Facing another severe drought year in 2015, farmers are going to be taking more losses. According to a new study from the UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences, this year California agriculture is estimated to use 2.5 million acre-feet less in water, employ 18,600 fewer people, and contribute $2.7 billion less to the state’s economy than it would in a normal water year.
It estimates that farmers will fallow 560,000 acres — decisions that could have impacts on the nation’s food supply for years to come.
The report comes on the heels of a punishing string of 2014 losses.
The study for last year tallied 428,000 fallowed acres, 17,100 lost jobs and a $2.2 billion economic loss. Yet those numbers show that last year was actually a little bit better than this year will be.
“The socioeconomic impacts of an extended drought, in 2016 and beyond, could be much more severe,” wrote study authors Richard Howitt, Duncan MacEwan, Josue Medellini, Jay Lund and Daniel A. Sumner.
It sounds ominous, and it is.
For while California farmers have been creative and industrious in the face of this severe drought — and the report tallies many examples of how they’ve adapted — the long-term impacts of a sustained drought will be devastating for the state.
For example, agriculture has relied heavily on groundwater substitutions for the water cutbacks it’s suffered from water districts. “Groundwater substitution, water market transfers and grower use of limited water for the most profitable crops are key factors buffering the economic and employment effects of drought,” write the study authors.
But groundwater is a finite resource, and no one knows for sure how much the state actually has. Already farmers are pumping deeper and deeper wells as shallower ones dry up.
“This study does not address long-term costs of groundwater overdraft, such as higher pumping costs and greater water scarcity,” the report warns.
Also, the regional impact of all of those job losses may take some time to be felt — but having an extended period of high unemployment would be devastating to a region that already suffers from high rates of poverty.
The best solution to all of this would be rain, and lots of it. There’s some hope for an El Niño event this year, but in case one doesn’t materialize, the state would be wise to start making some difficult choices.
The first thing we need to learn is how much groundwater we have. With Silicon Valley so close, it’s a wonder that there isn’t a full technological effort going on to measure groundwater so that the state isn’t flying blind.
Better data about this crucial resource would help guide the agricultural industry in its planting decisions — and the state in its cutback decisions.
Crop plantings may have to evolve if the drought continues, too.
It’s all the rage to claim that California farmers just need to stop growing water-guzzling almonds, but the global specificity of California’s soil, along with high commodity prices for certain crops, suggests these are decisions that need to be made with the assistance of economic and scientific data, not emotion.
Farmers have started shifting their crops — 2014 contracts for growing processing tomatoes shifted largely to the Sacramento Valley, for instance, which resulted in strong yields. That trend may have to continue — and with less voluntary choice.
Finally, the state has to consider ways to invest in job growth and opportunities beyond agriculture for the Central Valley.
Many experts have observed that it would be wise for the Central Valley to reduce its dependence on agriculture and low-wage service work for employment. Doing so could bring about improvements in the health, education, and opportunities for residents.
A prolonged drought may make that advice a necessity, as it’s accelerating existing trends toward lower employment in this sector.