Here we go again.

In the 1930s, LA sucked the Owens Valley Dry. Now they want the last drop.

Wonder what side of the environmental fence the anti-horses-in -the-wilderness-people are on this one?

http://mammothtimes.com/content/los-angeles-seeks-move-court-fight-over-mammoth-creek-fresno

This has been a continuous war with LA since the earliest years of the last century. Before LA stole the Owens Valley water, by stealth tactics, the population of the LA area was about 15,000. Without the water from the Eastern Sierra Nevada water shed, it would still be pretty much an arid desert, with a sparse population.

In spite of numerous court decisions to save our water, LA keeps trying to get more: http://chanceofrain.com/2012/03/ladwp-cheaper-to-fight-than-fix/
http://www.alternet.org/water/145761/l.a.'s_new_scheme_to_plunder_owens_valley_water,_this_time_with_solar_panels

Here is a part of that sordid story: http://www.owensvalleyhistory.com/ov_aqueduct1/page18.html

I hate the take it all know mentality. Draining Owens Lake may have given them a burst of water but once dry you cannot get any more then the Owens River can provide. Why not just take what the river can provide below the lake and that way the lake stays and you have the same amount of water you will years after the decision is made? Nope just take it all now!

Makes Frisco's Hetch Hetchy look tame by comparison.

I think a more fair statement of the situation is that LA is objecting to the town of Mammoth Lakes making consumptive use of water that LA believes it was successful of deceitfully acquiring early in the last century.

Dale B. Dalrymple

The historic Owens Lake was a brine pool similar to Mono Lake. The lake evaporated when it no longer received fresh water input. The lake had no fresh water or fresh water output since the end of the last major glaciation more than 10,000 years ago.

The size of the historic lake was the area required to evaporate the average fresh water input from it's surface each year. By the time LA bought the agricultural land in the Owens Valley, most of the river had been diverted to water crops including a claimed 100,000 fruit trees and the lake level was already dropping. LA acquired water rights by buying the land from those who had acquired the water rights for use on that land.

If LA hadn't acquired the water rights and diverted the water, it would be the farmers consuming the water who would be responsible for controlling the dust pollution caused by the desiccated lake bed. Agricultural use of the water in the Owens Valley might have avoided some of the other environmental consequences with which it has proven so difficult to make LA deal responsibly.

Dale B. Dalrymple

A little Owens Lake history:

http://hiltoncreek.com/owensdrylake.aspx

http://places.designobserver.com/feature/dreams-dust-and-birds-the-trashing-of-owens-lake/23328/

Yes, but my underline. (They would argue it was above board despite Goliath versus the little guy.)

Does little Mammoth have enough money and lawyers to fend off LA's apparent long-held legal claim?

Harvey, you and I disagree with LA about whether or not they were deceitful, but LA did pay for the water rights they claim.


If I see someone small steal your wallet, should I be concerned about the little guy's ability to afford the money and lawyers to defend against your long held claim?

Dale B. Dalrymple

Well there isn't much you can say if they already paid for it and own the rights. They aren't really stealing anything it's just a crappy deal for locals.

yep, point taken. letter of the law. eh?

wonder if Alfred Nobel's product will make a return visit to the Owens Valley?

The whole water rights issue is of interest. One favorite book I read was Cadillac Desert.

The water law under which the "west was won" came from a time when the frontier seemed like an endless resource and the development and utilization of the boundless resources were essential to becoming a world power. For resources like water and minerals the first to consume the resource acquired the ownership. The good news is that it worked. The bad news is that we didn't learn to turn off our appetite for consumption when the frontier was gone. We will continue to pay social, economic and environmental penalties for that in places like the eastern Sierra.

Dale B. Dalrymple

I am not taking LADWP's side in this, but the other side of the coin is this:

If the Owens Valley had access to all that water, and if LA hadn't piped it all away, there would be way more development in the Owens Valley. And it would not be quite as beautiful as it is.

This is just a business decision to go after Mammoth's meager water use. No regard to history or public relations. The amount of water involved is so small that if appears LADWP is just trying to send a message again. They might as well just put up billboards - it would be cheaper than legal fees. The billboards could repeat what one LADWP manager said publicly, "we own the people of Owens Valley, lock stock and barrel." Keep the message simply and consistent.

Say what? That makes no sense whatsoever.

It's worth noting that the same law firm that argued the HSHA lawsuit, Morrison and Foerster (aka MoFo), was the very same firm who successfully fought the city of LA in the Mono Lake case over a decade ago. They did both pro bono and, presumably, for the same reason: a concern for the environment and the unacceptable impacts each use caused.

George

I had no clue George, no intended snide, just asking. thanks for explaining.

Ok! Maybe I need to back off of caffeine a tad...
(Taxes this week).

g.

Mammoth Lakes is on the verge of bankruptcy. Maybe this explains the timing of LADWP's move against Mammoth. Hit them while they're down...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/14/us/mammoth-lakes-calif-faces-bankruptcy.html

I am cautious about attributing truth to advocates' statements, that are designed to create impressions, and when checked out, are often "shaded".

for example, when I google "we own the people of Owens Valley, lock stock and barrel" ----it appears on the internet in only one place, and that is on this thread.

Ken, I summarized the quote at the end of a 3 page article. Here's the quote verbatim:

L.A.'s utility chief Freeman recently told a reporter that the DWP owned the people of Owens Valley "lock, stock and barrel." He was right.

Here's the web address:   http://www.alternet.org/water/145761/l.a...r_panels?page=3