|
|
|
|
|
|
by acdha
4114 days ago
|
|
|
The underlying problem here is that there isn't enough water to go around. There three outcomes: 1. Farmers stop growing more wasteful crops which are very water intensive and peak consumption drops below the crisis level
2. Avocado farmers raise prices based on increased costs
3. Some avocado farmers can no longer compete with avocado farmers in wetter areas of the US or Mexico I'm certain we'd see some combination of all three and that any of those outcomes would be preferable to what we're doing now where the combination of a severely distorted market and a patchwork quilt of existing water rights & management districts ensures that market forces are applied very inconsistently if at all. |
|
|
And therein lies a thorny political issue. Generally speaking, when this sort of shift starts happening, farmers and agribusiness lobby the government (state and/or federal) for tariffs and subsidies, in order to protect their price competitiveness against foreign or out-of-state producers. This is a vicious cycle, and we need to find the political will to stop it when it comes. Which leads to further issues: can a governor of California get elected who is seen as hostile to Californian agriculture? Possibly, but oh man, would he or she be in for a fierce battle. Central CA is a very powerful voting bloc, and farm lobbies are very powerful at the state level and in D.C.