Ag Policy Blog

California Drought and Focus on Agriculture

Chris Clayton
By  Chris Clayton , DTN Ag Policy Editor
Connect with Chris:

After California Gov. Jerry Brown directed the first mandatory statewide water restrictions for his state last week, attention in the news immediately turned to agriculture being largely excluded from Brown's executive order.

As media nationally have reported, Brown's order affects roughly 20% of water usage in California with his call for 25% mandatory cuts in cities across the state. The order does not affect agriculture, which uses about 80% of the state's water.

"Largely missing from Brown’s appeal was the one industry that uses more water than anything else in this state but has already been brutalized by the drought – agriculture. As Californians mulled Brown’s unprecedented order, some wondered why farms were not being asked to sacrifice more," reported the Sacramento Bee. http://dld.bz/…

As the San Diego Union-Tribune reported, farmers believe they have been hit far harder than urban Californians in the drought thus far. When it comes to surface water from the major canals, the state has cut its allocation to farms to 20% while the federal allotment was dropped to zero.

“Agriculture has already borne the brunt of the drought,” said Chris Scheuring a water attorney for the California Farm Bureau, citing the 400,000 farm acres left fallow last year due to water shortages. “How do you order somebody who is already at zero to go to a 25 percent cut? It’s kind of a mathematical impossibility.”

P[L1] D[0x0] M[300x250] OOP[F] ADUNIT[] T[]

“Zero percent allocation — it means the irrigation ditch is dry,” Scheuring added.

http://dld.bz/…

In that same San Diego article, the director of Food & Water Watch in California called on restricting water to intensive crops such as almonds and pistachios, which have taken off in acreage over the past decade.

The New York Times immediately rolled out a string of articles examining different aspects of California's drought. On Monday, the NYT looked at how farmers have survived the loss of those surface-water allocations by turning more to groundwater. Lawmakers in California voted last year to force tighter controls by groundwater districts, but gives those groundwater regulators decades to create such controls. In the meantime, certain areas in the state's Central Valley have seen water tables fall by 100 feet or more just since 2009.

"Growers with older, shallower wells are watching them go dry as neighbors drill deeper and suck the water table down. Pumping takes huge amounts of electricity to pull up deep water, and costs are rising. Some farmers are going into substantial debt to drill deeper wells, engaging in an arms race with their neighbors that they cannot afford to lose," the Times wrote. http://dld.bz/…

Brown defended his actions regarding agriculture in a Sunday interview on ABC's "This Week." Brown noted agriculture has already been significantly impacted by the drought. Cutting back farmers even more would displace thousands of farm workers. Moreover, California farmers are responsible for a large share of the country's fruits and vegetables.

If you don't want to produce any food and import it from some other place, of course you could do that," Brown told ABC. "But that would displace hundreds of thousands of people and I don't think it's needed."

Brown did indicate on ABC that the state's old water-rights system may need to be changed.

http://dld.bz/…

Follow me on Twitter @ChrisClaytonDTN.

P[] D[728x170] M[320x75] OOP[F] ADUNIT[] T[]
P[L2] D[728x90] M[320x50] OOP[F] ADUNIT[] T[]

Comments

To comment, please Log In or Join our Community .

Bonnie Dukowitz
4/10/2015 | 7:44 AM CDT
They will yell about both, Ray. One needs much more info. to reach an informed opinion on an irrigation practice. Such as: trans- evaporation, crop use on the days used, gallons per minute from the well(s), total inches per acre, water holding capacity of the soil.(might be totally different across the road). much, much more. Because a pivot is applying water, doesn't mean it is being wasted. At the same time, most in agriculture (irrigators included) are good stewards and managers but some people in any industry, are just plain idiots.
Jay Mcginnis
4/10/2015 | 7:39 AM CDT
If we beleive in smaller government or no government ("we the people" crowd stand up and wave the Gaston flag) then the ones with the biggest pocketbook gets the water for whatever they wish. Aren't you folks Capitalists?
Raymond Simpkins
4/9/2015 | 9:45 PM CDT
RJZ say what you want but they never shut them off from the time the beans came up until they started to turn. Two center pivots on 300 acres,their beans went 60 ours done 50 I think that is 10 bu. I can't believe it pays but I don't care. The veggies are not going to yell about the food,they are going to blame agriculture for the water shortage.
RJZ Peterson
4/9/2015 | 4:43 PM CDT
HAHAHA... I love these arguments!!! First off, Ray, don't exaggerate, I highly doubt anybody irrigates their crops 24/7 all summer long for only 10-15 bushels. That costs too much money, even if the water is free especially at today's prices. Irrigators are crazy expensive to own and maintain, and you still have to pump that water whether it be by electricity or diesel. Bonnie makes a great point, when these "Veggies" don't eat their veggies, their is going to be hell to pay, we all know how vocal they can be.:) Why don't these states/cities who are in the drought areas start fining people watering their lawns and changing the water in their swimming pools first, and I don't mean a measly $100 fine, I mean fine the crap out of them so they make sure they don't do it. it sounds bad I know, but don't you think food is more important. When the water comes back them open the tap again. but then again, maybe these people who thought it might be a good idea to heavily populate a desert need a reality check. Maybe, just maybe they will realize how good they did have it and stop whining.
Bonnie Dukowitz
4/9/2015 | 9:09 AM CDT
The only means to get fresh veggies in the Northern states 9 months of the year is in a greenhouse. Then hope you don't run out of gas or coal. geothermal just don't cut the mustard.
LeeFarms
4/9/2015 | 6:33 AM CDT
Maybe if water cost more fruit and veggie growers would look for better areas to raise vegetables, at least during the hot, dry summers. ND and MN tried to start a carrot industry a few years ago and were pretty much run out of business. The upper Midwest/northern tier is where most vegetables should be coming from during the summer months and California irrigated areas should remain fallow. That will only happen when the market place allocates water based on price.
Jay Mcginnis
4/8/2015 | 8:21 PM CDT
Well there is plenty of rain in the East, so if you apply the climate change deniers philosophy the drought is a hoax. How can there be drought when there is so much rain! In fact the dog dish runneth over!
Coy Allen
4/8/2015 | 11:22 AM CDT
Nobody has talked about all the water being used to irrigate marijuana; I suppose that is off limits. Chris ran a piece about that issue last year I believe.
Raymond Simpkins
4/8/2015 | 8:48 AM CDT
Bonnie I am not arguing the fact some speciality crops need irrigated. But I am talking guys that waste water. I have guys right next to me that run water 24 hrs. a day all season long on soybeans and corn, for what ,10-15 bu. an acre that the world does not need. When the cities are without water who do you think they will blame.
Bonnie Dukowitz
4/8/2015 | 7:02 AM CDT
I've read that 90% of potatoes and 90% of the veggies grown are irrigated. As these types of food are shallow rooted, without irrigation supplementing rainfall, much of this food would disappear. Take 90 % of the these out of the store and see what would happen. People stampedes like black Friday! How many French fries would be available at the fast food places if it were not for irrigation? NONE! I like spuds but only grow enough in the garden for the fresh. Yes, we need to irrigate the garden where we live. Also, irrigated crops are more efficient at using fertilizer and chemicals as less is lost do to weather issues. Taxing food producers is not the answer.
Raymond Simpkins
4/7/2015 | 5:55 PM CDT
Nobody will starve.I don't need to make more money and if you don't know the difference between rain and groundwater so be it.I will drink groundwater you drink rain. If we need more yield why do we have a surplus of almost all of major crops? And yes I own the land we farm and work it everyday. Our farm has been in the family for 150 years. When you go to the golf course who needs green grass? Just a lot of wasted water. When the country is out of fresh water maybe you will realize you could have paid more for food.
CRAIG MOORE
4/7/2015 | 4:18 PM CDT
So you are willing to let people starve because they can't afford your limited supply of food just so you can make more money? And where do you think the ground water comes from? And I have noticed it is the extra billions of people on Earth that are pretty much driving the need for more yield. Do you actually run the farm or just working at one?
Raymond Simpkins
4/7/2015 | 3:05 PM CDT
No Craig,not pay for rain but for ground water.If it rained they wouldn't irrigate in areas that should not be farmed in the first place. I farm full time and have made a good living for 30 years and have not watered a thing. But greed and government wants more yield. Why not produce less and get more for your commodity. When water gets scarce nobody will eat. So if you want to be greedy buy water the same as fertilizer. They want water from the Great Lakes I say to bad, sell it to them.
CRAIG MOORE
4/7/2015 | 2:38 PM CDT
Ray Are you really suggesting that the farmers have to pay the government for the rain. And do you realize who would get charged for that water purchase? If you eat, that would be you. So that means you would be paying the government so you could eat. Aren't you Taxed Enough Already? Actually, I think it would be more important for the government to start charging all those freeloaders driving those electric cars for free on our highways. They need to be taxed for every mile they drive so they can help pay for the infrastructure.
Bonnie Dukowitz
4/7/2015 | 10:11 AM CDT
Unlike our city friends, most farm irrigators do not apply water for appearances, only enough to provide crop nutrients. Demand of the consumer drives which crop is grown. For the most part, nuts are primarily for squirrels.
Raymond Simpkins
4/7/2015 | 6:48 AM CDT
They better do something different because this is just the beginning.Irrigation has to be controlled or the whole country will run out of water.In our part of the country irrigation has gone rampant in the last 5 years, and needs to be regulated more.Water is a commodity make producers buy it as another input.