In wet years, yes, we have enough water, but most runs off into the ocean. If we could save more of that water, we’d have more water available during dry years. If we stayed in drought, though- and we’ve historically had droughts that have gone on for decades, we’re told- we might still have a bit more water stored for a while, but the dams still might not have much water in them.

Fred

There is enough system water in a wet year in California to support a population of 585 million people (97.5 million acre feet of system water x 2 households per acre foot x 3 people per household). Why are you concerned about conserving water for conservation’s sake? It reflects a quasi-religious asceticism or sacrifice ethic that is very appealing, however unnecessary. As such, it is the new water irrationality in California.

Most went to open space land acquisitions. Some went to buying land for wetlands and restoring wetlands. The bonds did not contain a provision to quantify the amount of water that is saved or captured.

Right now environmentalists are opposing 5 proposed dams that may cost $8.8 billion but we just blew $20 billion for what? Jobs programs.

I’ll disagree, at least in part. I think we do need more water storage, but if it doesn’t rain, storage wouldn’t mean much. If we had those dams now, we might have a little more stored water, but not much. Problem is, when the water is available, Californians will use most of it.