Climate Change? Nahhh ...

Yes. Because that’s a dangerous precedent to see if people up stream throw out established rights. It’s 200 years of law and throws private property into chaos.

Now, CA needs to play ball and we need to rethink having the second biggest city in the US in a spot dependent on imported water plus one of the biggest ag centers needing the same.

 

I don’t even like almonds all that much.

 

I think this sort of thing is going to outright require federal intervention. The state's self interests weigh more heavily on local politicians than global weather changes.

 

A river like this really does create an interesting concept for debate. Just because one state claimed the lion's share decades before another area that contains the river's source was even a thing creates a conundrum.
I guess in terms of flow of the river, the last shall be first, and the first shall be last.

 

I'm more fascinated if this goes to federal court because my former Boy Scout patrol leader/Eagle Scout is a general attorney specializing in environmental law for the Justice Department in Denver. I'm guessing he'll either get this case or have a prominent role in it.

 

This sort of reminds me of conversations my cousin and I have about restrictive property covenants. Neither of us have ever been in this position, but it's fun to discuss.

Let's say I sell a piece of property to Mr. A and have it written into the contract that he can't put a trailer on the property.
Time passes, maybe I've even dead, and Mr. A sells the property to Mr. B. Can Mr. B put a trailer on the property? Just because Mr. A and I agreed to something years before shouldn't mean that Mr. B is restricted on what he can do with what is legally his because he didn't make the original agreement.

Also, glad I don't live in an HOA.

 

California growers annually import Louisiana bees by the truckload, to pollinate almond trees.

 

That is a fun thought and I need to ask Mrs. Riverside-Spartan to clarify (or if QT handles real estate) but I believe covenants survive indefinitely unless overturned by law. I’m not sure what allows CC&Rs to be removed but it does suck if a covenant from 1890 is still on your property (and it does happen from what Mrs. R-S has told me.

Like they are covenants in Pebble Beach that forbids selling to Black people. Obviously that is unenforceable, but they are still there.

 

And all manner of fruits and vegetables. It's been a thing for, like, a while.