Many California Growers Face A Brutally Dry Year As Feds Cut Off Water

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation announced Friday that beginning in March, it will not provide water for agriculture to at least 200 local water districts in California’s San Joaquin Valley. Municipalities and industrial customers will receive half their allotments.

Advertisement

The announcement comes toward the end of what is shaping up to be the state’s third consecutive unusually dry “rainy season.” It’s not just growers in the San Joaquin Valley, one of the world’s most productive agricultural regions, who will be affected. For the first time, water districts in the Sacramento Valley will receive a 0% water allocation from the BuRec.

Growers aren’t the only ones who may be left high and dry this year. Also on Friday, the California Department of Water Resources projected that it would be able to allocate only 15% of what its contractors — which largely supply cities and towns — have sought. Californians may be asked to reduce their water use by 20%.  But that’s nothing compared to what growers in the Central Valley face.

As of now, up to one million acres of farmland won’t receive a federal water allocation this year, according to BuRec. “These are challenging times, and Reclamation will continue to explore all options within our authorities to minimize the impacts to those affected by this water shortage,” said Donald Glaser, BuRec regional director.

Thomas Birmingham, the general manager of Westlands Water District, which serves growers on the valley’s west side, said growers of vegetables and other “temporary” crops are leaving 300,000 acres fallow. And growers of such “permanent” crops as almonds aren’t thinking about the 2009 crop, but about saving their orchards. “Wherever possible, almond production will be stunted in hopes of keeping the trees alive through this desperate time. But there is no question that many years worth of investments will be lost,” he said. “The human impact is worse. The latest estimates from economists with the University of California-Davis predict that upwards of 75,000 people will lose their jobs this year and more than $2 billion will be lost from the San Joaquin Valley’s economy because of the combination of drought and regulatory restrictions on water deliveries.”

Top Articles
Have a Plan For Climate Change? Why Fruit Growers Need To Act Now

The Fresno County Farm Bureau issued the following statement in the wake of Friday’s announcement: “At a time when everyone across the nation is talking about economic stimulus, it is ironic that we are hit with this huge economic suppressant when Fresno County and its residents — already plagued with high unemployment — can least afford it. The impacts from this year’s water shortages will be far-reaching and widespread – on a social, economic, hydrological, and resource management basis. The west side of the county makes up 25% of Fresno County’s $5.3 billion agriculture industry.

“With a 0% allocation for the west side,” the statement continued, “farmers are forced to idle large amounts of acreage that would have generated jobs, value-added food products that stimulate significant economic activity for the county and region, and a safe, wholesome, affordable food supply for consumers throughout the U.S. and abroad. Farmers manage the water as efficiently as possible to grow crops, but the consumer is the ultimate beneficiary of that water.”

The Farm Bureau concluded: “Here in Fresno County, water is our life — it’s our jobs and it’s our food. Without a reliable water supply, Fresno County’s number one employer — agriculture — is at great risk. Agriculture is the economic engine that drives the valley and water is the fuel for that engine. Fresno County Farm Bureau calls for all farmers and rural communities to push for additional surface water and groundwater storage, improved conveyance through the (Sacramento) Delta, and a return to common-sense water policies that bring back into balance water allocated for food production, municipal and rural communities, and the environment.”

0

Leave a Reply

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

Sounds to me like Arnold had better organize a program to have cities reduce their usage by about 80% and have the residual go to protect permanent orchards etc and get them over the hump . Lawns and boulevards do not need to be green nor do cars have to be washed, nor do toilets have to be flused every time etc etc etc. Time for the economic pinch to be shared on a realistic basis when it comes to water. Also time to get some storage facilities built without the screaming and yelling by the NIMBYS and bunny huggers, and NGOs . How many trillions of gallons of water flowed down the Sacramento River last spring???? Enough for several years of irrigating all of the almonds etc, but it all went to sea while everyone in the north was flooded. Not a smart use of resources . Water storage is no longer a joke and a lets pretend game.

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

when people decide to build in areas where there is little water to begin with then they get what they asked for. So we should sacrifice nature because humans are greedy and do things like try to grow lawns in the desert?

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

The shifting terminology (from valley, to county, to district) make it a little hard for me to follow the story. Was the 1 million acres everywhere or just the central valley? At the least, it looks like about 10% of the irrigated acreage within the state will be affected. I would like to know if the producers will be able to shift around so that lower value crops take most of the hit or will it be unevenly shared so that tomatoes, melons, onions, carrots etc. take most of the hit? The lose of that much production could easily lead to some serious price spikes.

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

I have been concerned about water usage in the San Joaquin valley since 1952, Flood irrigation wastes a tremendous amount of water. A change is needed such as we did on the great plains with a more efficient pivot system.

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

Water is going to be the next crisis the US will have to deal with. City people are going to have to stop wasting water and there needs to be steps taken to built low impact infrastructure to contain
and manage water resources . New waste , run-off , and water delivery systems for cities will cost a
trillion dollars the next two years . Everyone wants unresticted water but do not wants to pay for
the infrastruture . Kind of like “people in hell want icewater ” too .

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

Sounds to me like Arnold had better organize a program to have cities reduce their usage by about 80% and have the residual go to protect permanent orchards etc and get them over the hump . Lawns and boulevards do not need to be green nor do cars have to be washed, nor do toilets have to be flused every time etc etc etc. Time for the economic pinch to be shared on a realistic basis when it comes to water. Also time to get some storage facilities built without the screaming and yelling by the NIMBYS and bunny huggers, and NGOs . How many trillions of gallons of water flowed down the Sacramento River last spring???? Enough for several years of irrigating all of the almonds etc, but it all went to sea while everyone in the north was flooded. Not a smart use of resources . Water storage is no longer a joke and a lets pretend game.

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

when people decide to build in areas where there is little water to begin with then they get what they asked for. So we should sacrifice nature because humans are greedy and do things like try to grow lawns in the desert?

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

The shifting terminology (from valley, to county, to district) make it a little hard for me to follow the story. Was the 1 million acres everywhere or just the central valley? At the least, it looks like about 10% of the irrigated acreage within the state will be affected. I would like to know if the producers will be able to shift around so that lower value crops take most of the hit or will it be unevenly shared so that tomatoes, melons, onions, carrots etc. take most of the hit? The lose of that much production could easily lead to some serious price spikes.

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

I have been concerned about water usage in the San Joaquin valley since 1952, Flood irrigation wastes a tremendous amount of water. A change is needed such as we did on the great plains with a more efficient pivot system.

Avatar for Anonymous Anonymous says:

Water is going to be the next crisis the US will have to deal with. City people are going to have to stop wasting water and there needs to be steps taken to built low impact infrastructure to contain
and manage water resources . New waste , run-off , and water delivery systems for cities will cost a
trillion dollars the next two years . Everyone wants unresticted water but do not wants to pay for
the infrastruture . Kind of like “people in hell want icewater ” too .

Advertisement