yrs.
So my question is? Are we here in cali ever going to have all the water necessary to fill all our refuges so that they open without delays or Being under capacity.
Will the trumps release of water from up north,and will that give us normal water for all our hunt spots at the refuges? Just curious.
 
Mac,

Water issues have been way longer than 10 years...IMO, it's only going to get worse, if we don't continue on a somewhat wet cycle............... :blush:

ps....Water is gold, and I'm sure that drinking water is way higher on the investment/need list.............;)

pss....If they'll let Lower Klamath/Tule Lake die...They'll let any refuge die..........:mad:
 
  • Like
Reactions: duck-boy and skeet
If the CA government was really serious about saving water, they would have continuously built water storage reservoirs over the last 26 years. Why do I say 26 years? Because the last reservoir built in CA was Diamond Valley in 1999. Diamond Valley cost $1.9 Billion to build. It can hold 260 billion gallons of water or 800,000 acre feet. It can generate up to 40 megawatts of clean hydroelectric power, enough to power 40,000 homes for a year. Assuming they had to spend 3 times that amount on new reservoirs, had the state decided to use the $205B they are wasting on the train to nowhere (which will likely never be finished nor attract much ridership if it is), they could have built 34 new reservoirs in the state. Assuming they could hold an average of half the water of Diamond Valley, that would be a potential for an additional 8,840,000,000,000 gallons or 27,128,964 acre-feet of water available to us. Assuming those reservoirs could generate half the hydroelectric power of Diamond Valley that would be an additional 680 megawatts, enough to power 680,000 households for a year. And this is not to mention the economic boost and additional jobs these 34 reservoirs could have supported due to the recreational opportunities they would have provided (fishing, boating, skiing, swimming, etc.). But no...they have to have a train.

BTW - the average household use of water in CA is 48 gallons per day per person. CA population is almost 40 million. That's just short of 2 billion gallons a day. If we had these reservoirs and their 8,840,000,000,000 gallons of water, that would be enough water for 4420 days for every resident in the state. And that doesn't count what we already have in the existing reservoirs and the constant replenishment to one degree or another, depending on river flows and rainfall, that will go on over that period of time.

They had something like 17 BILLION set aside to build 8 water storage reservoirs in 2014. Do you know how many they built with all that money over the last 10 years? I'll give you three guesses, and the first two don't count. As already noted, the last reservoir built in CA was Diamond Valley in 1999. So, the real question is, what did they do with that 2014 money? Let's say they actually did build those reservoirs. Remember, they were supposed to build 8 of them. Let's say they held half of what Diamond Valley can hold (DV = 800,000 acre-feet or about 261 BILLION gallons). That would be 1.044 TRILLION gallons of water we don't have now (8 x 130.5 BILLION gallons). The average household usage per day in CA is 55 gallons. There are about 13.3 million households in CA. That would mean there would be 18,981,818,181 average usage days of additional water available. 1427 days' worth of water or nearly 4 YEARS worth of household water use available in CA if we had those reservoirs. And, don't forget, rainfall partially or totally (depending on the year) refills these reservors each year. But, after 17 years we have a few bridges built and zero miles of "high-speed" rail now...right?







 
  • Angry
Reactions: ilovesprig
It would be nice to have kern. Fully ready to hold 200 hunters at least.(false hope i know) Seems every year they let 50 ppl in there for like 2 monthes. Then they up it to like 100. Not counting the grasslands. Seems to just get worse every year for sure.
We need full capacity refuges on opening day. For me its definitely bureaucrat nonsense. Or refuge management failures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: skeet
It would be nice to have kern. Fully ready to hold 200 hunters at least.(false hope i know) Seems every year they let 50 ppl in there for like 2 monthes. Then they up it to like 100. Not counting the grasslands. Seems to just get worse every year for sure.
We need full capacity refuges on opening day. For me its definitely bureaucrat nonsense. Or refuge management failures.
The Grasslands (including Kern) usually have a hunter meeting in the August timeframe. That's when we hear about Kern water...and all the refuges in the atrea. stay tuned...
 
So this is a subject that pisses me off. Lack of water seems to delay refuges from being at full capacity almost every year.
for how long now? Seems like the last 10 yrs.
So my question is? Are we here in cali ever going to have all the water necessary to fill all our refuges so that they open without delays or Being under capacity.
Will the trumps release of water from up north,and will that give us normal water for all our hunt spots at the refuges? Just curious.
Water rights and water law are one of the most complex environmental topics in CA and across the country. We feel the effects of it much more because we live in a state that experiences cycles of dry and wet periods. Sometimes way above, sometimes way below average. Speaking solely to the grasslands and the San Joaquin Valley - this historic wetland system is one of the most altered and damaged in the state. Just about every major drainage and river that runs off the Western Sierra Foothills is dammed or diverted for either irrigation use or flood control - in most cases both. This was done decades before our time by the Bureau of Reclamation, which "reclaimed" the land for human use. These diversions and uses are authorized by water rights. We have dammed many rivers in CA - at the cost of millions of acres of wetlands. This is the impetus for why we even have refuges and wildlife areas in the San Joaquin Valley (From the Grasslands down to Kern), set aside to replace a tiny fraction of what was lost. Sadly, these refuges play by the same rules that any farmer or water district play by. Refuges also have water rights, and have to pay for water. In many cases, refuge water is not a priority in terms of receiving, no matter how much they want it. The Central Valley Improvement Project Act established that refuges have a relatively high priority, but not before farmers and water districts. In short, there are many straws - and ducks are often the last straw in line. Your question about the federal water release, that did nothing but go straight into the ground at ground water recharge basins. In theory that helps replenish some ground water, but it was more a show of force than something good. I do not know any farmers who were happy with that, as they would rather slowly utilize surface water from those reservoirs in the summer.
 
Water rights and water law are one of the most complex environmental topics in CA and across the country. We feel the effects of it much more because we live in a state that experiences cycles of dry and wet periods. Sometimes way above, sometimes way below average. Speaking solely to the grasslands and the San Joaquin Valley - this historic wetland system is one of the most altered and damaged in the state. Just about every major drainage and river that runs off the Western Sierra Foothills is dammed or diverted for either irrigation use or flood control - in most cases both. This was done decades before our time by the Bureau of Reclamation, which "reclaimed" the land for human use. These diversions and uses are authorized by water rights. We have dammed many rivers in CA - at the cost of millions of acres of wetlands. This is the impetus for why we even have refuges and wildlife areas in the San Joaquin Valley (From the Grasslands down to Kern), set aside to replace a tiny fraction of what was lost. Sadly, these refuges play by the same rules that any farmer or water district play by. Refuges also have water rights, and have to pay for water. In many cases, refuge water is not a priority in terms of receiving, no matter how much they want it. The Central Valley Improvement Project Act established that refuges have a relatively high priority, but not before farmers and water districts. In short, there are many straws - and ducks are often the last straw in line. Your question about the federal water release, that did nothing but go straight into the ground at ground water recharge basins. In theory that helps replenish some ground water, but it was more a show of force than something good. I do not know any farmers who were happy with that, as they would rather slowly utilize surface water from those reservoirs in the summer.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20250427_174609096.jpg
    IMG_20250427_174609096.jpg
    257.8 KB · Views: 5

About us

  • SCHoutdoors was created in January of 2011 by a few people who love the outdoors. The main goal is still the same – bring people together who enjoy the outdoors and share their knowledge and experience.
    Outdoors in the West, Hunting gear reviews, Big Game, Small Game, Upland Game, Waterfowl, Varmint, Bow Hunting, long Range Rifles, Reloading, Taxidermy, Salt WaterFishing, Freshwater Fishing, Buy-Sell-Trade on Classifieds and Cooking/Recipes
    All things outdoors…come join us, learn, contribute and become part of the SCHoutdoors community.

Quick Navigation

User Menu