We could do with far less hectoring and nagging from state water officials who think they know best about how water should be used.

What we could use instead is a single rate for water that balances supply and demand. Drought year? Water gets expensive. It's as simple as that.

"We could do with far less hectoring and nagging from state water officials who think they know best about how water should be used."

Except that if left on their own, *certain* people in the state of California would consume all the water available, and leave nothing for the rest of us.

"What we could use instead is a single rate for water that balances supply and demand."

ONLY if we can tie it to income, so that, for example, residents of a certain neighborhood in Woodside would pay far more than residents in, say, Santa Clara.

After all, fair is fair...

> Except that if left on their own, *certain* people in the state of California would consume all the water available, and leave nothing for the rest of us.

That is a remarkable belief. Why does it not occur for any other commodity?

Let's consider for a moment that water is a basic human right and not a commodity.( Resolution 64/292, the United Nations General Assembly recognizes the human right to water and sanitation and that clean drinking water and sanitation are essential to human rights.)

Water is, of course, also essential to agriculture and industry. Potable water is special, limited, often mismanaged, wasted, in the wrong places, and increasingly becoming privatized. There is no simply answer but there is a constellation of answer that can mindfully address complex water issues. Conservation seems entirely sensible. Understanding more about the water resources in California (such as measure how much is pumped from aquifers) seems equally sensible. Economic incentives are frequently use to get more of what is good for the public good and discourage what is not is a proven approach to changing human behaviors.

In my view the State erred in cutting back on water restrictions because they have not addressed other core water issues.

Put the mandatory limits back on ... I could not understand why they lifted them

We haven't built any more storage capacity in the last thirty years or more. It's time to stop being cowed by environmentalists that whine every time more storage is proposed. We need more storage now more than ever. In addition, water given to agriculture needs to be better controlled. The state needs to demand farmers use the most efficient forms of irrigation possible and not allow crops such as rice that use a ridiculous amount of water to grow. In addition, we need to look at how much water we're willing to waste simply letting it flow away into the ocean. Are the fish we're trying to preserve really worth that much water? Add conservation to the above and we'll have enough water.

"Are the fish we're trying to preserve really worth that much water?"

It's not just about the fish. If substantially more river water is prevented from flowing through the Delta, brackish Bay water will encroach eastward and eventually contaminate the freshwater that is pumped south. As it happens, this is one of the many issues one of our presidential candidates fails to understand on even a fundamental level:

Web Link

This result is entirely predictable-- I agree that the mandatory limits should have remained. Our feckless state officials bowed to pressure to relieve the limits.

I disagree with the person calling himself or herself Menlo Boter. Water storage capacity is not the primary issue. It could temporarily be if we had a really exceptional year, but that's not likely. The giant San Luis Reservoir off Hwy 152 is only 10% full, and only reached about 50% full this year.

Either demand must be cut or supply increased. The only real way to increase supply is desalination, and that's very expensive and energy hungry.

Sorry Caitlin, but had storage kept pace with demand those reservoirs wouldn't look like they do. We need more storage coupled with conservation or we will end up having to use desal. which is very expensive. Ask the Australians. We Must build more storage and we MUST conserve. Neither is primary, but both are imperative.