It’s not that simple. Farmers are some of the largest consumers of water. Raising the price of water would not really reduce water consumption considerably for farming, as modern farming techniques are already fairly water-efficient and further improvements (such as greenhouses or advanced irrigation techniques) are typically very costly. It’s more economical for the farmer to just use the same amount of water and push the increased costs towards the consumer. In the end, the average consumer would end up shouldering the burden of increased water cost without any appreciable change in water supply.
If you try to raise the price of water beyond that which farmers could work around, they’d likely just pack up and leave, like ChristianKI says. And nobody wants that, either.
If you try to raise the price of water beyond that which farmers could work around, they’d likely just pack up and leave, like ChristianKI says. And nobody wants that, either.
I am entirely fine with that. There is no right to grow water-thirsty crops in the desert.
Look at one of the documents linked in the OP. If the farmers stop growing alfalfa hay which is one of the thirstiest crops and replace it with almost anything else, California will save a lot of water.
You’re correct that modern farming techniques are fairly efficient, but within the confines of any specific crop being grown. Efficiently watered corn, for instance, still takes less water input than efficiently watered rice, millet takes less water still. Techniques are good but crop selection is questionable. Beef/alfalfa is the thing on the top of my mind when I say this.
It’s not that simple. Farmers are some of the largest consumers of water. Raising the price of water would not really reduce water consumption considerably for farming, as modern farming techniques are already fairly water-efficient and further improvements (such as greenhouses or advanced irrigation techniques) are typically very costly. It’s more economical for the farmer to just use the same amount of water and push the increased costs towards the consumer. In the end, the average consumer would end up shouldering the burden of increased water cost without any appreciable change in water supply.
If you try to raise the price of water beyond that which farmers could work around, they’d likely just pack up and leave, like ChristianKI says. And nobody wants that, either.
I am entirely fine with that. There is no right to grow water-thirsty crops in the desert.
Look at one of the documents linked in the OP. If the farmers stop growing alfalfa hay which is one of the thirstiest crops and replace it with almost anything else, California will save a lot of water.
It’s my understanding that California farmers don’t use many water saving farming techniques because of the low price they pay for water.
You’re correct that modern farming techniques are fairly efficient, but within the confines of any specific crop being grown. Efficiently watered corn, for instance, still takes less water input than efficiently watered rice, millet takes less water still. Techniques are good but crop selection is questionable. Beef/alfalfa is the thing on the top of my mind when I say this.