document_title: Water in California

question_text: where does los angeles get its water from

question_tokens: where does los angeles get its water from

text: Water in California

text: Sources of water[edit]

text: California's limited water supply comes from two main sources: surface water, or water that travels or gathers on the ground, like rivers, streams, and lakes; and groundwater, which is water that is pumped out from the ground. California has also begun producing a small amount of desalinated water, water that was once sea water, but has been purified.

text: Groundwater[edit]

text: This section's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (August 2017)

text: Groundwater is a critical element of the California water supply. During a normal year, 30% of the state's water supply comes from groundwater (underground water). In times of intense drought, groundwater consumption can rise to 60% or more.[3] Over 850,000,000 acre feet (1,050 km3) of water is stored in California's 450 known groundwater reservoirs.[3] However, not all the water is usable. Over half of the groundwater is unavailable due to poor quality and the high cost of pumping the water from the ground. While surface water is concentrated mostly in the northern part of the state, groundwater is more evenly distributed.[3]

text: The largest groundwater reservoirs are found in the Central Valley.[3] The majority of the supply there is in the form of runoff that seeps into the aquifer. The freshwater is usually found in deposits of gravel, silt, and sand. Below these deposits lies a layer of deep sediment, a relic of the era when the Pacific Ocean covered the area.

text: Though California has laws governing surface water usage and quality, there exist no statewide groundwater management laws. Each groundwater basin is individually adjudicated to determine water rights.[4] Otherwise, for all practical purposes, land ownership implicitly carries the right to virtually unlimited groundwater pumping.

text: The large quantity of water beneath the surface has given rise to the misconception that groundwater is a sort of renewable resource that can be limitlessly tapped. Calculations assuming that groundwater usage is sustainable if the rate of removal equals the rate of recharge are often incorrect as a result of ignoring changes in water consumption and water renewal.[5]

text: While the volume of groundwater in California is very large, aquifers can be over drafted when groundwater is removed more rapidly than it is replenished. In 1999, it was estimated that the average, annual overdrafting was around 2,200,000 acre feet (2.7 km3) across the state, with 800,000 acre feet (0.99 km3) in the Central Valley.[6][page needed] Since then, overdrafting had significantly increased. Satellite measurements found that in just the combined Sacramento and San Joaquin River basins, including the Central Valley, overdrafting between 2011 and 2014 was 12,000,000 acre feet (15 km3) of water per year.[7]

text: Surface water[edit]

text: California has ten major drainage basins defined for convenience of water management. These basins are divided from one another by the crests of mountains. From north to south the basins are: North Coast, Sacramento River, North Lahontan, San Francisco Bay, San Joaquin River, Central Coast, Tulare Lake, South Lahontan, South Coast, and Colorado River regions. Each region incorporates watersheds from many rivers of similar clime.

text: The Central Valley watershed, which incorporates the Sacramento River, San Joaquin River and Tulare Lake regions, is the largest in California, draining over a third of the state – 60,000 square miles (160,000 km2) – and producing nearly half the total runoff.[8][9] The Sierra Nevada snowpack feeds Central Valley river systems and is a critical source of water in the state's long dry season when little if any precipitation falls. Up to 30 percent of California's water supply is from snowpack.[10] Much of California's extensive reservoir and aqueduct system is designed to store and capture runoff from the Central Valley watershed. The Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers converge at the Sacramento–San Joaquin River Delta, a large fresh-water estuary from where much of the state's water supply is withdrawn. The Central Valley watershed provides most of the water for Northern and Central California, as well as a significant chunk of Southern California's usage.[9]

text: The North Coast watershed receives the highest annual precipitation of any California watershed. It incorporates many large river systems such as the Klamath, Smith and Eel, and produces over a third of the runoff in the state. With a few exceptions, the North Coast watersheds are relatively undeveloped and provides water only to local communities. The vast majority of water flows uncontrolled into the Pacific Ocean. There have been many proposals to divert water from North Coast rivers to increase water supplies in the rest of California, but these projects were never realized, both due to cost and potential environmental harm.[11]

text: The Colorado River originates more than 1,000 miles (1,600 km) from California in the Rocky Mountains of Colorado and Wyoming and forms the state's southeastern border in the Mojave Desert. Unlike the other California watersheds, essentially all of the water flowing in the Colorado originates outside the state. The Colorado is a critical source of irrigation and urban water for southern California, providing between 55 and 65 percent of the total supply.[12]

text: The Central and South Coast watersheds include the most populous regions of California – the San Francisco Bay Area, Los Angeles and San Diego – but have relatively little natural runoff, requiring the importation of water from other parts of the state.

text: Rivers of the Lahontan watersheds in eastern California are part of the high desert Great Basin and do not drain to the Pacific. Most of the water is used locally in eastern California and western Nevada for irrigation. The Owens River of the South Lahontan region, however, is a principal source of water for Los Angeles.

text:
Main California watersheds[13]

Hydrologic region
Annual precipitation
Annual runoff

North Coast
55,900,000 acre feet (69.0 km3)
28,900,000 acre feet (35.6 km3)

Sacramento River
52,400,000 acre feet (64.6 km3)
22,400,000 acre feet (27.6 km3)

North Lahontan
6,000,000 acre feet (7.4 km3)
1,900,000 acre feet (2.3 km3)

San Francisco Bay
5,500,000 acre feet (6.8 km3)
1,200,000 acre feet (1.5 km3)

San Joaquin River
21,800,000 acre feet (26.9 km3)
7,900,000 acre feet (9.7 km3)

Central Coast
12,300,000 acre feet (15.2 km3)
2,500,000 acre feet (3.1 km3)

Tulare Lake
13,900,000 acre feet (17.1 km3)
3,300,000 acre feet (4.1 km3)

South Lahontan
9,300,000 acre feet (11.5 km3)
1,300,000 acre feet (1.6 km3)

South Coast
10,800,000 acre feet (13.3 km3)
1,200,000 acre feet (1.5 km3)

Colorado River
4,300,000 acre feet (5.3 km3)
200,000 acre feet (0.25 km3)

text: Rain and snowfall[edit]

text: Rain typically falls in California only during the winter and spring months, from October through May, with more rain falling on the northern half of the state than the southern. Approximately 75 percent of the total precipitation volume occurs north of Sacramento, while 75 percent of the total water demand is in the south. With very rare exceptions, summers are dry throughout the state. Precipitation falling as snow in the Sierra and other mountain ranges feeds the network of reservoirs and surface water sources that supply the state; a low rainfall or light snowfall year can result in drought.

text: Rivers in northern and coastal California are mainly rain fed, peaking from January to April and falling to very low levels between June and November. Snowmelt has a significant influence on the Sierra Nevada rivers from east of Sacramento to east of Bakersfield, which typically peak between April and July. Snowmelt is also the primary water source for the Colorado River which supplies southern California.

text: California precipitation and snowpack is measured by the state of California by "water year", which runs from October 1 to September 30.[14]

text: Desalination[edit]

text: In response to water shortages in the state, some water districts are looking to desalination as a way to provide water for residents. Supporters view seawater desalination as a safer water source, since it draws its water from the ocean and thus, is not affected by periods of drought like other sources of water are. Another incentive for desalination is the ability for localities to be more self-sufficient with their water supply, thus improving their drought resilience. However, desalination has been the subject of scrutiny by opponents, who believe that the costs and possible environmental effects of desalination are indicators that California should continue to pursue other alternatives.[15]

text: Although the response to desalination has been mixed, some areas of California are moving forward with seawater desalination. In December 2015, Poseidon Water completed the construction of the Claude "Bud" Lewis Carlsbad Desalination Plant.[16] This facility, which was approved by the San Diego Water Authority, is responsible for providing water for about 8% of San Diego County's water by the year 2020.[17] As of December 2015, there are 6 additional seawater desalination plants currently in operation in the state of California. As of May 2016, there are also 9 more proposed desalination plants.[18]

text: Reuse[edit]

text: Water always gets recycled, via rivers, aquifers, and the atmosphere, but we can also do this directly and intentionally. Water reuse in California is increasingly important, with reclaimed water being used preferably for agricultural irrigation, toilet flushing, and industry (e.g., making concrete, cooling), although some apply direct and indirect potable reuse, risking environmental persistent pharmaceutical pollutants and other constituents of emerging concern. Treatment should be in accordance with the use and, in many cases, water can be safely and productively recycled back to the same non-potable use.[19]

text: Uses of water[edit]

text: This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (October 2014) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Water use in California is divided into approximately 51% for environmental uses, 39% agricultural use and 11% urban uses, though that varies considerably between regions and between wet and dry years.[20] Solely relying on these statewide volumes is controversial because they don't consider the fact that most of the volume of water used for environmental purposes includes flows down Wild and Scenic Rivers in the North Coast where there is no practical way to recover it for either agricultural or urban use because it lacks many connections to the statewide water supply system.[21] It also doesn't factor in the amount of water required to keep salty water from the Pacific Ocean from intruding into the Delta beyond a certain small concentration.[21] Otherwise, "reduced water quality resulting from large amounts of salt water drawn into the Delta could shut down the export pumps that supply fresh water to agriculture and cities."[22][23]

text: Around 75% of California's water supply comes from north of Sacramento, while 80% of the water demand occurs in the southern two-thirds of the state.[24] The Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta Estuary located between San Francisco Bay and Sacramento receives about 40% of California's total precipitation and 50% of its total streamflow. It is a critical hub used by the federal Central Valley Project and California State Water Project to connect water collected and stored in the north regions of the state with aqueducts and canals that transport it to users in the North Bay, South Bay, East Bay, and Greater Southern California. In a typical year, about 10.8 million acre-feet are exported from the Delta: 67% is delivered by the Central Valley Project, 26% by the State Water Project and the remainder to other federal water project users.[25] Those flows are greatly reduced in drought years. About 16.5 million acre-feet of water entering the Delta in a typical year flows through the Delta into San Francisco Bay, including 6.3 million acre-feet in governmentally mandated environmental flows; 22.4 million acre-feet is used for other environmental purposes, and 1.6 million acre-feet supplies water to managed wetlands and wildlife preserves.[26]

text: Agricultural[edit]

text: In an average year, about 39% of California's water consumption, or 34.1 million acre-feet, is used for agricultural purposes. Of that total, 11%, or 8.9 million acre-feet is not consumed by the farms for crop production but is instead recycled and reused by other water users, including environmental use, urban use, and agricultural use, yielding net water consumption for food and fiber production equal to 28% of California's water consumption, or 25.2 million acre-feet.[26] This water irrigates almost 29 million acres (120,000 km2), which grows 350 different crops. Agricultural water usage varies depending on the amount of rainfall each year.

text: Alfalfa uses about 18% of California irrigation water and produces 4% of California's farm-gate revenue, most of which is used as livestock feed.[27] In 2015, California exported one-fourth of its total alfalfa production of roughly 2 million tons. About one-third of that, around 700,000 tons, went to China, Japan took about the same amount and Saudi Arabia bought 5,000 tons. Alfalfa farmers pay about $70 an acre-foot, in Los Angeles that same amount of water is worth $1000 per acre-foot.[28] In 2012, California exported 575,000 tons of alfalfa to China, for $586 million.[27] Other common crop water use, if using all irrigated water: fruits and nuts with 34% of water use and 45% of revenue, field crops with 14% of water and 4% of revenue, pasture forage with 11% of water use and 1% of revenue, rice with 8% of water use and 2% of revenue (despite its lack of water, California grows nearly 5 billion pounds of rice per year, and is the second largest rice-growing state[29][30]), and truck farming of vegetables and nursery crops with 4% of water use and 42% of revenue; head of broccoli: 5.4 gallons; one walnut: 4.9 gallons; head of lettuce: 3.5 gallons; one tomato: 3.3 gallons; one almond 1.1 gallon; one pistachio: 0.75 gallon; one strawberry 0.4 gallon; one grape: 0.3 gallon.[31][32]

text: Horses, based on the amount of alfalfa they eat, use about 1.9 million acre feet of water – about 7% of irrigated water in the state. There are 698,000 horses in California.[33]

text: Cheap agricultural water paired with a mild climate has allowed farmers to produce widely in California. Jane Dye Gussow discusses California's agricultural water in her book This Organic Life. She argues the farms that use precious water in California produces food in an area that "was never intended to be a garden."[34] The Central Valley, where the majority of this agricultural water is used, is the most threatened agricultural land in the nation.[citation needed]

text: Urban/residential[edit]

text: Urban and industrial use of water consumes about 11%, or 8.9 million acre-feet, of total water consumption in an average year.[26] A 2011 study of a sampling of 735 California homes across ten water districts found that the weighted average annual total water use of these homes was 132,000 US gallons (0.41 acre·ft) per year or 362 US gallons (0.00111 acre·ft) per household per day.[35] The study found that about 53% of total average household water use, or more than 192 US gallons (0.00059 acre·ft) per household per day, was used for landscaping and other outdoor uses. Meanwhile, indoor use accounted for more than 170 US gallons (0.00052 acre·ft) per household per day. The most in-home water consumption is toilet flushes, using 20% of the water. After toilets, 20% is used for showers and 18% goes to leaks inside homes.[36]

text: In Sacramento, in 2012 before the severe drought started, residents were using 217 US gallons (0.00067 acre·ft) a day per-capita.[37] Many homes in Sacramento didn't have water meters until recently. They now are gradually being installed after former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a 2004 law mandating meters statewide by 2025.[38]

text: After Folsom, a city of 72,000 east of Sacramento, installed meters in 2011 and adopted tiered rates that charge more for people who consume the most water, per-capita use started falling steadily.[38]

text: In response to the severe California drought, in April 2015, Governor Jerry Brown issued an executive order mandating statewide reductions in water use. The mandate aimed to reduce the amount of water consumed statewide in urban areas by 25% from 2013 levels. The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) proposed regulatory instructions that grouped urban water utilities into nine tiers, with conservation standards ranging from 8% to 36%.[39]

text: Water distribution[edit]

text: There are six main systems of aqueducts and infrastructure that redistribute and transport water in California: the State Water Project, the Central Valley Project, several Colorado River delivery systems, the Los Angeles Aqueduct, the Tuolumne River/Hetch Hetchy system, and the Mokelumne Aqueduct.

text: The State Water Project[edit]

text: The California State Water Project is the largest multipurpose, state-built water project in the United States.[40] The SWP transports water from the Feather River watershed to agriculture, and some of the water goes to industrial and urban users. More than two-thirds of Californians receive some water from the SWP. The system was designed and contracted to deliver 4,200,000 acre feet (5.2 km3), but in an average year delivers only 2,300,000 acre feet (2.8 km3) because many of the original planned features were never built.[13] Twenty-nine agencies hold contracts for SWP water. The contractors pay for SWP's major operating costs and have gradually reduced the $1.75 billion bond debt that supplied funds for initial construction. In the years since 1960, SWP has built 29 dams, 18 pumping plants, five hydroelectric power plants, and around 600 miles (970 km) of canals and pipelines.[41]

text: The SWP system begins with reservoirs on upper tributaries of the Feather River. Oroville Dam creates the largest SWP reservoir. At 770 feet (230 m) above the riverbed, the dam is the tallest in the United States. The reservoir covers 15,000 acres (61 km2) and holds 3,500,000 acre feet (4.3 km3).[42] Water travels from Lake Oroville to the Sacramento River. At Harvey O. Banks Delta Pumping Plant, which pulls SWP water into the Bethany Reservoir, around 2,200,000 acre feet (2.7 km3) are extracted from the Delta each year.[43] Water that flows to the south end of the San Joaquin Valley must be pumped over the Tehachapi Mountains. Because of this, the SWP is California's largest energy consumer, and even though the hydroelectric plants of the SWP generate 5,900 GWh per year, that is only a fraction of the energy needed to lift water over the Tehachapis.[44] Below the Tehachapis the California Aqueduct splits, with the west branch storing water in Castaic and Pyramid Lake, and the east branch storing water in the Silverwood Lake reservoir.

text: The Central Valley Project[edit]

text: The CVP's original purpose was to tame seasonal flooding and to direct water to the south to irrigate 3 million acres (12,000 km2) of farmland. The CVP is operated by the United States Bureau of Reclamation. As one of the largest water systems in the world it stores over 7,000,000 acre feet (8.6 km3) of water, or 17 percent of the state's developed water.[45] The CVP dams and diverts five major rivers: the Trinity, the Sacramento, the American, the Stanislaus, and the San Joaquin. Friant Dam, on the San Joaquin, was completed in 1944, forming Millerton Lake. This was one of 20 reservoirs in the CVP. Shasta Dam, the largest CVP storage facility, was completed in 1945. At Sacramento, American River water stored by Folsom Dam is added. 2,500,000 acre feet (3.1 km3) are annually pumped from the Delta into the Delta-Mendota Canal. New Melones Dam on the Stanislaus River was finished in 1979, and the reservoir was filled in 1982.

text: The CVP has generated some controversy about environmental damage, prices charged to farmers, and lax enforcement of farm size limitations. Bureau of Reclamation water was supposed to be used for farms limited to 160 acres (see Homestead Act). Under Spanish and Mexican land grants, however, there were only a few land owners, all of whom owned large tracts of land. A 1982 reform increased CVP area limits to 960 acres (3.9 km2).[46] In 1992, the Central Valley Project Improvement Act made fish and wildlife protection and restoration an authorized purpose of the CVP on an equal footing with other authorized purposes. 800,000 acre feet (0.99 km3) of annual runoff were dedicated to environmental usage, which generated intense controversy.[47]

text: Colorado River Systems[edit]

text: The Colorado River is the source of 4,400,000 acre feet (5.4 km3) per year for California.[48] Six other states along the river's watershed (Wyoming, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona) and Mexico, share allocated portions of river water. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, or MWD, holds priority water rights on the Colorado. It sells water to 95 percent of the South Coast region. Lake Mead, formed by Hoover Dam, is the primary reservoir in the Colorado River basin. The Colorado River Aqueduct begins 155 miles (249 km) downstream from Hoover Dam, and can carry 1,200,000 acre feet (1.5 km3) annually.

text: An additional system diverts water from the Colorado River at the Imperial Diversion Dam provides waters to the Imperial and Coachella valleys as well as Yuma, Arizona, via the Alamo Canal, the Coachella Canal and the All-American Canal, which runs alongside the Mexican border. This system was also responsible for the accidental re-creation of the Salton Sea in 1905.

text: The Colorado is considered over-allocated, because apportionments were made on inaccurate measurements of annual runoff. Marc Reisner in Cadillac Desert noted that the Colorado is "unable to satisfy all the demands on it, so it is referred to as a 'deficit' river, as if the river were somehow at fault for its overuse".[49] For years California took more than its share of the apportionment, because other states were not prepared to use their entire allotments. MWD became used to 800,000 acre feet (0.99 km3) excess of water. Pressure from other Colorado river states caused the Secretary of the Interior to order California to show progress towards decreasing its dependency on the excess 800,000 acre feet (0.99 km3), or face cuts.[50] The Colorado River Water Use Plan called for Imperial and Coachella Valley agriculture to give up water in order to reallocate 800,000 acre feet (0.99 km3) within the state. The plan's proposals generated much controversy, and the deadline arrived with no agreement reached. The Department of the Interior reduced MWD's access by 415,000 acre feet (0.512 km3).

text: The Los Angeles Aqueduct[edit]

text: The Los Angeles Aqueduct carries water from the Eastern Sierra Nevada to Los Angeles. The construction of the aqueduct marked the first major water delivery project in California. The city purchased 300,000 acres (1,200 km2) of land in the Owens Valley in order to gain access to water rights. The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power transports 400,000 acre feet (0.49 km3) of Eastern Sierra Nevada water to the city each year. This growth clearly shows William Mulholland's observation that "Whoever brings the water, brings the people."[51]

text: After four decades of diversion from the Mono Lake area, environmental damage created an environmental battle in the 1980s, with a victory for the Mono Lake proponents in 1994.[52] Other problems arose when dust from the bed of Owens Lake (completely dried up by diversions) became a major source of air pollution in the southern Owens Valley. To restore Mono Lake, correct air-quality law violations, and rewater portions of the Owens River, Los Angeles has begun to reduce its dependence on Eastern Sierra Nevada water. This has mostly been achieved through water conservation. The city enacted a program offering free low-flow toilets to its customers.[53]

text: Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct[edit]

text: The Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct carries water from the Tuolumne River to San Francisco and other Bay Area regions. The system starts in Hetch Hetchy Valley, inside Yosemite National Park. The system also generates up to 400MW of electrical power, depending on rainfall, most of which is sent to San Francisco via city-owned power lines.[54] After water leaves Hetch Hetchy, it passes through tunnels towards powerhouses. Three pipes then bring the water across the Central Valley. Concerns about the Hetch Hetchy Aqueduct's ability to withstand earthquakes led to a $1.7 billion bond, approved by voters in November 2002.[55]

text: Mokelumne Aqueduct[edit]

text: The East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) serves 35 communities in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, including Berkeley and Oakland. The Mokelumne River in the central Sierra Nevada is the source for almost all of EBMUD's water. EBMUD built the Pardee Dam across the Mokelumne in the foothills northeast of Stockton. South of Pardee is Camanche Reservoir, which regulates releases to serve downstream water rights holders. EBMUD holds almost 30,000 acres (120 km2) in the Mokulumne River watershed and 25,000 acres (100 km2) in other watersheds. EBMUD also has an American River water right that could be sent to the Mokelumne Aqueduct through the Folsom South Canal. The only time this has been done was during the drought years of 1977–78, when the water was actually pumped from the Delta.[13] This generated controversy, as EBMUD preferred the cleaner water from the American River, but environmentalists and Sacramento had concerns about the impacts such a diversion would have on the river. The legal battle led to affirmation of EBMUD's water right, but modifications were also negotiated. The intake point was moved downstream, to maintain minimum flows in the American River before it merges with the Sacramento.

text: North Bay[edit]

text: The North Bay Aqueduct of the California State Water Project delivers an annual average of 39,309 acre-feet of water to urban communities and agricultural users in Napa, Solano, Sonoma and Marin counties. That water is diverted from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta Estuary, a water hub that serves as the junction of south-, west, and north-flowing rivers draining the Cascade and Sierra Nevada mountain ranges.

text: Certain municipalities north of San Francisco Bay, including Santa Rosa and Petaluma, are served by the Sonoma County Water Agency. Their primary water source is the Russian River. However, it must be noted that the Russian River owes its summer flow in large part to the Eel, which is bled off via a tunnel into Potter Valley (via the Potter Valley Project) and flows to a reservoir near Ukiah, Lake Mendocino. PG&E now owns the rights to this delivery system, as well as the long controversial history. There are many[who?] along the Eel who would like their water back.

text: The cities of Vallejo, Fairfield, and Vacaville are served by the Solano County Water Agency, which transports water from Lake Berryessa and moves it south along the Putah South Canal. Marin County has the Marin Municipal Water District and the North Marin Water District.

text: Planning and management[edit]

text: The planning and management of water in California is subject to a vast number of laws, regulations, management plans, and historic water rights.

text: The California state agency responsible for water planning is the California Department of Water Resources.

text: California water plans[edit]

text: There have been several documents known as the "California Water Plan", with the most recent being published in 2013.[56] Before the state of California started drafting comprehensive plans for the management of water in the state, the earliest plan for water distribution in California was an 1873 report. This was followed by a 1919 report called "Irrigation of Twelve Million Acres in the Valley of California". The 1919 report is this first comprehensive plan, and is often called the "Marshall Plan", after its author Col. Robert Bradford Marshall. There have been many subsequent water plans and water plan updates, which were often issued as California Department of Water Resources bulletins.[57] California Water Code provides guidance or the plan updates.[58] Beginning in 1957, early Water Plan Updates were largely technical and focused on water supply development. Plans gradually became more comprehensive to address the state's growing conflicts over limited resources. Updates now present the status and trends of California's water-dependent natural resources; water supplies; and agricultural, urban, and environmental water demands for a range of plausible future scenarios. They also evaluate different combinations of regional and statewide resource management strategies to reduce water demand, increase water supply, reduce flood risk, improve water quality, and enhance environmental and resource stewardship. The evaluations and assessments performed for the updates help identify effective actions and policies for meeting California's resource management objectives in the near term and for several decades to come.

text: Since 2000, another major goal for each update has been to receive broad input and support from Californians. Preparation of these new millennial Water Plan updates has been widely viewed as exceptionally transparent and collaborative as the consensus seeking process is routinely cited by other agencies and states as a model for policy planning efforts.[59] The approach involves: interest based dialog and exchange among teams, committees and the public to develop work products; multiple opportunities for review by different audiences; and integration and reconciliation of feedback from a variety of perspectives.

text: Update 2013 leverages the clear guidance Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. (Jerry Brown) forged with his California Water Action Plan.[60] That five-year plan, released in January 2014, outlines a succinct set of actions that together bring reliability, restoration, and resilience to California water resources, even as the state's population is expected to grow from 38 million to 50 million by 2049.

text: Three related themes distinguish Update 2013 from Update 2009. The five year time span reinforced the value of integrated water management, and Update 2013 closely examines the practices and policies that allow water managers to combine flood management, environmental stewardship, and surface water and groundwater supply actions to deliver multiple benefits across a region. Fundamental to that integrated approach is better alignment in the management of data, planning, policy-making, and regulation across local, State, tribal, and federal governments.

text: Water rights[edit]

text: On more than one occasion, the California Supreme Court has noted that "the scope and technical complexity of issues concerning water resource management are unequalled by virtually any other type of activity presented to the courts."[61][62] An example of this complexity is demonstrated in the case of National Audubon Society v. Superior Court.

text: Water rights are divided in multiple ways. Water rights to surface water and underground sources are separate. Also, California recognizes four distinct types of water rights to surface water in its statutory and common law: pueblo, riparian, prior appropriation, and water reserved by the US. A fifth statutory right also provides area of origin watershed rights.[citation needed]

text: Pueblo water rights[edit]

text: California recognizes water rights granted to pueblos (settlements) under the Spanish and Mexican governments, prior to the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.[63][64] Under the doctrine, pueblos organized under the laws of Mexico or Spain have a water right to the yield of all streams and rivers flowing through the city and the groundwater aquifers lying below.[65] Pueblo water rights are superior to all riparian and appropriative rights and cannot be lost by a failure to assert an interest or use the water.[66] In addition, the pueblo's claim expands with the needs of the city and may be used to supply the needs of areas that are later annexed to the city.[66] Los Angeles and San Diego are the only original pueblos to exercise their pueblo water rights in the courts.

text: Pueblo water rights are controversial. Some modern scholars and courts argue that the pueblo water rights doctrine lacks a historical basis in Spanish or Mexican water law.[67]

text: Riparian water rights[edit]

text: Under the riparian doctrine, "the owner of land has the right to divert the water flowing by his land for use upon his land, without regard to the extent of such use or priority in time".[68] "Riparians on a stream system are vested with a common ownership such that in times of water shortage all riparians must reduce their usage proportionately."[69]

text: Riparian water rights were inherited from the common law of England.[70] Under the doctrine, property owners have correlative rights to the reasonable use of the water passing through their land adjacent to the watercourse. The right is part and parcel with the land itself and, in California, only accompanies those tracts that have always directly touched the water.[71]

text: The English focus on landownership differs sharply from the "first in time, first in right" approach 49ers, who were generally trespassing on federal land, developed to wash hills into rivers.[72] In Lux v. Haggin (1886) the California Supreme Court resolved the conflict by finding that riparian water rights are superior even to older prior appropriations. When in 1926 the Court went so far as to find that riparian owners did not need to put their water to beneficial use, the People amended the California Constitution to reverse the decision, establishing that no water in the state may be wasted.[73]

text: While riparian rights are superior to appropriative rights and may survive dormant and unused, in 1979 the California Supreme Court found that the California State Water Resources Control Board has the power to assign unused riparian rights lower priority than existing prior appropriations.[74]

text: Water rights by prior appropriation[edit]

text: "The appropriation doctrine confers upon one who actually diverts and uses water the right to do so provided that the water is used for reasonable and beneficial uses," regardless of whether that person owns land contiguous to the watercourse.[69] In addition, all appropriative rights are subordinate to riparians or earlier appropriators.[69] In times of shortage riparians are entitled to fulfill their needs before appropriators are entitled to any use of the water.[75] "And, as between appropriators, the rule of priority is 'first in time, first in right.'"[76] Beginning in 1914, a statutory scheme has provided the exclusive method of acquiring appropriation rights through the California State Water Resources Control Board.[77] The modern system of prior appropriation water rights followed by California is characterized by five principles:

text:
Exclusive right is given to the original appropriator, and all following rights are conditional upon precedent rights.
All rights are conditional upon beneficial use.
Water may be used on riparian lands or non-riparian lands (i.e. water may be used on the land next to the water source, or on land removed from the water source)
Diversion is permitted, regardless of the shrinkage of the river or stream.
The right may be lost through non-use.[78]

tag: ol

text: Beneficial use is defined as agricultural, industrial, or urban use. Environmental uses, such as maintaining body of water and the wildlife that use it, were not initially regarded as beneficial uses in some states but have been accepted in some areas.[79] Every water right is parameterized by an annual yield and an appropriation date. When a water right is sold, it maintains its original appropriation date.

text: Water reserved by the United States[edit]

text: Lands reserved by the United States government are accompanied by a corresponding reservation of water rights for as much water is needed to fulfill the purpose for which the reservation was made. Such reservations were made on behalf of Native American tribes, national parks, monuments and forests.[80][80][81][82] Water rights reserved by the United States are defined by and controlled by federal law. And because reserved water rights are not riparian nor appropriative, they may conflict with state law.[80]

text: Area of origin watershed rights[edit]

text: California provides communities and other water users within watersheds senior status over appropriative water rights in limited circumstances.[83] California area of origin laws include The County of Origin Law (1931), The Water Protection Statute (1933), and The Delta Protection Act (1959).[84]

text: Area of origin water rights parallel pueblo water rights. In both cases, water is reserved for future growth of the local community. In other words, appropriations may be subject to a water rights claim from people/government in the area of origin. That later claim would be senior despite its temporal disconnect. As a result of its pueblo rights, Los Angeles has rights to all or almost all water from the Los Angeles River.[which?] In the same way, communities along major water sources such as the Sacramento River theoretically have senior water rights to support growth despite a downstream user holding otherwise senior appropriative water rights.[citation needed]

text: Area of origin laws were passed in reaction to the controversies related to Los Angeles diverting water from the Owens Valley.[citation needed] Despite being on the books for generations, the area of origin statutes were not used until 2000. In addition, there currently are no court opinions regarding area of origin watershed rights.[citation needed]

text: Adjudication[edit]

text: Since under the law, landowners can extract as much groundwater from their property as they can put to beneficial use, adjudication was used to determine who had the right to pump how much and to audit such usage.[85] The courts appoint water masters to audit usage and otherwise enforce water rights, who are often management boards, the federal United States Department of the Interior, the California Department of Water Resources, or an individual.[85][86][87]

text: Disputes and controversies[edit]

text: The California Water Wars, a struggle between Los Angeles and certain parties within the Owens Valley, for water rights is but one of examples of the alleged wrongdoings of municipalities and people in securing adequate water supplies. The city of Los Angeles bought 300,000 acres (1,200 km2) of land from residents of the Owens Valley and the water rights attached with them, for a fair price. The diverting of this water from the valley, transformed it from an agricultural valley into a dust bowl.[49]

text: The electricity produced by the hydroelectric plants drawing their water from the Hetch Hetchy reservoir became the subject of controversy when it was reported by the San Francisco Bay Guardian that the city of San Francisco sold roughly 500 megawatts of power to the PG&E,[88] supposedly in violation of the Raker Act, which specifies that because the source of water and power was on public land, no private profit could be gained from such sales. Whether or not the Raker Act is indeed being violated is still a matter of controversy.

text: The creation of so many dams in California in order to enact a pragmatic water supply program has been met with criticism from some environmentalists,[which?] who have decried the negative effects of dams on ecosystems, particularly on migratory fish populations.[89]

text: Predicted need for increased water supplies[edit]

text: This section's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (May 2013)

text: It is projected that California's population will be more than 44 million people in the year 2030, and almost 50 million by 2050.[90] If the prediction comes true and there is no action to increase the water supply, the difference between water demand and supply would be between 2,000,000 and 6,000,000 acre feet (7.4 km3) in the year 2020.[91] Over the past five years California voters have approved $3 billion in bonds for water development and management. Many of these projects are incorporated in the CALFED Bay-Delta program, a federal-state program designed to reduce water supply conflicts. In August 2000 the state and federal governments approved the CALFED plan for water quality, water conservation and recycling, watershed administration, ecosystem re-establishment, delta levees, surface and groundwater storage, water transportation, and science. The plan has a thirty-year implementation period and designed to incorporate changes in conditions and knowledge about the effects of specific projects. Stage 1 was initiated in 2000 and was designed as a seven-year program. The cost is estimated to be $8.7 billion.[92] Stage 1 water yield within the next seven to ten years is estimated to be 2,900,000 acre feet (3.6 km3) per year.[91] As part of Stage 1, an Environmental Water Account was established through the purchase of 350,000 acre feet (0.43 km3) of water. The EWA is used to protect fish and other wildlife without reducing water allocations to farms and municipalities.

text: A $7.5 billion water bond was approved in November 2014 with a 2 to 1 ratio.[93] The bond-financing has been contentiously debated by the legislature and Governor Jerry Brown for the past few years, was said to improve the water quality, supply and infrastructure, if passed by voters.[94]

text: Natural disasters and California water[edit]

text: Major droughts in California history since 1900[edit]

text:
1917–21
1922–26
1928–37
1943–51
1959–62
1976–77
1987–92
2007–09
2012–15[95][96]

tag: ul

text: Archives relating to California water[edit]

text: The California Water Documents collection in the Claremont Colleges Digital Library is a valuable online resource of archived materials related to California's water history. Topics encompassed in the collection include: water quality, flood control, water distribution, water conservation, water usage, drought, and geology.[97] Additionally, the collection has digitized materials relating to the creation and operation of both the Central Valley Project and the California State Water Project as well as their component units.[97] The items represented in the Claremont Colleges Digital Library are part of a larger collection entitled the Water Resources Collection in Special Collections at Claremont Colleges' Honnold/Mudd Library. The Water Resources Collection was started in the 1930s by Librarian Willis Holmes Kerr and Librarian and Claremont Colleges' Trustee John Treanor.[98] These librarians' interest in California's water problem led them to start collecting a variety of documents related to water history and usage from around the state. It includes reports of engineers, annual reports and minute books of boards of directors of water companies, documents of federal and state governments, promotional pamphlets, and newspaper clippings.[98] Most of the documents focus on the water history from the first half of the 20th century, but there are additional, more recent publications included, which have been donated by Claremont Graduate University Professor Merrill Goodall.[98] The California Water Documents collection is currently a work in progress at the Claremont Colleges Digital Library.

text: The Water Resources Collections and Archives is located at the University of California, Riverside and features a comprehensive collection of water-resource related documents.


document_title: Star Wars sequel trilogy

question_text: when's the new star wars movie coming out

question_tokens: when 's the new star wars movie coming out

root

text: Star Wars sequel trilogy

text: Initial development

text: According to Mark Hamill, who plays Luke Skywalker, in 1976, Star Wars creator George Lucas told him that he planned three Star Wars trilogies. Lucas suggested Hamill could have a cameo role in Episode IX, which he imagined filming by 2011.[1][2] A Time magazine story in March 1978, quoting Lucas, stated there would be ten Star Wars films after The Empire Strikes Back.[3] Gary Kurtz was also aware of proposed story elements for Episode VII to Episode IX before 1980.[4][5] In 1980, at the time of the release of The Empire Strikes Back, Lucas said there were seven further Star Wars films he wanted to make. He said he had "twelve-page outlines" for those films.[6] In an interview with Jim Steranko in Prevue magazine published in late 1980, Lucas described how the expansive scope of Star Wars had started with an overlong screenplay:

tag: p

text: So, I took the screenplay and divided it into three stories, and rewrote the first one. As I was writing, I came up with some ideas for a film about robots, with no humans in it. When I got to working on the Wookiee, I thought of a film just about Wookiees, nothing else. So, for a time, I had a couple of odd movies with just those characters. Then, I had the other two films, which were essentially split into three parts each, two trilogies. When the smoke cleared, I said, 'This is really great. I'll do another trilogy that takes place after this.' I had three trilogies of nine films, and then another couple of odd films. Essentially, there were twelve films.

text: He added that he had:

text: …eliminated the odd movies, because they really don't have anything to do with the Star Wars saga. ... I'm just going to keep it pure. It's a nine-part saga that has a beginning, a middle and an end. It progresses over a period of about fifty or sixty years with about twenty years between trilogies, each trilogy taking about six or seven years.[7]

text: In this interview, Lucas also stated that he had "titles and ten-page story outlines for each of" the nine episodes.[7] In an interview with Gary Kurtz in the same magazine, Kurtz said:

text: [w]hether or not all nine or twelve films actually get made depends on how George feels as time goes along. The series may happen the way he originally planned or may completely change. As the films are made, each of the stories develops. As each is finished, I think the direction of the saga may change a bit.[8]

text: In an interview with Starlog magazine published in September 1981, Lucas confirmed that he had the nine-film series plotted, cautioning:

text: …but it's a long way from the plot to the script. I've just gone through that with Return of the Jedi, and what seems like a great idea when it's described in three sentences doesn't hold together when you try to make five or six scenes out of it. So plots change a lot when they start getting into script form.[9]

text: Story development by Lucas

text: Shortly after 1980's release of Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back, Lucas had already written story treatments for episodes: VI, and the sequel trilogy consisting of episodes VII, VIII and IX. Dale Pollock, George Lucas's biographer, revealed in a 2012 interview, that as part of his biographical research during the 1980s, Lucas had allowed him to read the plot outlines for the at the time comprising 12 planned Star Wars film episodes, albeit on the condition of signing a confidentiality agreement.[10] About the 1980s sequel trilogy drafts, Pollock said:

text:
"The three most exciting stories were 7, 8 and 9. They had propulsive action, really interesting new worlds, new characters. I remember thinking, 'I want to see these 3 movies.'"
The next film series would "involve Luke Skywalker in his 30s and 40s."

text: Pollock said that Disney would probably use Lucas's outlines as the basis for the sequel trilogy, saying "That's in part what Disney bought."[10]

text: Impact of Episode VI: Return of the Jedi on the sequel trilogy

text: Those were Lucas' original plans for the sequel trilogy. Other than Pollock's vague description, no official information about the 1980s script treatments for the sequel trilogy has been released. Those plans were drastically changed after Empire Strikes Back released because Lucas decided not to make the sequel trilogy, and instead let the story be a trilogy by ending the storyline with Episode VI: Return of the Jedi. This led Lucas to rework and fully incorporate many of the plots from his discarded sequel trilogy directly into Return of the Jedi. Those incorporated elements include:

text:
The focus on Luke Skywalker's journey to becoming the premier Jedi Knight.
"Luke's sister", who was originally meant to be a new character (set to appear in Episode VIII). However, by Return of the Jedi's final script, it was decided Leia would be retconned into being Luke's sister (a plot element further set in stone by Episode III: Revenge of the Sith).
The first appearance of the Emperor and Luke's ultimate confrontation with him. Both also fully happened within Episode VI: Return of the Jedi (Lucas originally planned for both to happen in Episode IX), that specific storyline had been planned as early as pre-1980, according to A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back producer Gary Kurtz.[4][5][11]

text: Cancelation period

text: From 1997 to 2012, Lucas frequently stated that he had no plans to make the sequel trilogy and would not allow others to do so.[12][13][14][15][16] He gave various explanations for the apparent abandonment of plans to film the sequel trilogy.

text: At a 1997 "Special Edition" press conference, Lucas said: "Everyone said, 'Well, are you going to do sequels to the first three?' But that was an afterthought; I don't have scripts on those stories. The only notion on that was, wouldn't it be fun to get all the actors to come back when they're 60 or 70 years old and make three more about them as old people."[12] In a 1997 issue of Star Wars Insider, he said: "The whole story has six episodes.... If I ever went beyond that, it would be something that was made up. I really don't have any notion other than, 'Gee, it would be interesting to do Luke Skywalker later on.' It wouldn't be part of the main story, but a sequel to this thing."[13]

text: In an interview published in the February 1999 issue of Vanity Fair, Lucas said: "When you see it in six parts, you'll understand. It really ends at part six. I never had a story for the sequels, for the later ones."[17][18] In early May 2002, just before the worldwide release of Episode II: Attack of the Clones and while Lucas was working on the script for Episode III, rumors of Star Wars episodes VII, VIII, and IX were posted on the Internet.[19] In reply, Lucas noted that there would be no Star Wars Episodes VII, VIII, and IX, since the time feels right to move on:

text: I am going to do my own movies. I have got some ideas but they are the kind of movies that aren't going to be popular, they're not going to be successful in terms of financing. I have managed to get a fund by doing these (blockbuster) movies that allows me the creative freedom to do things that may never see the light of day—or if they do get distributed they will be on a very limited basis because they are not mass entertainment movies. There are a lot of things I still want to do. I want to do a TV show, some TV movies, mostly they will be historical in nature.[19]

text: Lucas also noted "Ultimately, the saga will be six films, a 12-hour story. Then people can watch all six films together as they were intended to be seen."[19] In 2008, after all six films had been released, Lucas said: "The movies were the story of Anakin Skywalker and Luke Skywalker, and when Luke saves the galaxy and redeems his father, that's where that story ends."[20]

text: In 1999, when asked about the possibility of someone else making Star Wars films, Lucas said, "Probably not, it's my thing."[17][18] In August 1999, at a press conference in New York City to discuss The Phantom Menace, Lucas described the "nine year commitment" required to make a Star Wars trilogy.[21] In 2002, he said: "Basically what I said as a joke was, 'Maybe when Harrison and Carrie are in their 70s, we'll come back and do another version.' The thing I didn't realize then, and that I do realize now very clearly, is that not only would they be in their 70s, but I would be in my 70s too."[22] In 2007, Lucas described making the films at that age as "an idea that seemed amusing at the time, but doesn't seem realistic now", and suggested that 'off-the-cuff' comments he had made in earlier years had been misconstrued as absolute statements.[23]

text: Production

text: Post-Episode VI: Return of the Jedi drafts

text: For the next 35 years, Lucas gave many hints about many of the plot elements from his discarded 1980s script treatments for the sequel trilogy, or what would happen if he were to make a sequel trilogy. Those discarded plots continued to fascinate fans for decades, as many of them were completely unaffected by the conclusion of the original trilogy; thus leaving the sequel trilogy a possibility of using them. Among those things Lucas hinted at, were:

text:
Episode VII would begin roughly 20 (or perhaps 30–40) years after the end of Return of the Jedi (according to Lucas in 1980 and 1982).[7][24]
R2-D2 and C-3PO would be the only characters who might continue through all nine films (Lucas in 1980, 1981, and 1983).[7][25][26]
"It's like a saga, the story of a group of people, a family" (Lucas in 1980).[7]
The main theme of the trilogy would be moral and philosophical problems, such as the necessity for moral choices and the wisdom needed to distinguish right from wrong, justice, confrontation, and passing on what you have learned (Lucas in 1983 and 1989).[27][28]
The key actors, Hamill as Luke Skywalker, Ford as Han Solo, and Fisher as Princess Leia, would appear, in their 60s or 70s (Lucas in 1983).[12][27]
In Episode IX, Hamill would cameo, "like Obi-Wan handing the lightsaber down to the next new hope" (according to Hamill, in 2004).[1]
"The other one—what happens to Luke afterward—is much more ethereal. I have a tiny notebook full of notes on that. If I'm really ambitious, I could proceed to figure out what would have happened to Luke" (Lucas in 1980).[29]
The trilogy would deal with the rebuilding of the Republic (Lucas in 1980).[30] And that Luke would have a romantic relationship with a female love interest (Lucas in 1988).[31] (While other ideas seem to have been retained, these two last ideas were apparently discarded for Disney's sequel trilogy, given how it starts at a time where the Galactic Republic has already been rebuilt, and that Luke is in exile).

text: During the early 1990s, Lucas allowed writer Timothy Zahn to write a Star Wars expanded universe novel series set after the events in the original trilogy, which was called the Thrawn Trilogy. Between 1999 and 2005, Lucas made the prequel trilogy of Episodes I, II, and III, and decided to end the saga as six films. In a 2008 interview in Total Film, Lucas ruled out anybody else making Star Wars films, and additionally addded that the Expanded Universe novels and comics did not lined up with his six films Star Wars saga. Asked if he was happy for new Star Wars films to be made after his death, he said: "I've left pretty explicit instructions for there not to be any more features. There will definitely be no Episodes VII–IX. That's because there isn't any story. I mean, I never thought of anything. And now there have been novels about the events after Episode VI, which isn't at all what I would have done with it. The Star Wars story is really the tragedy of Darth Vader. That is the story. Once Vader dies, he doesn't come back to life, the Emperor doesn't get cloned and Luke doesn't get married..."[32]

text: This decision meant that Lucas decided to cancel the sequel trilogy, this was until he had a change of heart in the 2010s, when Lucas secretly started writing more ideas for the sequel trilogy and strongly considered to direct Episode VII for a May 2015 release.[33]

text: Disney acquisition of Lucasfilm

text: George Lucas cease of involvement with Star Wars

text: However, then, Lucas changed his mind again, and decide to fully retire, and instead allow other filmmakers do the films, instead of himself. Deciding to sell his production company Lucasfilm, along with the rights to Star Wars, to Disney. Speaking after Disney's 2012 acquisition of Lucasfilm, Lucas (sitting alongside new Lucasfilm president Kathleen Kennedy), said: "I always said I wasn't going to do any more, and that's true, because I'm not going to do any more. But that doesn't mean I'm unwilling to turn it over to Kathy to do more."[34] Lucas said at some point, he had planned to finish Episode VII, release it in May 2015 and then sell the company afterward. But Disney expressed interest, with Lucas saying "It's better for me to get out at the beginning of a new thing and I can just remove myself. The time is more important to me than the money."[35] Both plot-outlines, the one written in the 1980s and the one written in the 2010s, were turned over to Disney chairman Bob Iger around the time that Disney acquired Lucasfilm in 2012.[36]

text: Previously mentioned veteran writer of Star Wars novels, Zahn was interviewed about the at-the-time just-announced sequel trilogy in 2012, he confirmed the sequel trilogy was never meant to be based on his Thrawn novels nor the expanded universe but said he had been briefed years before on Lucas's plans for the sequels.[37] (Zahn had discussions with Lucas before the first Thrawn novel was published in 1991.)

text: The original idea as I understood it—and Lucas changes his mind off and on, so it may not be what he's thinking right now—but it was going to be three generations. You'd have the original trilogy, then go back to Luke's father and find out what happened to him, and if there was another seventh, eighth, or ninth film, it would be Luke's children.[37]

text: As announced by Lucasfilm, the sequel trilogy also meant the end of most of the existing Star Wars expanded universe, so as to give "maximum creative freedom to the filmmakers and also preserve an element of surprise and discovery for the audience". Much of the old expanded universe content would continue to be available under the Star Wars: Legends brand, which was created to brand the non-canonical works of the franchise.[38]

text: Abandoned and incorporated elements from George Lucas story treatments

text: The first film in the trilogy was titled Episode VII: The Force Awakens, and written by Lucas co-writer on two sequels in the original trilogy Lawrence Kasdan, along J.J. Abrams, who also directed it. As noted by Lucas in 2013, the film had seemingly discarded his ideas for Episode VII. During an interview with Cinemablend in January 2014, while promoting the upcoming release of the Lucasfilm animated movie Strange Magic, Lucas revealed that ultimately, Disney chose not to use the story treatments which he had written and turned over with the acquisition, and that the company chose to create brand new stories for the upcoming movies instead: "The ones that I sold to Disney, they came up to the decision that they didn't really want to do those. So they made up their own. So it's not the ones that I originally wrote [on screen in Star Wars: The Force Awakens]".[39]

text: However, Rian Johnson's Episode VIII: The Last Jedi, brought some of them back. Few details have been revealed about the contents of Lucas's 2010s story treatments for the sequel trilogy, the revelations came from the book, called Art of Star Wars: The Last Jedi. The book disclosed that in January 2013 at Skywalker Ranch, George Lucas himself, held the first brief about the as-yet untitled Episode VII and its story. Showing numerous concept arts including:

text:
A female young Jedi padawan named Kira (the female young Jedi padawan was fully retained, albeit the character would be renamed Rey).
An older Luke Skywalker who, decades after the fall of the Galactic Empire, exiled himself to the remote planet where the first Jedi temple was located. The first Jedi temple concept art had a bell-shaped design, as designed by VFX art director James Clyne. (The idea and designs would later be reworked as the planet Ahch-To, briefly seen at the end of Episode VIII: The Force Awakens, and explored in Episode VIII: The Last Jedi).
Luke would have started off reluctant to train the female Jedi padawan, but would have eventually had a change of heart and agree to train her. (This idea was fully incorporated into the plot).

text: Lucas seemingly had planned for the conclusion of Luke's story to happen in Episode VII instead of Episode VIII, with Luke dying at the end of the film, this element was also incorporated into Johnson's film.[40] Conversely, some months later, Mark Hamill contradicted this statement, saying that George Lucas' original vision for the ending of Episode IX was to have Luke dying there instead of a simple cameo, leaving his sister Leia as a Jedi.[41]

text: Films

text:
Film
U.S. release date
Director(s)
Screenwriter(s)
Producer(s)
Status

Star Wars: The Force Awakens[a]
December 18, 2015 (2015-12-18)
J. J. Abrams
Lawrence Kasdan, J. J. Abrams and Michael Arndt
Kathleen Kennedy, J. J. Abrams and Bryan Burk
Released

Star Wars: The Last Jedi[b]
December 15, 2017 (2017-12-15)
Rian Johnson
Kathleen Kennedy and Ram Bergman

Star Wars: Episode IX
December 20, 2019 (2019-12-20)[42]
J. J. Abrams[43]
J. J. Abrams and Chris Terrio[43]
Kathleen Kennedy, J. J. Abrams, and Michelle Rejwan[43]
Pre-production

tag: table

text: Star Wars: The Force Awakens

text: The Force Awakens, the first film in the sequel trilogy, takes place approximately 30 years after the events of Return of the Jedi. It includes new characters, as well as characters from the original trilogy, in search of Luke Skywalker with the help of Han Solo, and Princess Leia along with Chewbacca, C-3PO, and R2-D2.[44][45] The Force Awakens, like the subsequent two films, is based on an original screenplay and not a storyline from the expanded universe.[46]

text: The original trilogy's cast joins newcomers Daisy Ridley, John Boyega, Adam Driver, and Oscar Isaac. It is directed by J. J. Abrams, who co-wrote a revised version of the screenplay along with Lawrence Kasdan, co-writer of the screenplays for The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. Original drafts of The Force Awakens script were written by Michael Arndt,[47][48][49] but ultimately early character and plot elements in Arndt's vision came into conflict with the conceptual ideas of director J.J. Abrams and Lucasfilm president Kathleen Kennedy, as well as filming schedules and ultimately Arndt was removed from the project due to creative differences and time constraints,[50][51][52][53] being replaced by Kasdan as the primary co-creative visionary to Abrams' plot concepts.[52][53]

text: George Lucas was set to provide Abrams with advice as a creative consultant; however, Lucas had no involvement with the film, with his representative stating Lucas "ideally would love not to see any footage until he walks into the theater next December. He has never been able to be surprised by a Star Wars film before and he said he was looking forward to it."[36][54][55][56] The film began pre-production on October 30, 2012. Production began in April 2014;[57] it was released on December 18, 2015.[58] In the US, the film is rated PG-13 "for sci-fi action violence" and an M Rating In Australia,[59] the second Star Wars film to receive that rating after Revenge of the Sith (the five other films received a PG rating).[60]

text: The film broke opening weekend box office records in North America with $248 million ($39 million more than previous record holder Jurassic World) and totals of $529 million worldwide, the largest opening ever. The film set another new record by becoming the first movie to break the $1 billion mark in box office sales in just 12 days.[61] It is currently the highest-grossing film of all time in North America and the third highest-grossing film worldwide, unadjusted for inflation.[62]

text: Star Wars: The Last Jedi

text: The Last Jedi, the second film in the sequel trilogy, takes place following the events of The Force Awakens. On June 20, 2014, Rian Johnson was announced as writer and director of Episode VIII and story treatment writer of Episode IX.[63][64] Kathleen Kennedy and Ram Bergman were the producers and J. J. Abrams is the executive producer. Steve Yedlin is the cinematographer.[65] Johnson confirmed in August 2014 that he would direct Episode VIII.[66]

text: In March 2015, Oscar Isaac confirmed he would reprise his The Force Awakens role of Poe Dameron in Episode VIII.[67][68][69] In July 2015, it was reported that Benicio del Toro was being considered for a villain;[70][71] del Toro later confirmed that he had been cast.[72] In September 2015, it was reported that Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Tatiana Maslany, Gina Rodriguez, Olivia Cooke, and Bel Powley were on the shortlist for two separate parts.[73][74] Jimmy Vee was cast as R2-D2, succeeding Kenny Baker, who died in August 2016.[75][76]

text: Much of the filming for Episode VIII took place at Pinewood Studios near London.[77][78] In September 2015, some pre-production filming took place on the island of Skellig Michael, Ireland to take advantage of better weather conditions.[79] In a November 2015 interview with Wired, Abrams stated that the film's script was completed.[80] In December 2015, Hamill,[81] Isaac,[82] Christie,[83] and Boyega were confirmed to reprise their roles as Luke Skywalker, Poe Dameron, Captain Phasma, and Finn, respectively.[84] Kennedy announced on December 17, 2015, at the London premiere for The Force Awakens that most of the cast would return for Episode VIII.[85] On January 20, 2016, Lucasfilm and Disney announced that the release of the film would be delayed to December 15, 2017.[86] Principal photography began in February 2016.[87] Additional filming took place in Dubrovnik from March 9 to March 16, 2016,[88][89] as well as in Ireland.[90] Principal photography wrapped in July 2016.[91][92][93] On December 27, 2016, Carrie Fisher died after going into cardiac arrest a few days earlier. Fisher had completed filming her role as General Leia Organa before her death.[94] On January 23, 2017, the film was given a confirmed release date of December 15, 2017 with the title Star Wars: The Last Jedi.[95]

text: Star Wars: Episode IX

text: In June 2014, Johnson was announced as writing a story treatment for Episode IX,[63] but later stated he had not been involved with writing the film.[96] In August 2015, Colin Trevorrow was announced as the director of Episode IX,[97] and he, with Derek Connolly, began writing a script.[98] In February 2016, Disney CEO Bob Iger confirmed that pre-production of Episode IX had begun.[87]

text: In late December 2016, following the death of Carrie Fisher, media outlets reported that she had been slated for a key role in Episode IX.[99][100][101] A few weeks later, Lucasfilm stated that they would not digitally recreate Fisher's performance for the film,[102] and in April 2017, Kathleen Kennedy confirmed that Fisher will not be in Episode IX.[103] In August, it was announced that Jack Thorne would write the script.[104]

text: In September 2017, Lucasfilm announced that Trevorrow had stepped down as director of the film,[105][106] and a week later, it was announced that J.J. Abrams would return to direct Episode IX. Abrams will also co-write the film with Chris Terrio, in addition to producing the film through his company Bad Robot Productions, with Kennedy and Michelle Rejwan.[43][107]

text: The cast members currently confirmed to return are Adam Driver as Kylo Ren, Daisy Ridley as Rey, John Boyega as Finn, and Oscar Isaac as Poe Dameron.[108] Principal photography is set to begin in July 2018.[109] Originally, Disney had intended for the film to be released in December, as with the other sequel films The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi, but then chose a release date of May 24, 2019, a time frame more common to Star Wars releases prior to the Disney purchase.[110] However, after Abrams took over the film from Trevorrow, the film's release date was moved back to the winter holiday season. The film is now scheduled to be released on December 20, 2019.[42][111]

text: On January 10, 2018, it was reported that John Williams will return to compose and conduct the music for Episode IX.[112][113] The next month, Williams announced that Episode IX will be the last Star Wars film music he will be composing.[114]

text: Reception

text: Critical and public response

text:
Film
Rotten Tomatoes
Metacritic
CinemaScore

Star Wars: The Force Awakens
93% (383 reviews)[115]
81 (54 reviews)[116]
A[117]

Star Wars: The Last Jedi
91% (374 reviews)[118]
85 (56 reviews)[119]
A[117]

Average
92%
83
A

text: Box office performance

text:
Film
U.S. release date
Box office gross
All-time Ranking
Budget
Ref(s)

U.S. and Canada
Other territories
Worldwide
U.S. and Canada
Worldwide

Star Wars: The Force Awakens
December 18, 2015
$7002936700000000000♠936.7 million
$7000113199999999999♠1.132 billion
$7000206800000000000♠2.068 billion
1
3
$245 million
[120]

Star Wars: The Last Jedi
December 15, 2017
$7002620200000000000♠620.2 million
$7002712300000000000♠712.3 million
$7000133200000000000♠1.332 billion
7
10
$200 million
[121][122]

Total
$7000155700000000000♠1.557 billion
$7000184400000000000♠1.844 billion
$7000340000000000000♠3.4 billion

$445 million

text: Academy Awards

text:
Academy Awards
Film

Star Wars:
The Force Awakens
(2015)
Star Wars:
The Last Jedi
(2017)

Best Original Score
Nominated
Nominated

Best Sound Editing
Nominated
Nominated

Best Sound Mixing
Nominated
Nominated

Best Film Editing
Nominated

Best Visual Effects
Nominated
Nominated

text: Notes

text:
Jump up ^ Also known as Star Wars: Episode VII – The Force Awakens.
Jump up ^ Also known as Star Wars: Episode VIII – The Last Jedi.


document_title: Magnum Force

question_text: who said a man's got to know his limitations

question_tokens: who said a man 's got to know his limitations

text: Magnum Force

text: Plot[edit]

text: This article's plot summary may be too long or excessively detailed. Please help improve it by removing unnecessary details and making it more concise. (July 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Mobster Carmine Ricca (Richard Devon) drives away from court and an angry mob after being acquitted on a legal technicality. An SFPD motorcycle cop stops Ricca’s limo for a minor traffic violation. Suddenly, the patrolman pulls his service revolver, shoots all four men in the car, and rides away.

text: Inspector Harry Callahan (Clint Eastwood) and his partner Earlington "Early" Smith (Felton Perry) visit the crime scene, despite being on stakeout duty. Callahan's superior, Lieutenant Neil Briggs (Hal Holbrook) dismisses them, seeing Callahan and his tactics as reckless and dangerous. Callahan, in turn, quips, "A good man always knows his limitations," mocking Briggs' pride in not ever drawing his gun in the line of duty. Callahan and Early then stumble upon a hijacking attempt at the airport; Callahan poses as a pilot and stops the two would-be terrorists.

text: Rookie cops Phil Sweet (Tim Matheson), John Davis (David Soul), Alan "Red" Astrachan (Kip Niven), and Mike Grimes (Robert Urich) encounter Callahan at an indoor firing range. Sweet, after demonstrating his speed and accuracy with Callahan's gun, reveals that he is an ex-Airborne Ranger and Special Forces veteran and that the others are as good or better shots than he. The young officers' zeal and marksmanship impress Callahan.

text: Later, a motorcycle cop slaughters a mobster's pool party using a satchel charge and a submachine gun. Shortly afterwards, a pimp (Albert Popwell) who murdered one of his prostitutes (Margaret Avery) is shot dead by another motorcycle officer. Callahan realizes that the pimp had let his killer approach him and offered a bribe. He deduces that a cop is likely responsible, and suspects his old friend Charlie McCoy (Mitchell Ryan), who has become despondent and suicidal after leaving his wife, Carol (Christine White).

text: Another motorcycle cop murders drug kingpin Lou Guzman (Clifford A. Pellow) and associates using a Colt Python equipped with a suppressor. However, Guzman is under surveillance and Callahan's old partner, Frank DiGiorgio (John Mitchum), sees McCoy dump his bike outside Guzman's apartment complex just before the murders. The motorcycle cop encounters McCoy in the parking garage and kills him to eliminate a potential witness. The motorcycle cop comes out of the garage to control the crowd, takes off his helmet and it is Davis. Meanwhile, at headquarters Harry presents his suspicions about McCoy to Briggs, who informs him of McCoy's death.

text: At the annual combat pistol championship, a puzzled DiGiorgio tells Callahan that Davis was the first officer to arrive after the murders of Guzman and McCoy. As Davis proceeds to break Callahan's speed and accuracy records, Callahan borrows Davis' Colt Python and purposely embeds a slug in a range wall. That night he retrieves the slug, and ballistics reveals that it matches those found at the Guzman and McCoy crime scenes. Harry begins to suspect that a secret death squad within the department is responsible for the murders.

text: Briggs ignores Callahan's suspicions and insists that mob killer Frank Palancio (Tony Giorgio) is behind the deaths. When Briggs obtains a warrant for Palancio's arrest and tells Harry to lead the raid, Callahan requests Davis and Sweet as backup. Palancio and his gang are tipped off via a phone call and arm themselves; in the ensuing gunfight Sweet is killed, along with Palancio and all his men. A search of Palancio's offices turns up nothing that would incriminate him, raising Harry's suspicions further.

text: The three remaining renegade cops confront Callahan in his garage complex. They present Callahan with a veiled ultimatum to join their organization: "Either you're for us or you're against us." He responds, "I’m afraid you've misjudged me." While checking his mailbox, Harry discovers a bomb left by the vigilantes and manages to defuse it, but a second bomb kills Early as Harry phones to warn him.

text: Callahan summons Briggs and shows him the bomb. While driving to City Hall, Briggs suddenly draws his revolver and forces Harry to disarm, revealing himself as the leader of the death squad. He cites the traditions of frontier justice and summary executions, and expresses disappointment for Callahan's refusal to join his squad. Grimes appears behind the car, following along as backup.

text: Callahan distracts Briggs by sideswiping a bus and beats him unconscious. Grimes gives chase and shoots out the car's rear windshield before Harry manages to run him over. The two remaining motorcycle cops appear and Callahan flees onto an old aircraft carrier in a shipbreaker's yard. As they stalk Callahan through the darkened ship, Astrachan shoots recklessly and runs out of ammunition, allowing Callahan to ambush and beat him to death. Callahan runs onto the top deck and starts up Astrachan's motorcycle, leading Davis in a series of jumps between ships before the two run out of deck space. Callahan manages to skid to a stop, but Davis falls to his death.

text: Callahan makes his way back to the car, but a bloodied Briggs appears, intending to prosecute him for killing the vigilante police officers rather than just shoot him dead. As Callahan backs away from the car, he surreptitiously activates the timer on the mail bomb and tosses it in the back seat. Briggs is driving away when the car explodes, killing him. "Man's got to know his limitations", Callahan quips again, before walking away.

text: Cast[edit]

text:
Clint Eastwood as SFPD Homicide Inspector Harry Callahan
Hal Holbrook as SFPD Homicide Lt. Neil Briggs
David Soul as SFPD Traffic Officer John Davis
Tim Matheson as SFPD Traffic Officer Phil Sweet
Kip Niven as SFPD Traffic Officer Alan "Red" Astrachan
Robert Urich as SFPD Traffic Officer Mike Grimes
Felton Perry as SFPD Stakeout Inspector Earlington "Early" Smith
Mitchell Ryan as SFPD Traffic Officer Charlie McCoy
Margaret Avery as the Prostitute
Bob McClurg as the Cab Driver
John Mitchum as SFPD Stakeout Inspector Frank DiGiorgio
Albert Popwell as the Pimp, J.J. Wilson
Richard Devon as Carmine Ricca
Christine White as Carol McCoy
Tony Giorgio as Frank Palancio
Maurice Argent as Nat Weinstein
Jack Kosslyn as Walter
Bob March as Estabrook
Adele Yoshioka as Sunny
Suzanne Somers as Pool Girl (uncredited)

text: Note: Harry's surname is spelled "Calahan" in the closing credits of Magnum Force. It is "Callahan" in every other film in the Dirty Harry series.

text: Production[edit]

text: Development[edit]

text: Writer John Milius came up with a storyline in which a group of rogue young officers in the San Francisco Police Department systematically exterminate the city's worst criminals, conveying the idea that there are even worse rogue cops than Dirty Harry.[2] Terrence Malick had introduced the concept in an unused draft for the first film; director Don Siegel disliked the idea and had Malick's draft thrown out, but Clint Eastwood remembered it for this film. Eastwood specifically wanted to convey that, despite the 1971 film's perceived politics, Harry was not a complete vigilante. David Soul, Tim Matheson, Robert Urich and Kip Niven were cast as the young vigilante cops.[3] Milius was a gun aficionado and political conservative and the film would extensively feature gun shooting in practice, competition, and on the job.[3] Given this strong theme in the film, the title was soon changed from Vigilance to Magnum Force in deference to the .44 Magnum that Harry liked to use. Milius thought it was important to remind the audiences of the original film by incorporating the line "Do ya feel lucky?" repeated in the opening credits.[3]

text: With Milius committed to filming Dillinger, Michael Cimino was later hired to revise the script, overseen by Ted Post, who was to direct. According to Milius, his script did not contain any of the final action sequences (the car chase and climax on the aircraft carriers). His was a "simple script".[4] The addition of the character Sunny was done at the suggestion of Eastwood, who reportedly received letters from women asking for "a female to hit on Harry" (not the other way around).[4]

text: Milius later said he did not like the film and wished Don Siegel had directed it, as originally intended:

text: Of all the films I had anything to do with, I like it least. They changed a lot of things in a cheap and distasteful manner. The whole ending is wrong, it wasn't mine at all. All movies had a motorcycle or car chase at the time — except Westerns. They have a scene where this black girl's pimp forces Drano down her throat. In the script, they merely went into the morgue and Harry said, "I don't feel bad for that son of a bitch, 'cause two weeks ago one of his girls was in here and he'd poured Drano down her throat." I think it's better to hear about it than to see it later; also, it goes right back to the character again: you understand Harry's feelings about it. All the stuff they put in about the Japanese girl: they put in a scene where the star gets to fuck some girl, and it's pretty hard to get it out. My Dirty Harry scripts never had Harry knowing any girls too well other than hookers, because he was a lonely guy who lived alone and didn't like to associate with people. He could never be close enough to a woman to have any sort of affair. A bitter, lonely man who liked his work[5]

text: Directing[edit]

text: Eastwood himself was initially offered the role of director, but declined. Ted Post, who had previously directed Eastwood in Rawhide and Hang 'Em High was hired. Buddy Van Horn was the second unit director. Both Eastwood and Van Horn would go on to direct the final two entries in the series, Sudden Impact and The Dead Pool respectively.

text: Filming[edit]

text: Frank Stanley was hired as cinematographer. Filming commenced in late April 1973.[3] During filming Eastwood encountered numerous disputes with Post over who was calling the shots in directing the film, and Eastwood failed to authorize two important scenes directed by Post in the film because of time and expenses; one of them was at the climax to the film with a long shot of Eastwood on his motorcycle as he confronts the rogue cops.[6] As with many of his films, Eastwood was intent on shooting it as smoothly as possible, often refusing to do retakes over certain scenes. Post later remarked: "A lot of the things he said were based on pure, selfish ignorance, and showed that he was the man who controlled the power. By Magnum Force Clint's ego began applying for statehood".[6] Post remained bitter with Eastwood for many years and claims disagreements over the filming affected his career afterwards.[7] According to second unit director of photography Rexford Metz, "Eastwood would not take the time to perfect a situation. If you've got seventy percent of a shot worked out, that's sufficient for him, because he knows his audience will accept it."[6]

text: Effect[edit]

text: The film would launch a number of careers, including David Soul (Starsky & Hutch television series), Robert Urich (S.W.A.T., Vega$ and Spenser for Hire) and Tim Matheson (Animal House and Fletch). Future Three's Company TV star Suzanne Somers can be seen as the topless blonde at the mobster's pool party.

text: Controversy[edit]

text: The film received negative publicity in 1974 when it was discovered that the scene where the prostitute is killed with drain cleaner had allegedly inspired the infamous Hi-Fi murders, with the two killers believing the method would be as efficient as it was portrayed in the film. The killers said that they were looking for a unique murder method when they stumbled upon the film, and had they not seen the movie, would have chosen a method from another film. The drain cleaner reference was repeated in at least three other films, including Lethal Weapon (1987), Heathers (1989) and Urban Legend (1998). According to scriptwriter John Milius, this drain cleaner scene was never meant to be filmed, but was only mentioned in his original script.[4]

text: Release[edit]

text: Box office[edit]

text: In the film's opening weekend, it grossed $6,871,011.[8] In the United States, the film made a total of $44,680,473,[9] making it more successful than the first film[10] and the sixth highest-grossing film of 1973.

text: Theatrical rentals were $19.4 million.[11]

text: Reception[edit]

text: The New York Times critics such as Nora Sayre criticized the conflicting moral themes of the film and Frank Rich believed it "was the same old stuff".[7] Pauline Kael, a harsh critic of Eastwood for many years mocked his performance as Dirty Harry, commenting that, "He isn't an actor, so one could hardly call him a bad actor. He'd have to do something before we could consider him bad at it. And acting isn't required of him in Magnum Force".[7] Rotten Tomatoes sampled 20 reviewers and judged 80% of the reviews to be positive.[12]