Hacker News Reader

Comment by mikestew | Hacker News Reader

Since about 70 percent of water delivered from the Colorado River goes to growing crops

Okay, so much for my suggestion of making illegal Las Vegas golf courses and lush Phoenix lawns. But at what point is California told to quit growing alfalfa for export, and to quit with the flooded rice paddies[0]? It's a serious question: does CA just keep growing such things until the tap literally runs dry, or are restrictions put into place before it gets that bad? What's the end game? Because it seems obvious that the situation isn't going to get better.

[0] https://localwiki.org/davis/Rice_Paddies

View on HN

"Over a third of the country’s vegetables and two-thirds of the country’s fruits and nuts are grown in California."[0]

I'd be careful to imply blame on a single state, when it is a large part of the population that relies on the output. There are certainly ways to target water waste in agriculture, but the whole nation has a stake in successful water management.

[0] https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/Statistics/

Yes but I'm not sure they have to be. I live in Ohio. My wife and I grow lots of things pretty easily: kale, peppers, lettuce, onions, broccoli, tomatoes, all sorts of herbs, etc.

The thing is to my knowledge California is just cheaper/better because full sun and up until now you could just pull water from the ground and grow your crops.

IMO we need more urban and suburban gardens to supplement, and we'll have to just relocate some crops away from California and other drought-prone areas. Tough times ahead for some.

And as much as even I despise the suburbs, I think they're prime for retrofitting. We have a lot of land, we just need changes to zoning, a little more density, and more emphasis on the local community which can come from the former. Like why can't we all grow a few crops (nothing crazy) and just trade once/week at someone's house?

There is plenty of agricultural land in the midwest to grow vegetables, it's just that for the most part they are growing commodity crops (corn and soy) and not vegetables because California is cheaper and can provide fresh produce year-round (or nearly so). Regional farms could provide local produce that's more scalable than suburban gardens, but both are seasonal (without greenhouses and other infrastructure at least).

Right!

I think in the future we might see either community greenhouses, more local farming, and/or more suburban gardens and even greenhouses (HOAs permitting).

The thing is that the current model is basically export water in the form of crops from California because as you said it's much cheaper, but that low cost comes at the expense of water and the environment, a low cost to which Californian farmers are probably not bearing and certainly society in general isn't. Really we're exporting water from a arid locations to places like the Great Lakes. That's not to include transportation costs via cheap oil/energy.

It's just not sustainable long-term.

> why can't we all grow a few crops (nothing crazy) and just trade once/week at someone's house?

HOAs. The same entities that insure every waterway for miles is forever polluted with residential runoff.

I'm content to play chicken with the farm conglomerates and their bought-and-paid-for legislators. Go ahead, try and turn off the taps in a residential area because you want to keep growing water-intensive crops.

The result will be one of two things: either the farm industry will back down and adjust, or the corruption of the legislature through lobbying will be exposed in spectacular fashion.

I believe residential water restrictions are already happening, except only in poor rural areas where residents are less empowered to fight back.

https://calmatters.org/environment/2021/05/drought-rural-lat...

They should move all this to the midwest where we grow crops. The Ogallala Aquifer will last forever!!! /s

Oh wait, we are depleting that at the rate of 18 Colorado Rivers per year. We are such a greedy species. We need some major changes to support the same number of people on this planet.

Historically speaking that is exactly what happens.

https://www.popsci.com/how-la-gets-its-water/

I tried to figure out where the water goes, but a complete answer eludes me. If it does indeed go to crops, maybe we need to rethink where we grow crops, much less how.

If we can use Mississippi river water to grow rice and get the countries which depend on our agricultural exports to pay for it we all win.

Sure, many of the crops grown in the west are ill suited to our climate. That said, there is a bigger solution to the problem which produces a better outcome for everyone.

> But at what point is California told to quit growing alfalfa for export

What does it being for export have to do with anything? Only 0.005% of the water used to grow alfalfa actually ends up in the alfalfa.

"But there is nothing we can do, we are going to hurt businesses and job creators".

Okay, then. Let's see what happens when all businesses leave, especially tech, when California is going to resemble frontier living again.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com