“In the East, to ‘waste’ water is to consume it needlessly or excessively. In the West, to waste water is not to consume it—to let it flow unimpeded and undiverted down rivers.”

An important reoccurring component of Reisner’s argument is that Americans, particularly in the West, are obsessed with controlling rivers. To many, the greatest insult are rivers that make it to the ocean, never mind if they contain important salmon runs or waterfowl habitat. Dams represent the only means to control nature. They also allow farmers in the West to grow non-native crop species that require massive amounts of water, such as almonds and alfalfa. This water has large subsidies despite the energy cost of getting it to its intended beneficiaries. This perspective contracts with that of many Easterners who, according to Reisner, believe conservation means protecting rivers from development. 

“In the West, it is said, water flows uphill toward money.”

Water literally flows uphill in the West. One powerful example Reisner discusses is the California clause stipulation in Arizona’s Central Arizona Project (CAP). CAP pumps water up steep hills from the Colorado River to Phoenix and Tucson, but during periods of drought, these two cities will not receive a drop of water from the Colorado. Instead, the water goes to California. Illegal subsidies have already enriched many of the larger farmers in California, whose excess production has depressed nationwide crop prices and whose waste of cheap water creates an expensive environmental problem.