And the average swimming pool uses between 18,000 to 24,000 gallons of water, the average Southern California golf course uses 310,000 gallons per day, so what's the real point? People can live most anywhere, almonds, walnuts, citrus, avocados are far more particular. California possesses some of the most arable land in the world-- a resource that is rapidly diminishing. Millions of precious acres have already been paved over in the state, sacrificed to short term, short sighted real estate devolpment. So who got to Tree Hugger, anyway? Shilling for the next prodigal wave of speculation? Enough of this bull shit.
The real point is a scarce public resource used for private profit, such that the central valley has been sinking since industrial agriculture began plundering the water table in the early 20th century. Plus: pesticides!
And really, why not grow in California water-intensive produce that is native to the Middle East and South Asia? Move non-hackers to Death Valley! Ag billionaires or bust!
The Wisconsin study is important in that it identifies and ostensibly accounts for the source of CO2 fluctuation through a season. It is especially applicable in regions of intensive commodity crop cultivation not typically associated with California agriculture--one simply does not encounter in the Golden State hundred mile or more stretches of corn, soy, or wheat fields as are commonly found in the Great Heartland. Hard to believe, but in my youth the number agricultural county in the state was Los Angeles County. It was the number two dairy producing county in the nation. Area that are now exclusive gated communities were once at that time mostly small 'truck farms'. (Today LA County ranks something like 29th in the state in agricultural production with little indication of its presence noticeable anymore.) At that time the population of all of California was about 10,000,000. Today, over 10,000,000 is the estimated population for LA County alone, and that of the state has nearly quadrupled to just under 40,000,000. It is fully proper to evoke Malthus, for the true problem in California is about over population and its demands upon limited resources. The potential was recognized and acknowledged years ago and measures were instituted to curtail and manage growth within acceptable limits. With Dutch Reagan that all began to come an end and, as the numbers seem to indicate, the real estate frenzy and land grabs were once again on. The initial means of wrestling land away from the existing farmers was to make irrigation unaffordable. Developers once have the scent and covet new conquests in the state. One can not help but think history is about to repeat itself. Caveat emptor!
4 comments:
And the average swimming pool uses between 18,000 to 24,000 gallons of water, the average Southern California golf course uses 310,000 gallons per day, so what's the real point? People can live most anywhere, almonds, walnuts, citrus, avocados are far more particular.
California possesses some of the most arable land in the world-- a resource that is rapidly diminishing. Millions of precious acres have already been paved over in the state, sacrificed to short term, short sighted real estate devolpment.
So who got to Tree Hugger, anyway?
Shilling for the next prodigal wave of speculation?
Enough of this bull shit.
The real point is a scarce public resource used for private profit, such that the central valley has been sinking since industrial agriculture began plundering the water table in the early 20th century. Plus: pesticides!
And really, why not grow in California water-intensive produce that is native to the Middle East and South Asia? Move non-hackers to Death Valley! Ag billionaires or bust!
Anonymous, you forgot the lawns & gardens.
More Malthusianism -- get rid of the food & the people will follow.
The organic almond growers are already victims of the germophobic (when it suits them) FDA.
Here's a good one: Crops Play a Major Role in the Annual CO2 Cycle Increase
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/626467/
The Wisconsin study is important in that it identifies and ostensibly accounts for the source of CO2 fluctuation through a season.
It is especially applicable in regions of intensive commodity crop cultivation not typically associated with California agriculture--one simply does not encounter in the Golden State hundred mile or more stretches of corn, soy, or wheat fields as are commonly found in the Great Heartland.
Hard to believe, but in my youth the number agricultural county in the state was Los Angeles County.
It was the number two dairy producing county in the nation.
Area that are now exclusive gated communities were once at that time mostly small 'truck farms'.
(Today LA County ranks something like 29th in the state in agricultural production with little indication of its presence noticeable anymore.)
At that time the population of all of California was about 10,000,000. Today, over 10,000,000 is the estimated population for LA County alone, and that of the state has nearly quadrupled to just under 40,000,000.
It is fully proper to evoke Malthus, for the true problem in California is about over population and its demands upon limited resources.
The potential was recognized and acknowledged years ago and measures were instituted to curtail and manage growth within acceptable limits.
With Dutch Reagan that all began to come an end and, as the numbers seem to indicate, the real estate frenzy and land grabs were once again on. The initial means of wrestling land away from the existing farmers was to make irrigation unaffordable. Developers once have the scent and covet new conquests in the state. One can not help but think history is about to repeat itself.
Caveat emptor!
Post a Comment