Back to water. My preference would be a combination of restrictions on usage, raising of prices and outright banning of growing certain crops. Almonds for export are the poster child, but in CA rice and cotton should never be grown either. Market forces by themselves will not stabilize or assure food availability or the survival of civilization in a desert.
Josh[/quote]
the unsustainable drought poster crop in California and the rest of the arid SW USA IMHO is alfalfa,… and the reason is because it is grown AND exported as feed for live stock in china
…basically the reason the farmers in California (and other parts of the USA) are growing alfalfa is because people in other parts of the world want to to consume more animal protein
…AND FWIW data seems to indicate because of the Putin “Military Action” in Ukraine along w/ excess global debt that appears to be unserviceable odds are there is going to be a global famine (on a biblical scale)
PS FYI
[quote] Everyone gets less water during a drought. But the breakdowns of the state and federal projects’ water allocations show some groups — particularly farmers who have longtime rights to divert water — faring better than others.
They also reflect the overwhelming thirst of Southern California towns and cities — some of the most arid, and populous, parts of the state. The Chronicle analyzed this year’s expected water allocations from the California State Water Project and the federal Central Valley Project, and how they break down and compare to previous years.
Here are some of the biggest takeaways of who got more from where:
State Water Project
The State Water Project, which includes the 444-mile long California Aqueduct and the Oroville Dam, supplies water to some 27 million Californians and 750,000 acres of farmland, according to the state water department, its operator. It also generates power and provides for recreational areas in the state.
The project has 29 long-term contractors — smaller, regional water providers, including cities, towns and irrigation districts, that sell the water to customers. For the past two decades, about a third of State Water Project water was for agricultural use and two-thirds for municipal, industrial or residential uses, state officials said. For the second year in a row, the State Water Project is expected to deliver only 5% of the amount requested from contractors. The last time allocation was that low was in 2014 — the third year in that drought spell. “We’re not going to expect much additional precipitation on the horizon,” said Molly White, the project’s water operations manager. The 2022 cuts were deep across the board among the 29 contractors, but some cuts were less harsh than others. Most were approved for just 5% of their requested amounts, but the state awarded larger percentages to communities with critical health and safety needs. “Folks at the Department of Water Resources have been very clear that they’re not going to reduce allocation to 5% if that supplier’s going to have to turn off water to residences,” White said.
Napa and Solano counties’ water districts were approved for 15% of their requested amounts, compared with the 5% contractors in the Central Valley and Southern California received. But these Bay Area communities requested far smaller amounts to begin with. The allocation amounts are based on a variety of factors, including river flows, water storage conditions, environmental requirements and how much rain and snow there has been, the water operations manager said. In terms of the total amount of water, Southern California water agencies still take the bulk — nearly half — of State Water Project water, with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California expected to get the most, at almost 96,000 acre-feet. The Metropolitan Water District is a public regional wholesaler cooperative supplying water to roughly 19 million people in California through its numerous member agencies. This year, for the first time, it required significant cutbacks from its users, who must limit lawn-watering to one day a week. Small water suppliers, especially those who rely entirely on one source and don’t have alternatives to fall back on, tend to be much more vulnerable to water shortage, according to the water department. Most water suppliers don’t rely solely on one source of water, however. Many, like the East Bay Municipal Utility District, have several sources, including access to reservoirs, groundwater pumping and purchasing water from other providers. Annually, the State Water Project delivers 2 million to 4 million acre-feet of water. An acre-foot — about 326,000 gallons — generally provides enough water for one to two households for a year. By comparison, the Colorado River — another huge water source for the state, especially farmers in Southern California — is supposed to deliver 4.4 million acre-feet annually to California, though cutbacks are on the horizon due to the drought. Central Valley Project
California’s Central Valley Project, run by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, is much bigger than the State Water Project and is geared more toward agriculture. It counts more than 270 contractors, including the big irrigation districts in the San Joaquin Valley. It has historically supplied water for 3 million acres of farmland. The federal waterworks also serves communities in the Bay Area and wildlife refuges.
The project, which captures water from the southern Cascades to the southern Sierra Nevada, consists of 20 dams and reservoirs – including the state’s largest, Shasta Lake — and operates more than 500 miles of canals and pipelines to deliver water. It also operates 11 power plants. This year, because of the drought, federal water managers announced that no project water would be sent to many of its contractors, effectively a 0% allocation. Those who receive water are doing so because of contractual obligations that date back decades or because of health and safety issues. Faring best are senior water rights holders, typically farmers and irrigation districts.
This is not because the project allocates water based on water rights but because the federal government, in order to operate its project, committed to providing water to senior users who were drawing water from the Sacramento and San Joaquin river watersheds before the project began drawing water. Senior users are those with water rights dating back the longest. But even those users are falling far short of what they normally get: This year, because of low flows, federal water managers made a deal with senior users in the Sacramento River watershed to take less than what they’re due — just 18% of what they requested.
While the project’s municipal and industrial contractors were officially allocated no water, the federal government is providing these customers enough to meet minimum health and safety needs. The Contra Costa Water District in the East Bay, for example, is getting 34% of its requested allocation. Agricultural contractors who don’t have senior water rights in the Sacramento and San Joaquin river watersheds are not getting any project water. In the Friant (Fresno County) area, some contractors are receiving limited deliveries because the source of water there is different than in the rest of the project area, and federal managers say water is available. The Central Valley Project has historically delivered about 7 million acre feet of water annually. By comparison, the Colorado River is supposed to deliver 4.4 million acre-feet annually to California, though cutbacks are on the horizon due to the drought.
