View Mobile Site

Ask the Expert

Signal Photos


Setting the record straight on some drought misinformation

Posted: August 28, 2014 2:00 a.m.
Updated: August 28, 2014 2:00 a.m.

The state’s emergency drought regulations (watering-day restrictions and more) happened before local water agencies could adequately inform customers of which regulations apply to them.

While water agencies are still developing outreach, I wanted to address some prevalent misinformation. Although I am vice president of Newhall County Water District, I am speaking on my own behalf only in a non-official capacity.

First, the state Water Resources Control Board forced this regulation upon local water retail agencies. Enforcement is only through local agencies, and there are no funds for patrols.

So unfortunately, it is based on citizen reporting.

The city and county have no enforcement authority.

Water agencies were allowed some leeway, so we have all allowed a 20 percent reduction over last year as an alternative to watering-day restrictions.

We also have additional hardship exemptions such as for new plantings and fire zones.

Education and corrective action are greatly preferred over penalties. We hope to work with large water users to get success stories, rather than irritating homeowners for little gain.

The rules will apply to all customer classes including government agencies, schools, businesses and HOAs.
While the state dictated an immediate Aug. 1 effective date, water retailers’ boards had not even met by that point, so there will be understanding and assistance — not penalties while customers are being informed.

Lastly, I personally hope this is a two-way street and want our agencies to document what and who can cut back, and when arbitrary rules prove ineffective, so it can inform policy going forward.

Contact your water retail agency — Newhall County Water, Santa Clarita Water, Valencia Water, or District 36 — with questions and feedback.


ricketzz: Posted: August 28, 2014 10:42 a.m.

Put the hose down and walk slowly away from the spigot...

cj64: Posted: August 28, 2014 11:23 a.m.

Incorrect statement. "The rules will apply to all customer classes including government agencies" The recent addition of unnecessary, water use, landscaping on Golden Valley Road and soon on McBean Pkwy are contradictions to this statement.

And how about the more than 20,000 new homes soon to be built by Newhall Land and Farm? Until something is done about these water intensive situations, the water companies mandates will be ignored. --edited.

17trillion: Posted: August 28, 2014 12:31 p.m.

I don't care!

We are going to spend 80 billion, or more, on a stupid train that nobody will ride instead of on water projects.

I don't care!

We flush billions of gallons into the Pacific to save a bait fish that doesn't need saving.

I don't care!

Residential water use makes up less than 15% of state water usage so a 20% reduction means only a 3% reduction for all water use. This is stupid!

I don't care!

20,000 new homes contemplated.

I don't care!

I hate this state and the majority of people who vote for the idiots that run it.

I don't care! Did I mention I don't care?

Nitsho: Posted: August 28, 2014 1:57 p.m.

I will pay for what I use. Period.

chefgirl358: Posted: August 28, 2014 5:14 p.m.

I'm with Nitsho.

Did you hear about Oprah? So the way I heard it, her mansion in Montecito (Santa Barbara) used 140,000 gallons of water last year, so they were told they needed to drastically reduce their usage. They did in fact decrease the amount of water coming through the public water utility lines by more than half. The problem is, she is literally paying to have a truck deliver 800 gallons of water PER DAY to the home for use in a water tank. So her consumption according to the utility has decreased by 50%, but in reality, it's actually increased. lol.

BrianBaker: Posted: August 28, 2014 7:34 p.m.

That's like Al Bore and the rest of the "climate change" Chicken Littles bloviating about "carbon footprints", then hopping on to their private jets to blast over to their huge mansions, all of which have a Sasquatch-like "carbon footprint".

Don't tell me your actually surprised by leftist hypocrisy?

tech: Posted: August 28, 2014 8:35 p.m.

But Oprah and Al Gore have "offsets", i.e. wealth to fund their outsized water and carbon footprints.

Limits are for the hoi polloi. The elites are excused.

chefgirl358: Posted: August 29, 2014 2:10 a.m.

No way, not surprised at all, just amused at their (wealthy and insulated) overwhelming sense of entitlement.

ricketzz: Posted: August 29, 2014 10:34 a.m.

Carbon Offsets are offensive only to the bitter and or the twisted. They are a great way to flip off the people who imply that you are a hypocrite. I prefer rich people preserving rain forests to rich people using government to hurt their fellow citizens. Who would you rather visit with for a couple days; Oprah or Shelly Adelson?

AlwaysRight: Posted: August 29, 2014 10:46 a.m.

So, ricketzz, "let them eat cake"?

17trillion: Posted: August 29, 2014 11:16 a.m.

I don't even know who Shelly Adelson is unless you're talking about Sheldon? In that case, it's Shelly by a landslide.

tech: Posted: August 29, 2014 12:40 p.m.

I'd have to concur, 17t. Oprah was taken in by the cipher in 2008 and then compounded the error in 2012.

Agree with him or not, it's clear Adelson isn't addled. --edited.

tech: Posted: August 29, 2014 12:54 p.m.

"Carbon Offsets are offensive only to the bitter and or the twisted." - ricketzz

What an interesting way to address the rational, ricketzz.

Carbon offset proponents should be huge fans of the USA and Canadian Forest Industry. Why aren't they, ricketzz?

Forestry Labeling War Turns Ugly As Greenpeace Bungles Logging Industry Attack

In December, Greenpeace pulled the trigger, claiming it had proof from GPS-tagged video and pictures that one of the coalition industry members, Resolute Forest Products, was building logging roads in areas forbidden by the agreement. It released pictures it said were taken in August 2012 in Quebec’s Montagnes Blanches region, and it promptly resigned from the CBFA.

“This is a deal breaker for us,” said Greenpeace spokeswoman Stephanie Goodwin. “There is no agreement left to uphold. With the boreal forest under threat, the only responsible decision for Greenpeace is to pursue other pathways to obtain results in the forest.”

Greenpeace’s action reflected the general sentiment of the radical wing of FSC supporters. They’ve long viewed the forestry industry as a whipping boy to demonstrate the clout of environmental greenmail—threatening corporations with public campaigns to get them to capitulate to their demands, which often include economic payoffs in the form of contributions to their campaigns. In essence, that’s how CBFA came into existence. Canadian foresters reached the truce only after a vicious “Do Not Buy” campaign launched against its members that claimed that the boreal was under imminent threat—although no independent Canadian government or international agency agreed with those hard-edged NGO allegations.

Unlike Kimberly-Clark and Quebec-based hardware and lumber retailer Rona, which buckled under harsh criticism and paid greenmail, Resolute fought back, providing documentation that the allegations were untrue. It supplied “concrete milestones” that it had reached for caribou protection and the implementation of best practices.


tech: Posted: August 29, 2014 12:54 p.m.

When its prey did not drop, Greenpeace reloaded and fired again. Spokesperson Shane Moffat trumpeted “Greenpeace’s science-based advocacy for responsible forestry” as the group issued a report, Boreal Alarm that threatened to wreak havoc on Resolute’s brand if it didn’t junk its logging practices, already approved under the terms of the CBFA coalition, in Quebec, Ontario and Manitoba.

Greenpeace and its key allies were surprised at Resolute’s resoluteness. But the company believed it was standing on firm factual ground and refused to be bullied. Finally in a huge embarrassment, on March 19, the activist group admitted it had bungled its “investigation” and that the unimpeachable videos and photos were just plain wrong. Even as it crowed about its 40 years of commitment to “best available science and research,” Greenpeace admitted it relied on “inaccurate maps” before launching its highly public and damaging attacks.

“We felt it was imperative to own up to our error,” said spokesperson Goodwin. Yet, Greenpeace continued to oppose the CBFA, saying it would have quit the organization even if it hadn’t fumbled its campaign.

ricketzz: Posted: August 30, 2014 10:34 a.m.

We were talking about carbon offsets; nothing to do with Greenpeace. Try to focus.

"Bad maps" is the same excuse the USA used when they blew up the Chinese Embassy in Bosnia after the F-117A went down. I'd still rather be with real people compared to some robotic reactionary end result of bad programming and crappy food. You can spot the plastic people in any crowd.

tech: Posted: August 30, 2014 9:29 p.m.

The Forestry Industry provides huge sustainable and renewable carbon offsets that Greenpeace opposes due to irrational ideology. Try to focus.

Chinese Embassy in Bosnia? Again, try to focus.

"Plastic people"? You guess it… focus. --edited.

ricketzz: Posted: August 31, 2014 10:45 a.m.

Belgrade, used to be Yugoslavia. Whatever, that's not the point. Canadian forests are burning down right now (betcha Fox News ain't covering that).

tech: Posted: August 31, 2014 1:16 p.m.

… betcha Fox News ain't covering that… - ricketzz

LOL! The idée fixe of you and Indy is akin to Tourette's Syndrome. The enemy must be denounced daily during the Two Minutes Hate, eh?

Nitsho: Posted: September 1, 2014 9:18 a.m.

"Canadian forests are burning down right now (betcha Fox News ain't covering that)"

Who are you? Smoky the Bear? There have been fires for, like me think, millions of years.

Tech, what's he talking about? I need a flowchart with him some times.

ricketzz: Posted: September 2, 2014 10:05 a.m.

Tech was ranting about Greenpeace being underfunded or something. The fires in Canada are notably larger than what they are used to. Fox News refuses to admit we have a problem with the climate. All the networks refuse to tell the truth. But they do copy Fox News, don't they? The country is left of center; the corporations prefer we elect their stooges (who tend to be snake handlers with double digit IQs).

tech: Posted: September 2, 2014 12:36 p.m.

res ipsa loquitur

Nothing to explain, Nitsho.

tech: Posted: September 2, 2014 12:47 p.m.

"Tech was ranting…" -ricketzz

Having you, of all people in this forum, claim that I rant is priceless! You don't know the meaning of the word, ricketzz.

rant |rant| verb [ no obj. ]
speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned way: she was still ranting on about the unfairness of it all.

Nitsho: Posted: September 2, 2014 4:54 p.m.

I don't know why I do this but...

"Tech was ranting about Greenpeace being underfunded or something"
Greenpeace isn't really funded. it's more like donations and donations are down because they are useless, wasteful and ineffective.

"The fires in Canada are notably larger than what they are used to" Source? I read your link and there is no data that they are comparing it to. Not very scientific.

"Fox News refuses to admit we have a problem with the climate. All the networks refuse to tell the truth"

then explain this...

"But they do copy Fox News, don't they? The country is left of center" Would not that make them copy MSNBC, or CNN CBS, or NBC, or ABC? They are all the same teleprompter, just a different face.

ricketzz: Posted: September 3, 2014 9:47 a.m.

That is the problem. The licensed electronic media is no longer of the people and instead is trying to change peoples' minds via propaganda. We are in uncharted territory (unless you study the 1930s and mass communications' role in the rise of Fascism). The People are sheep being led to the slaughter. Willingly.

"Television is a vast wasteland" -FCC Chair Newton Minow

"Kill ugly radio" -Frank Zappa

tech: Posted: September 3, 2014 5:08 p.m.

"The licensed electronic media is no longer of the people and instead is trying to change peoples' minds via propaganda." - ricketzz

The majority of journalism majors are overwhelmingly registered as Democrats and favor statist "solutions" to address climate change, ricketzz. Your assertion is juxtaposed with that fact.

It appears you're annoyed because the majority of Americans are skeptical of the climate alarmist's argumentum ad populum, the antithesis of the Scientific Method.

ricketzz: Posted: September 4, 2014 9:27 a.m.

"The majority of journalism majors are overwhelmingly registered as Democrats". I doubt that seriously as most people, especially young people, belong to neither party. I think the stat your memory is teasing you with is that among journalists who register to vote Democratic is the party of choice.

I really want to know where you get this Bircher language from, I want to relive the golden days of my youth spent being forced to listen to Joe Pyne while watching my dad bury ammo in the desert.

tech: Posted: September 5, 2014 4:00 p.m.

"Bircher"? LOL! You really are dating yourself.

No doubt you find my ongoing rebuttals of your revolutionary and environmental Marxism inconvenient.

You need to be a registered user to post a comment. Please click here to register.

The Signal encourages readers to interact with one another, following the guidelines outlined in our Comment/Moderation Policy. Click here to read it.

To report offensive or inappropriate comments, e-mail The content posted from readers of does not necessarily represent the views of The Signal or Morris Multimedia. By submitting this form you agree to the terms and conditions listed above. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.


Powered By
Morris Technology
Please wait ...