California Agriculture: Dispelling Myths and Correcting the Record
California’s agricultural sector has long been the subject of debate, particularly regarding its use of water and environmental impacts. A recent article published by Al Jazeera titled “California Water Wars: A Century of Wrangling Over Los Angeles’s Water” presents a misleading and incomplete picture of California’s agricultural water and its role in the state’s economy.
Too often columnists lean on sensationalist claims, biased or incomplete information, and outdated, inaccurate tropes when describing California agriculture and water, as in this article published by Al Jazeera.
The article fails to provide a nuanced, data-driven perspective, instead favoring a simplistic narrative that misrepresents the facts. California’s farmers are not reckless water users—they are stewards of land and water who play a crucial role in feeding millions. Any discussion of California’s water future must recognize this reality rather than vilify an essential part of everyone’s daily supply chain.
Below are some of the most egregious examples of the failure to accurately portray agriculture’s use of water to grow our food.
1. Mischaracterization of Agricultural Water Use
The Al Jazeera article portrays agriculture as a dominant and unchecked consumer of California’s water, implying that it monopolizes resources to the detriment of urban users and the environment. However, this claim is both exaggerated and contextually flawed. According to the California Department of Water Resources (CA DWR), water use in the state is distributed as follows:
- 50% for environmental purposes (including rivers, wetlands, and regulatory requirements for habitat maintenance).
- 40% for agriculture, supporting a $54 billion industry that provides the food and fiber demanded by consumers across the nation and the world.
- 10% for urban use, which includes residential, commercial, and industrial consumption.
The framing of agriculture as an unsustainable burden ignores the necessity of food production and the efficiency measures that farmers have implemented. Precision irrigation, groundwater banking, and conservation practices have significantly reduced water waste in California’s agricultural sector.
2. Ignoring Agriculture’s Economic and Food Security Contributions
The article fails to acknowledge that California is the nation’s largest agricultural producer, supplying over one-third of the country’s vegetables and two-thirds of its fruits and nuts. The state leads in the production of tree nuts, cheese and milk products, wine, and citrus, among other commodities, ensuring national and global food security.
Furthermore, while critics focus on the water footprint of certain crops, they fail to mention that California agriculture contributes billions to the state’s economy and provides employment for hundreds of thousands of workers (CDFA). Dismissing the industry’s importance while amplifying concerns about water use misrepresents the trade-offs required to sustain food production.
3. Inaccurate Depiction of Groundwater Management
The article suggests that agricultural water use is poorly regulated, particularly regarding groundwater extraction. This is demonstrably false. California farmers have spent a decade working to comply with the State’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) to manage groundwater withdrawals- supporting the development of surface water replacements, implementing smart groundwater recharging, and working collaboratively with their local communities and state agencies to find consensus-driven solutions on groundwater. Passed in 2014, SGMA mandates local and regional agencies manage groundwater sustainably, farmers are working hard to find solutions that meet the needs of agriculture, the environment and urban communities.
Recent public attention has even been given to these efforts, as farmers have proactively adopted regenerative on-farm and local groundwater recharge practices (UCANR), capturing excess water during wet years and reinjecting it into aquifers. This is a vital component of California’s water strategy and contradicts the narrative that agriculture operates without care and without oversight.
4. Overstating the Impact of Agricultural Water Use on Urban Supplies
A recurring argument in critiques of California agriculture is that water-intensive farming deprives cities of necessary resources, and this has been repeated in the Al Jazeera article- claiming that water supplied to agriculture during periods of drought are a threat to the stability of urban water supplies.
State and federal law mandates that urban water use has priority over all other water uses. In addition to these foundational protections, the State Water Board has been granted exceptional authority to curtail water diversions and to reallocate supplies to protect the health and safety of urban water users through emergency regulations.
Beyond the legal and regulatory protections already in place- through the ongoing conservation efforts of the people of the state, as well as technological advancements in fields such as water recycling, desalinization, and reduced-demand fixtures, urban water use has remained stable (CA DWR), even as California’s population has grown. These demand-reduction strategies are helping Californians to do more with less.
The claim that agriculture is at odds with urban water security ignores not only the legal, but the practical realities as well.
Conclusion: A Balanced Perspective Is Needed
California’s water challenges are complex, but portraying agriculture as the primary villain distorts the reality of how water is allocated and managed. Instead of simply continuing to pursue costly reductions to the water needed to supply grocery store shelves, policymakers should continue investing in water storage, conveyance improvements, and smarter water management strategies that benefit all sectors.
