[ar813]

The answer to this problem lies here: “Entsminger pointed out that roughly 80% of the river’s flow is used for agriculture, and most of that for thirsty crops like alfalfa, which is mainly grown for cattle, both in the U.S. and overseas.”

The simple solution would be to raise prices on water such that it disincentivizes growing water hungry crops than alfalfa for example. The west’s water crisis is less about cities than agricultural choices made during the last century, which was wetter than it will be going forward. The obvious answer is to either regulate or incentivize using less water hungry crops more strongly. It would be better if this had started slowly a while ago, allowing the market to adjust and reallocate. Alas, looks like it will have to be an abrupt shift in the near future.

[swatcoder]

> The simple solution > The obvious answer

This community seems like its at its best when it expresses humble curiosity and its worst when it shuts the door on learning by oversimplifying deeply complex matters as though nobody else had the sense to look straight at them.

Water rights carry a legacy of centuries of personal and political history and thousands of competing interests. The levers with which to control price and set incentives the way you suggest don’t exist.

There are real problems looming, but there are no “simple solutions” or “obvious answers” being missed.

Whatever comes will involve great compromise and very few will think it was the right solution. I guess maybe you’re just joining that chorus early.

[LanceH]

We can start by rolling back the modern entrenchments that have only made it worse. I would be absolutely shocked if this were only a 200 year old problem and there wasn't modern legislation basically gifting free water to special interests.

[googlryas]

What is so complex about eminent domain? Just force the sale of water rights back to the government for a fair price. It will sting a little bit, but sting far less than pretending like only 15% of the water in the western US actually exists.

[staticautomatic]

Notwithstanding the farm and ranch lobbies, what part of raising prices isn’t a simple solution?

[stickfigure]

> Water rights carry a legacy of centuries of personal and political history and thousands of competing interests.

So did slavery, and we managed to get rid of that.

Doing the right thing is really not that complicated, it just requires political will.

[kortilla]

Water rights are at odds with what society needs now. There is nothing complex here. Make everyone pay equally for water and the problem goes away.

The people that complain that it’s way more complex than that are the ones that don’t want to pay for water.

[kolanos]

Alfalfa is one of the most water efficient and nutritionally rich crops there is. It is also one of the most drought resistant crops. It is hearty and reliable, unlike corn which is far more wasteful when it comes to water.

> Deep-Rootedness—alfalfa roots are commonly 3-5 feet deep and can extend to 8-15 feet in some soils. Therefore this crop can utilize moisture residing deep in the profile when surface waters become scarce. It shares this property with crops such as orchards, vineyards, and sugarbeets and safflower, unlike crops such as onion, lettuce and corn, where it's easy to lose water past the root zone.

> 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...

[thepasswordis]

Here's the worst part: we aren't even growing this for ourselves. These are farms owned by the saudis, and we're growing it and exporting it.

[remarkEon]

Citation? I'd love to read more about this.

Edit: ah, I see you linked it downthread thanks.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/11/02/453885642/sa...

[kolanos]

> 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]

[0]: https://hayandforage.com/article-3825-year-end-hay-exports-s...

[wolverine876]

Yes, market prices on water and beef (incorporating what are now climate externalities) would seem to solve these problems. Why isn't that being considered? Remember when conservatives, neo-liberals, and libertarians supported the market as a solution for everything?

Of course, we would need a reasonable amount of water available to consumers at below-market rates.

[ajmurmann]

To me charging market price for water seemed obvious and easy till the comments here pointed out what should be obvious: the farmers Steve getting their water from the faucet but from their own wells, creeks etc. So that solution is pretty hard to do on practice.

Other than disgruntled voters, I don't see an obstacle for proper beef prices. In fact I wish we could price in carbon emissions, as I wish that pretty much for every price. I personally hope we'll soon see the day where you have to pay extra at McDonald's to get a beef patty instead of cyber meat.

[jandrewrogers]

Some US beef is already produced with private water traded on the free market, at least in the western US. This is already priced into the cost of that beef. The price of water fluctuates every year but as a percentage of cost for beef, it isn't that much.

[pm90]

The reason this doesn’t happen is that farmers/farming lobbies have a lot of political power, especially in rural districts and no politician wants to be painted as anti-farming interests.

[kolanos]

Unlike cities, farmers go where the water is. I know some HNers think farmers are growing crops in deserts. But that's just laughable. They farm where there is water: rivers, lakes, flood planes, deltas, etc. It is the cities diverting the water from these places.

[thehappypm]

How is something a cow eats possibly a cash crop?

[shagie]

Cash crop is defined as something that you sell rather than use yourself.

Corn, harvested and sold as corn is a cash crop. Corn, harvested and used to feed your dairy herd is not.