Skip to content

California’s reservoirs have nothing to do with LA’s fires

Here's the latest outrage about California:

Sigh. Yes, the reservoirs are taking a very long time. But seven projects were approved a few years ago to receive Prop 1 funding:

  • Three of them are dam projects in northern California.
  • Two are groundwater recharging projects in northern California.
  • Two are groundwater recharging projects in Southern California. Neither is in Los Angeles.

Reservoirs in northern California obviously have no impact on fires in Los Angeles. Groundwater projects have no impact regardless of where they are. These construction projects may not be poster children for efficient bureaucracy, but they also have nothing to do with water supplies in Los Angeles.¹ No homes are being lost because they aren't online yet.

Do we really have to keep doing this forever? Conservatives have always stoked outrage over "big government waste," but in the Trump/Musk era this has morphed into a reckless and relentless firehose of lies and exaggerations about everything the government does. It's hardly any wonder that Republican trust in institutions of all kinds has plummeted.

¹Which, once again, are ample at the moment. More water wouldn't help unless it comes with pumping infrastructure to reach steep hillsides.

49 thoughts on “California’s reservoirs have nothing to do with LA’s fires

  1. RiChard

    "More water wouldn't help unless it comes with pumping infrastructure to reach steep hillsides." Bingo.

    As with all disasters, the planners planned quite well enough -- for the disasters they could afford, financially and politically. But here we are now with a bigger one. There's always a bigger disaster, and more people wanting help from whatever finite thing you built to protect them 20 or 50 years ago.

  2. kkseattle

    Right-wingers are shitty human beings. They fawn over billionaire rapists and seek to immiserate as many people as possible.

  3. bobsomerby

    IN RE Jillian Michaels:

    In 2016, Michaels referred to Donald Trump as "a bigot trying to rob Americans of their equal rights." That same year, Michaels labeled Trump's vice presidential candidate Mike Pence "the number one anti-gay politician in the country right now."

    In a reversal to her prior comments regarding Donald Trump, Michaels announced she had voted for Trump in the 2024 United States presidential election.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jillian_Michaels

    Later:

    Jillian Michaels has revealed that while she has voted for Donald Trump in the 2024 US election, she does not endorse him in any way.

    The fitness guru, 50, explained that she only pledged support for the former president instead of the Democratic nominee Kamala Harris because it "became a question of lesser evils"...

    "There's one candidate in the world that I that I would run over broken glass for...I've made that clear to this individual that I would endorse and go to town and bend over backwards and throw it all to the wolves because I believe in this person so much, Tulsi [Gabbard]."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-14040273/Jillian-Michaels-voted-Donald-Trump-2024-election.html

    Also, she's an instant expert on fire management!

  4. middleoftheroaddem

    Kevin you are likely correct on the substance but, I suspect, you miss the broader emotional vibe. Many people believe that government made meaningful errors and are angry.

    What are those errors? One can debate that topic: water, manpower, equipment, fire prevention etc. However, this reminds me of debating immigration during the Biden term. One can debate particular policies but the polling was clear, folks believed that Biden messed up.

    I think this fire is similar: folks believe that government made errors that have materially contributed to the magnitude of this fire.

    1. Chip Daniels

      In this case, "folks" = MAGA.

      Regardless of what mistakes were or were not made, the loudest voices screeching are the MAGA liars who lie about everything.

    2. Jimm

      Wrong focus though, people look for someone to blame, but even the city being stellar in every way wouldn't have prepared us for this worse-case fire that no one would have wanted to pay in advance to be ready for.

      At the city and county level (everywhere), everyone wants to keep and expand their budgets, while residents generally resist any new fees or taxes, and no one seems to proactively embrace worst-case scenario preparation and spending, until it happens and then everyone suddenly imagines that they would have.

      This is a wakeup call however, old-school systems aren't going to work moving forward, especially in California as we look at drier and drier conditions, we need to redesign with more resilient, distributed, multi-purpose systems in mind, and be much more transparent about the cost of living in wilderness edges (so those folks pay and not everyone in the city).

        1. Jimm

          I live right next to Palisades, yes it is on the wilderness edge.

          *

          https://www.theinertia.com/mountain/los-angeles-is-more-wild-than-you-think-dawn-patrol-hiking-at-topanga-state-park/

          "In a region known for its miles of concrete, newcomers, and even residents, may be surprised to find a healthy tapestry of accessible wilderness areas in the mountains overlooking Los Angeles.

          Beginning in the Pacific Palisades with Will Rogers State Park and running north to Point Mugu, one of my favorite areas is the patchwork of state parks and wilderness areas which collectively comprise the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area."

    3. FrankM

      The main error the government made is not stopping the 100 mph winds that spread the fire faster than any water infrastructure on the planet could stop. Any thoughts you have on how that could have been done would, I'm sure, be much appreciated by the LA city council.

    4. Jasper_in_Boston

      Many people believe that government made meaningful errors and are angry.

      Many people believe lots of erroneous things. Of course, it's possible that, after all is said and done and investigations take place, errors by officials will be uncovered. I doubt it, but it's not impossible.

      More likely is: the inevitable investigations will recommend changes. Which is fine. Then we can debate the feasibility of said changes and decide whether or not to implement them. Prediction: the ones that are really expensive won't be pursued, because of the reasonable conclusion that spending that kind of money isn't justified for black swan events.

      Anyway, pointing out that people are angry doesn't make it an appropriate sentiment. Once upon a time when national tragedies occurred, we pulled together as a country, at least sometimes. Now it seems to never happen. I blame Murdoch and now Musk. These assholes benefit from rancor and division.

      1. middleoftheroaddem

        Jasper_in_Boston - clearly we will see how this horrible situation plays out, politically and practically.

        I don't know if you have, for example, been to the Pacific Palisades or know people who live/lived there: I have two friends who lost their houses to this fire.

        One of my two friends from the Palisades shared by email, 'the darn hillsides never got trimmed. Lots of bushes and a few dead trees.' Now, would that have stopped the fire, probably not: however, MIGHT trimming the hillside slowed the spread and saved some houses?...one can only speculate.

        Second friend just posted on Facebook: " We are okay but the house is gone. With what we pay in taxes, I can't believe there was no F ing water" Now is this position fair? Maybe, maybe not. But do I think this represents the position of several people within the Palisades? Most definitely. Note, this second person was a big Obama fund raiser and, I assume, a big donor to Biden.

        My point, there is a sense of Governmental failure within the local population. And no, I don't think most of these folks are MAGA.

          1. middleoftheroaddem

            Crissa - "The water ran out long after they lost their home."

            You are probably right: I have no clue.

            But let me try this analogy on for size.

            1) Situation one, your loved one has an aggressive cancer. The Doctor uses the appropriate treatment and yet, they die.

            2) Situation two, your loved one has an aggressive cancer. The Doctor tells you, we are out of X drug, but we will do our best. The patient dies.

            Do you feel the same about both situations ?

            1. SeanT

              no
              because that is a bad analogy that oversimplifies the complex, dynamic nature of wildfire management
              Cancer treatment deals with an individual's health, while wildfires are large-scale affecting entire communities

            2. jdubs

              This is a ridiculous comparison.

              But we do see crazy nutcases who use the cancer deaths of others to lie and take advantage of people. Miracle cures that the govt doesn't want you to have, dangerous cancer clouds or invisible cancer beams, etc.

              The correct analogy would be huckster fueled anger that the government didn't fund the right research and the FDA didnt approve miracle cancer cure X.

        1. LactatingAlgore

          anecdata?
          i expect nothing else from middle of the road dem (who last voted for a democrat for president in 1972 (george wallace)).

    5. KenSchulz

      Which is the better program for the future, going with what ‘folks believe’, or waiting for experts to spend time gathering and analysing information, and developing recommendations?

      1. Salamander

        I would tentatively suggest working on "what folks believe", to try and get it in line with the reality of global warming, the limited and otherwise powers of government, what things cost, what might be done (based on all those experts and their data).

        Getting most people behind government (etc) action is nearly as important as those actions. Getting people to realize we're all in this together and to behave accordingly would be powerful. Democrats haven't been really good at this since the New Deal.

        But meanwhile, Republicans have been scaring people and then appealing to their worst, most selfish and xenophobic instincts, and winning. It's a recipe for societal collapse/

        1. KenSchulz

          +1
          And in particular, Republicans have been fomenting mistrust of government for decades; and mistrust of expertise that might support constraints on businesses; all to further the unchecked dominance of laissez-faire capitalism.

  5. kenalovell

    MAGA Republicans are pushing this "blame Newsom and Bass and DEI and Democrats in general" as the first step in the 2026 and 2028 campaigns, in which several Californian House seats may see close contests and Newsom may well be a leading candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination. I suppose it relieves our frustration to keep pointing out their lies and distortions, but it's engaging in an exercise that has nothing to do with theirs.

  6. Honeyboy Wilson

    This is much more about conservative hatred of California than about their hatred of what the government does. They don't criticize Florida disasters or Texas disasters with lies, like they always do California.

      1. KenSchulz

        Yes, but the lies were not about the local or state government responses, but about the *Federal* Emergency Management Agency, because a Democrat is in the White House and the agency head is a Democratic appointee.

  7. NotCynicalEnough

    In any event the Trump administration, and the GOP in general, have a standard solution to such problems as reservoirs not being constructed; tax cuts for the ultra wealthy. Let's face it, they don't actually believe much of the bullshit they come up with, nor do they have any solutions (like use a lot less fossil fuels?) but Fox viewers and GOP voters love the outrage.

  8. Justin

    When bad things happen, government and politics are to blame. When good things happen… republicans take credit. Democrats don’t see the need to comment. 😂

    The next time a tornado or hurricane hits a southern KKK location, will democrats publicly blame the government?

  9. middleoftheroaddem

    Ignore national Republicans.

    The neighborhoods directly impacted vote strongly Democratic: perhaps 80 percent Dem. Yet listen to almost any interview with a locals and they will mention bad fire prevention, inadequate infrastructure, poor management etc.

    For the most part these are not MAGA folks. Rather, these are Democrats angry at various levels of California government.

    1. Jasper_in_Boston

      Yet listen to almost any interview with a locals and they will mention bad fire prevention, inadequate infrastructure, poor management etc...

      Almost none of the locals are experts on fire prevention and fire fighting. And nearly all of the locals (in Palisades, at least) have carbon footprints that are sky high by California standards.

      It's understandable that people are stressed. That they're in shock. That they're feeling profound sadness. But the anger part, while real, is misplaced, unless/until we get information to the contrary. And California, for what it's worth, likely has the single most sophisticated and robust fire-fighting operation on the planet.

      1. LactatingAlgore

        why are you engaging in the elitism of denying the rightness of middle of the road dem's just-so voices of the common man?

    2. ColBatGuano

      "Yet listen to almost any interview with a locals and they will mention..."

      I'm sorry they're suffering, but their lack of understanding of fire and fire control is their problem.

  10. bouncing_b

    When Hurricane Ian devastated Central Florida, or Hurricane Helene Georgia, South and North Carolina, or massive tornado outbreaks across the Midwest last spring, we never heard a peep - let alone from prominent Democrats - casting blame on governments or institutions or the people who live there.

    But what’s more surprising than despicable behavior by the MAGA hardcore is how it’s taken as normal, not outrageous, hardly worth mentioning. I used to have some faith that most Americans had an underlying decency that would lead them to recoil from this, but I am (again) proven wrong.

    We read of the value of listening to trump voters, that “we really want the same things” and similar crap, but no matter how low they sink there appears to be no bottom.

    Sorry for wasting your time with the obvious; I’m just having a hard time getting my mind to accept it.

    1. kkseattle

      If MAGA had any decency whatsoever they wouldn’t be slavering over a rapist felon who scammed thousands out of millions with a fake “university.”

      MAGA is despicable.

  11. spatrick

    Exactly. Over 700 people died in the Texas winter storm of 2022, freezing to death in their homes with no power. A storm Ted Cruz happily rode out Cancun! Where is he today? Still in the U.S. Senate! How many Democrats suffered because of Maui's fire in Hawaii? Hmm?

    Stop talking politics right now. JUST STOP! Because nobody knows what going to happen in the next year in a half that's going to affect the outcome of the election when it's all said and done and investigations take place and so forth.

  12. megarajusticemachine

    but in the Trump/Musk era this has morphed into a reckless and relentless firehose of lies and exaggerations about everything

    Sure, only now has this happened... The GOP have been backing such practices by Fox News for twenty years, even longer if you look back to Rush.

  13. D_Ohrk_E1

    Convicted Felon President-Elect Trump: Now I understand everyone's shit's emotional right now. But I've got a 3 point plan that's going to fix EVERYTHING.

    Congressman: Break it down, Trump!

    Convicted Felon President-Elect Trump: Number 1: We've got this guy, ME. Number 2: ME's got a higher IQ than ANY MAN ALIVE. and Number 3: ME's going to fix EVERYTHING.

    Brought to you by Carl's Jr.

  14. JohnH

    I appreciate Kevin's rising quickly to the occasion. Yesterday I could only offer the mild skepticism here that the claim needed further debate. But the really sad thing is how ready the NY Times was to feed the conservative cause.

    True, it didn't exactly say that the reservoir would have made a huge difference. It just reported, objectively no doubt, that the reservoir project still wasn't done. But the "obvious:" conclusions were hard even for a progressive not to be concerned. Thanks, our balanced media.

Comments are closed.