New Report Shows Enormous Potential for Agricultural Water Conservation
- Barry Nelson
- Senior Policy Analyst, Water Program, San Francisco
- Blog | About
- Posted July 24, 2009 in Living Sustainably
There’s no single “silver bullet” to meeting California’s future water needs, particularly in light of the likely impacts of our changing climate and the unlikelihood of squeezing more water out of the Colorado River or the Bay-Delta. Instead, we’re going to need lots of tools in our water management toolbox to get the job done.
I don’t know about you, but I have a few favorite tools that I seem to grab first when I start a new project around the house. My square nose pliers and vice grips always seem to be on the top of the box. For water managers, conservation is the favorite tool in the toolbox.
Our colleagues at the Pacific Institute have shown again how useful this tool is in this newly-released report about water conservation and the future of the agricultural economy. The report has a particularly appropriate focus – not on how much conservation California can wring from this sector of our economy, but rather on how an increased focus on efficiency can help the agricultural economy thrive in the future. Most importantly, the report concludes that agricultural water conservation has the potential to be the single largest sources of “new” water to meet California’s needs in the coming century.
The report reflects the fact that California has one of the most diverse agricultural economies in the nation. In addition to highlighting where major improvements are possible, the Institute has highlighted agricultural leaders in efficiency. NRDC’s recent report on commercial, industrial and institutional water conservation identified similar leaders in conservation. It’s essential to acknowledge these success stories – one of the most important ways to demonstrate that agricultural and urban water conservation make good business sense.
The report’s comprehensive recommendations also track NRDC’s work quite closely. For example, they recommend an increased focus on economics and a movement toward more realistic water pricing. They also call for the reform of the Central Valley Project’s water contracts, based on the new Biological Opinions issued by the National Marine Fisheries Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Today, after three dry years, many farmers are suffering from water supply reductions. This report shows the power of conservation as a tool to help farmers and the entire state weather similar dry periods in the future – and help protect our rivers and salmon in the process.
(bookmark or email this entry)
Comments are closed for this post.
We close comments on a blog post when it's clear the conversation has moved on -- click on the tags (above) or on our homepage to see if we've got fresh news and views on this post's topic.




Comments
Donald R. Strong — Jul 26 2009 09:49 AM
Water markets are an extremely important angle that, for some reason, Peter Glieck doesn't address seriously in his analysis. Instead, he advocates subsidies for farmers (Gawd, more subsidies for California ag!!!!!!!!) as the major economic driver of his water plans. Several water economists have long advocated water markets as an important component of a solution to these problems. They argue that the absence of major markets creates huge economic inefficiencies for California agriculture. We export water in the form of inexpensive crops, while more valuable crops wither for want of water. Dr. David Zetland has discussed water markets. David has a blog http://aguanomics.com/.