California Agriculture: Dispelling Myths and Correcting the Record

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Too often columnists lean on sensationalist claims, biased or incomplete information, and outdated, inaccurate tropes when describing California agriculture and water, as in this article published by Al Jazeera.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. 

California’s Water Allocations Get a Boost—and Why It Matters for the Nation’s Food Supply

California’s Water Allocations Get a Boost— and Why It Matters for the Nation’s Food Supply

Guide

California’s water management is famously complex, relying on a network of reservoirs, aqueducts, rivers, and groundwater basins to meet the needs of farms, cities, and the environment. In recent years, the state has endured extended drought conditions and seen years of abundance.

The surge in precipitation through February has provided a welcome boost to water supplies, and there remains time to further advance on those gains- smart management of water resources in California is critical to the people of California, and the nation.

February’s Atmospheric Rivers Bring Welcome Relief

February’s storms delivered significant rainfall and substantial snowpack to many parts of California.

As of February 25, reservoir levels in most key water storage facilities, such as at Oroville and Shasta, are exceeding historical averages, with only two of the state’s major reservoirs slightly below average for the year to date.

Currently, snowpack for the state is at 87% of normal for the year to date, ranging from 72% in the Southern Sierra, to 109% in the Northern Sierra.

Despite the regional abundance, in a February 18 letter to the State Water Resources Control Board, Governor Gavin Newsom reminded water leaders that climate scientists warned, “there will be fewer years wet enough to overcome that heat and dryness.” The Governor added, “Average annual deliveries from the State Water Project will decline. The future will bring fewer days of precipitation — but climate projections also indicate an increase in the intensity of the largest storms.

An uncertain future makes water management all the more difficult and underscores the need for water supply infrastructure that is designed and managed to meet a variety of extreme challenges.

2025 Water Allocations

State Water Project Increases Planned Deliveries

Encouraged by the recent storms, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) announced in a February press release an increase in the SWP’s planned water deliveries. This marks a significant improvement from very low initial allocation estimates that had been set due to drought conditions in previous years. As California’s largest state-run water conveyance system, the SWP supplies water to over 27 million people and 750,000 acres of farmland.

While this updated allocation provides welcome relief for water districts, DWR officials emphasize that continued precipitation, snowpack conditions, and reservoir storage levels in late winter and early spring will influence final allocation decisions. More storms—and careful management of runoff—will determine whether additional increases in allocations are possible.

Central Valley Project’s Initial Allocation

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation also announced initial water supply allocations for the federal Central Valley Project (CVP) in their recent press release. The CVP is the state’s largest water delivery system and is a key lifeline for many of California’s agricultural regions, particularly in the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys. While early allocations are more generous than in severely dry years, and more than double the initial allocation in 2024, they remain cautiously conservative until spring conditions become clearer.

Why These Allocations Matter for the Nation’s Food Supply

California leads the nation in agricultural output, producing over a third of the country’s vegetables and two-thirds of its fruits and nuts. A reliable water supply is essential to maintaining this productivity.

  • National and Global Food Security: California’s produce isn’t just consumed locally; it feeds families across the United States and in international markets. Shortages or cutbacks in water can reduce crop yields and potentially drive-up prices nationwide. Recent egg shortages and skyrocketing prices are sobering reminders of the impact on consumers resulting from reduced farm production.
  • Economic Impact: Agriculture is a cornerstone of California’s rural economies, supporting hundreds of thousands of jobs in farming, food processing, and related services.

Because of these high stakes, even modest increases in water allocations can have a significant ripple effect, supporting the farms that grow our food and fiber, sustain rural and disadvantaged communities, and bolstering consumer confidence in both the availability and affordability of the healthy, affordable, and locally-grown farm products we all rely on.

Looking Ahead

While improved SWP and CVP allocations are promising, they also serve as a reminder that California’s water supply is highly dependent on seasonal precipitation and responsible resource management at all times. That’s why infrastructure is as important to our food supply as it is to bringing water to the tap at home. Jennifer Pierre, General Manager of the State Water Contractors, said recently in comments supporting the Delta Conveyance Project, “It is important, again, to underscore that while hydrology is a major driver of California’s water supply, how we respond to it is up to us.”

Ultimately, ensuring sustainable, reliable water deliveries will not only benefit California’s farmers and communities—it will help maintain a robust, dependable food supply for the entire nation.

Stay Informed

In California, all eyes remain on the skies and on the state’s reservoirs to see how 2025 (and beyond) shapes up for water, agriculture, and the nation’s food supply.

Water Misinformation – California’s Wildfires

It’s no secret that water policy in California is incredibly complex—so complex, in fact, that it rarely fits neatly into a headline or a 30-second news clip. Yet, this complexity has real-world consequences that ripple far beyond the pages of newspapers or social media feeds and into the very fields that feed millions of people across the nation.

Continue reading

Full Reservoirs and Drought

The recently released drought map from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) looks like another looming crisis, which is red meat for journalists. The data made available by the U.S. Drought monitor on January 1 highlights areas categorized as “abnormally dry” or in “moderate drought.” However, a closer look at other data from the California Data Exchange Center (CDEC) presents a contrasting perspective, showing that 14 of the state’s 17 largest reservoirs are currently at or above year-to-date historical averages.

Continue reading

The Colorado River’s Future: A Call for Collaborative Solutions

The Colorado River's Future: A Call for Collaborative Solutions

As the Colorado River Basin faces unprecedented challenges, it’s crucial for the seven basin states and tribal nations to come together and forge a consensus-driven solution for the river’s future management. With the current operating guidelines set to expire in 2026, the time is now for stakeholders to redouble their efforts in crafting a balanced, long-term plan that includes equal participation from both the Upper and Lower Basin states.

The stark divisions that have emerged among the basin states in recent negotiations underscore the complexity of the issue. However, these differences should not be seen as insurmountable obstacles, but rather as opportunities to find innovative compromises that benefit the entire region.

The Interior Department has set a clear deadline: a new operating plan must be in place by August 2026. This plan will be critical in defining water allocations for both the Upper and Lower Basin, guiding future management, and safeguarding against the need for short-term fixes. Continuing the adoption of temporary measures, as the Interior Department has done over the past year is not a long-term solution.

It’s essential to recognize that any viable alternative must comply with the Colorado River Compact, particularly regarding water deliveries from the Upper Basin to the Lower Basin and Mexico. However, this requirement should not preclude the possibility of compromise among the states.

Projections indicate that water deliveries could fall below the mandated minimum by 2027, revealing the weight of the 1922 Colorado River Compact on future operational requirements. If the Upper Basin is unwilling to come to the table with a commitment to do more than voluntary conservation, that would potentially trigger a “compact call,” allowing the Lower Basin states to demand the Upper Basin to deliver 7.5 million acre-feet of water per year over a ten-year average, as stipulated in the 1922 Colorado River Compact.

Clearly, a negotiated agreement among all seven states is in the best interest of everyone.

This situation underscores the urgency of finding collaborative solutions to manage the Colorado River’s dwindling resources and highlights the complex interplay between upper and lower basin states in water allocation decisions.

September 6, 2024 U.S. House Committee Hearing

U.S. House of Representatives Committee Members Hearing

Santa Nella, CA – Today, members of the U.S. House of Representatives Natural Resources Committee held a hearing titled “Water Abundance: Opportunities and Challenges in California.”

The committee members heard from California experts on the impacts of compliance with the Endangered Species Act and associated regulatory efforts on local communities, business, and America’s food supply.

“Today’s testimony shows how broken our water supply system has become. The U.S. had an agricultural trade deficit in 2019 where, for the first time in 50 years we imported more food than we exported.” said Mike Wade, executive director of the California Farm Water Coalition. “That trend has continued in three of the last five years. When California farms don’t have water to grow our food, we’re depending on other countries to do it. That’s not good for food security or having safe, affordable food choices for the American people.”

Testimony heard from the experts is summarized by topic below.

 
Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Regulatory Burden

Ronda Lucas, a water and environmental attorney, critiqued the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for its failure to recover species despite being in effect for over 50 years.

  • Lucas argued that the ESA has listed more than 1,700 species, but only 2% of those species have been recovered. She attributed this failure to bureaucratic inefficiencies and litigation that prioritize listing species over recovery.

Lucas also pointed out the ESA’s negative impact on water availability in California, particularly on farmers, as unelected officials impose water scarcity measures in the name of species protection without yielding measurable benefits for the environment​.

  • She cited a study from 2023 showing that after 40 years and $9 billion spent on salmon recovery efforts in the Columbia River Basin, there has been no empirical evidence of increased wild fish populations​.

Jason Phillips, CEO of the Friant Water Authority, discussed how the ESA has negatively impacted water deliveries in the San Joaquin Valley.

  • He highlighted that agricultural water users south of the Delta received only 50% of their water supply in a year that followed a wet winter, due to these environmental regulations.​
  • He remarked that regulatory actions over 30 years have failed to help struggling fish populations, while restricting water access for communities and agriculture.
  • He also underscored concerns with the 2019 Biological Opinion, noting it may exacerbate water scarcity​.

William Bourdeau, a San Joaquin Valley farmer, expressed frustration with how the ESA and other regulations lead to delays in water allocation announcements.

  • In 2024, despite historic rainfall and snowpack, the Bureau of Reclamation initially provided only minimal water allocations. These delays had severe impacts on agricultural planning, resulting in lost contracts and idle equipment.
  • Bourdeau emphasized the need for timely, transparent water management that reflects real-time conditions​.

Allison Febbo, General Manager of Westlands Water District, echoed concerns about the slow, ineffective nature of the ESA’s regulatory process.

  • She noted that despite decades of stringent regulation, fish populations continue to decline, and water supply reliability has eroded.
  • Febbo spoke on the need for reforms to improve transparency and adaptive management practices that can better respond to real-time environmental needs​.
Water Scarcity and Infrastructure Challenges

Jason Phillips highlighted the inefficiency of California’s current water management system, where overly conservative and ineffective regulations and lack of new infrastructure prevent water from being stored during wet years.

  • He pointed out that the Friant-Kern Canal and related systems deliver 1.2 million acre-feet of irrigation water annually to over 15,000 farms on one million acres of some of the most productive farmland in the world.
  • He noted that despite abundant rainfall in recent years, water deliveries were limited to only 50% of contracted amounts due to regulatory restrictions​.
  • Phillips mentioned that the southern third of the Friant-Kern Canal has lost 60% of its capacity due to land subsidence caused by excessive groundwater pumping. This results in an annual loss of 100,000–300,000 acre-feet of water that could have been used for irrigation and groundwater recharge​.

William Bourdeau noted that delays in water allocations due to regulatory inefficiencies create significant disruptions in agricultural supply chains.

  • For instance, garlic packers, who plant in September and October, and tomato processors, who finalize commitments in January, are unable to adjust their operations if water announcements are delayed until March. This leads to economic losses across the entire agricultural sector​

Allison Febbo added that California’s outdated water infrastructure, which was designed for past climate conditions, is not equipped to handle the current hydrologic variability caused by climate change. She underscored the need to repair and expand water storage facilities, conveyance systems, and groundwater management to secure water supplies for agriculture and communities​

 
Economic and Social Impact

Ronda Lucas discussed the far-reaching social and economic impacts of regulatory droughts. She pointed to the high unemployment rates, poverty, and increased instances of respiratory illnesses, particularly asthma, as a result of dust from fallowed fields due to water shortages.

Lucas mentioned that these water shortages, caused by regulatory decisions, have led to violations of the Clean Air Act, directly harming the health of children, the elderly, and vulnerable communities.​

William Bourdeau stressed that water scarcity has led to a collapse of the social fabric in farming communities.

  • He highlighted the stress and mental health challenges faced by families dependent on agriculture, citing rising cases of respiratory illness, domestic violence, depression, and even suicide as indirect consequences of mismanaged water resources​.
  • Bourdeau also noted that the scarcity artificially inflates food prices, disproportionately affecting low-income families across the nation.

 

Technological Solutions and Innovation

Josh Weimer, Director of External Affairs at Turlock Irrigation District (TID), presented an optimistic outlook by detailing technological advancements that improve water management.

  • He highlighted TID’s investment in the Airborne Snow Observatory (ASO) and Forecast-Informed Reservoir Operations (FIRO), which have drastically improved the accuracy of water forecasting. For example, the ASO program provides snowpack measurements with 97% accuracy, allowing TID to better manage water supply and flood control during both dry and wet years​.Weimer points to the benefits of these technologies during the wet year of 2023, where TID was able to pass over 2 million acre-feet of water through Don Pedro Reservoir by carefully managing early releases. This not only mitigated the risk of flooding but also generated $20 million in hydroelectric power by efficiently using water flows​.
  • Weimer also emphasized TID’s Hydrologic Forecasting and Analysis Model (HFAM), which provides hourly watershed conditions and enables more precise water management decisions. The model has proven to be accurate within a 2% margin, helping TID to maximize both water storage and flood control capacity.

Testimony of: 

William Bordeau, Farmer, San Joaquin Valley

Allison Febbo, General Manager, Westlands Water District

John Herrick, South Delta Water Agency

Ronda Lucas, Water and Environmental Attorney

Jason Phillips, Chief Executive Officer, Friant Water Authority

Josh Weimer, Director of External Affairs, Turlock Irrigation District

 

 

Sustainable Food Supplies and Imports

Sustainable Food Supplies and Imports

America’s grocery stores may seem brimming with fresh fruits and vegetables year-round, but behind the vibrant displays lies a sobering truth: a significant portion of these products are imported from other countries. 

The new CFWC fact sheet, “Our Food Supply – Sustainability & Imports,” opens the door to discussions about the policies and regulations that have made Americans more dependent on foreign-produced food.

According to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, a staggering 60.9% of the fresh fruit and 38.8% of the fresh vegetables consumed in the United States are sourced from abroad.

That’s a 228% increase of fruit and 479% increase of vegetable imports since 1980. This heavy reliance on imports poses a concerning risk to the security and sustainability of our food supply, particularly given the alarming challenges overseas producers face, from political strife, war, degrading natural resources, and inconsistent food safety standards.

Unsustainable Water Use

Foreign food products have been a boon for American consumers, however, the reliance on these products come with deeper concerns: unsustainable water supplies. Of total fruit and vegetable imports, Mexico now accounts for 69 percent of fresh vegetables and 51 percent of fresh fruits that make their way to the United States. This greater dependence on foreign production has other consequences as well. Local businesses that depend on farm production lose out when agricultural production shifts to other countries, just as they did when water shortages devastated Sacramento Valley rice production in 2022.

Mexico is also one of the world’s largest exporters of nuts, with the water-stressed region of Chihuahua a major source of walnut production in the country. During the past 30 years, total nut production has grown significantly in Mexico, with production increasing over 640% from 47,405 tons in 1992 to 304,747 tons in 2022. Walnuts alone have dominated the increase in tree nut production, growing from 2,900 tons in 1992 to more than 176,000 tons in 2022, according to USDA.

Large swaths of Mexican farmland, including regions around Mexicali and the Baja Peninsula are irrigated with water supplies that are not sustainable. The new CFWC fact sheet highlights the rising cost of food in America, UN projections of the growing global food demand, and that overseas producers are not required to meet the same health and safety standards that are common in California.

Planning for the Future

To protect America’s food supply, elected officials and policymakers must consider the long-term effects of their actions. This means making more careful decisions about the policies and regulations that affect farmers who grow our food.

In California, we need to be doing things like investing in water supply infrastructure, such as Sites Reservoir and other surface storage projects, groundwater recharge, new conveyance, and in ecosystem/water supply solutions, like the Voluntary Agreements.

Supporting sustainability for fish, waterfowl, and the farmers who grow our food helps protect Americans from disruptions in our food supply. And they’re investments that make sense for all of California.

Sustainability & Imports : Mexico

Food Supply - Sustainability & Imports

The United States relies heavily on foreign production of fresh fruits and vegetables. 

Many countries of origin are now facing water shortages and other adverse environmental impacts. 

This Country Profile: Mexico looks at one of the major sources of imported fresh fruits and vegetables.