Then why does Cali spend do much advertising money to try to save water at the tap?
More bad government management?
Lobbying by the ag interests who want more? Follow the dollars!
Litigation re California water law, fighting over allocation of a scarce and limiting resource, is a significant industry here.
Related, ag has the funds, and the motivation, to put candidates in office at the state and federal level. To advocate for them, including probably the advertising you saw. Other water interests - fish and wildlife advocates, Indian reservations, flood control planners etc don't have the same unlimited funds to push their own interests. Its an endless fight over an insufficient resource.
A couple of other California water issues if you want to go deep in the weeds learning more:
1) Nestle has been buying up bottled water firms, for years. They have continual litigation over discoveries that they aren't paying for the water they draw from streams, springs, and municipal supplies. A while back one of their brands of 'spring water' delivered in 5 gallon glass jugs was found to be simply Sacramento tap water. They closed their bottling plant in downtown Sacramento.
2) The real water law battles got started in the 1870's when Hydraulic mining for gold, washing entire hillsides down to run through sluices, was causing so much damage to farmland downstream that the practice was outlawed. The bed of the Sacramento river is some 16 ft higher than it was before that era, due to all the material washed down, requiring continual levee improvements. A lot of federal flood control dollars - voted by Congress - go into maintaining the levees. I doubt we're at the cost level of what it takes to keep the Mississippi River inside its levees but the federal funding issues are similar. Your Tax Dollars At Work!
water.ca.gov
