I don’t have it in me to go through the Humboldt Basin case study, although it gets much closer to the complexity that we see in California. So we’re done with stepping through each section. Come back, readers! Come back, Twitter referrals! It is safe to come back!
Next week I may do some synthesis, but more importantly, I want to get into the question of what this implies about water markets in California. Which of the elements of changing to market-based rights (accurately measuring all water, linking each right to a water account, converting water rights to shares, issuing yearly allocations, the preposterous water resource sharing plans, the governance) can be used here? Which do we need to improve water transfers here? Is this really better than just reforming water rights the way I want to? Do Australians like their water market? Would doing this really avoid any political fights?