3 ms·

Yes, it always amazes me that we grow rice in a desert. But you might say the same for cotton, but in the case of cotton, long-staple cottons derived from ancie

Yes, it always amazes me that we grow rice in a desert. But you might say the same for cotton, but in the case of cotton, long-staple cottons derived from ancient Egyptian cottons make superior cloth because of the longer fibers, but are susceptable to boll rot if it gets rain at the wrong time. It isn't always a simple analysis. If you want to give up growing cotton in California, be prepared for the quality of your shirts to go down. The bottom line is it isn't the farmers who are the ultimate consumers of the water. We all use ag water when we buy food at the grocery store. We eat the water. You can't make an impact on ag water without impacting the consumer also, and that connection needs to be acknowledged. The farmers use the water, but they don't consume the water. We do.

nine_k 9y ago
Your arguments would be correct if consumers footed 100% of the ag water bills. Want a premium-quality t-shirt? Go pay for superior cotton grown in a desert. Sounds fair to me. The question is in subsidies on water for farming; without them, much of the ag on California would become unsustainable, or, hopefully, would turn to modern practices that allow to grow vegetables in places like Middle East with very moderate water supply.
ameliaquining 9y ago
This doesn't have to mean an across-the-board increase in food prices, though. Prices that consumers pay for goods should reflect the cost of the resources consumed in their production. If almonds in particular become more expensive at the grocery store (it takes a gallon of water to grow one almond), and this causes people to buy fewer almonds relative to other foods, and water is conserved as a result, then this seems like the right outcome. (If we did see an across-the-board increase in food prices, that could be fixed with government subsidies, if that were necessary to prevent the change from being a regressive tax.)

nine_k 9y ago

Your arguments would be correct if consumers footed 100% of the ag water bills. Want a premium-quality t-shirt? Go pay for superior cotton grown in a desert. Sounds fair to me. The question is in subsidies on water for farming; without them, much of the ag on California would become unsustainable, or, hopefully, would turn to modern practices that allow to grow vegetables in places like Middle East with very moderate water supply.

ameliaquining 9y ago

This doesn't have to mean an across-the-board increase in food prices, though. Prices that consumers pay for goods should reflect the cost of the resources consumed in their production. If almonds in particular become more expensive at the grocery store (it takes a gallon of water to grow one almond), and this causes people to buy fewer almonds relative to other foods, and water is conserved as a result, then this seems like the right outcome. (If we did see an across-the-board increase in food prices, that could be fixed with government subsidies, if that were necessary to prevent the change from being a regressive tax.)