Very similar to tree nut exports in California and the corresponding water crisis.
> Based on USDA data for 2021, only 3.9% of all U.S. hay produced and 6.4% of all alfalfa hay entered the export market.
[0]: https://www.hayandforage.com/article-3825-Year-end-hay-expor....
The problem is that due to the system of water rights and allocations, California is effectively subsidizing Saudi Arabia by selling water to local farmers at below market rates. Thus we have a water shortage which impacts everyone while benefiting only a tiny number of farmers.
https://www.desertsun.com/story/opinion/contributors/valley-...
> Alfalfa's deep roots are capable of extracting water from deep in the soil, thus much of the water applied is not wasted. Additionally, deep roots enable the crop to survive periodic droughts.
> Perenniality—The fact that the crop grows for 4-8 years, grows quickly with warm conditions in the spring is a major advantage of alfalfa—it can utilize residual winter rainfall before irrigation is necessary. This is unlike summer-grown annual crops that need to be replanted each year (water use efficacy is low during this time). In many areas, the first cutting of alfalfa of the year requires zero irrigation– supported only by rain and residual soil moisture.
> Very High Yields—Alfalfa is a very high yielding crop, and can grow 365 days a year in warm regions (such as the Imperial Valley of California and southern Arizona). Its biomass yields are very high—we can get up to 12 cuttings per year in those regions, and growers with top management can obtain more than 14 tons/acre dry matter yields. High-yields create higher water use efficiencies.
> High Harvest Index, High Water Use Efficiency—Alfalfa's Water Use Efficiency is not only due to high yields, but because nearly 100% of the above-ground plant material is harvested (known as the harvest index). In most seed-producing and fruiting crops, only a portion of the plant is harvested (typically 30-50% of the total plant biomass).
[0]: https://ucanr.edu/blogs/blogcore/postdetail.cfm?postnum=1772...
The problem is that farmers are being blamed for poor city planning and management. Los Angeles, for example, lets tens of billions of gallons of fresh water flow into the ocean. [0]
The farmers are at least using the 40% share of the water they get and in return Californians get affordable food.
> According to the Pacific Institute, California's urban areas are letting between 770,000 and 3.9 million acre-feet of water spill away every year (depending on how dry or wet the year is).
[0]: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/13/us/california-drought-sto.... [1]: https://www.latimes.com/california/newsletter/2023-01-16/ess....
We need to move towards a free market solution where all water users pay market rates instead of subsidizing politically favored sectors. If that means that prices rise for certain water-intensive crops then so be it. That's preferable to a water shortage.
There isn't a water shortage. Cities are wasting their fresh water through mismanagement. They could syphon off 10% of the runoff to little to no environmental effect, but they don't because there is no political capital to be gained.
And water rights are attached to land, it isn't just "given", farmers need to buy, own and maintain the land to preserve their water rights. Which has more free market qualities than any proposal I've heard coming out of the California legislature.