GUEST COMMENTARY: Californians like to waste water, so everyone pays a premium for food

Monday, August 4, 2014 | 12:20 p.m. CDT

California’s harsh new measure to deal with long-term drought is making waves. Residents caught wasting water by washing sidewalks with a garden hose and committing similar reckless acts are incurring fines of up to $500.

Is that fair? Or will the fine be perceived as governmental overreach, like former New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg’s ill-fated attempt to limit soda sizes to 16 ounces?

As California struggles through its third year of drought, the government first called for a voluntary 20 percent reduction in water use. Instead, it got a 1 percent increase. After all, when it doesn’t rain, folks who won’t let go of their lush, green lawn will run the sprinkler more often.

To the Golden State’s own residents, failure to conserve voluntarily comes as no surprise. Who here hasn’t seen automatic sprinkler systems running during a rainstorm, or a home on a steep slope attempting to irrigate its green lawn as the gallons of water meant for the grass run into the sewer?

A few weeks ago, I saw my neighbor’s sprinklers going in the middle of the afternoon (the least efficient time to water). The water was flowing straight into the gutter. The yard didn’t even have grass. As far as I could tell, the intended recipient of the water was a cactus.

Supermarket hits

Do you live outside of California and wonder, “Why should I care?”

Try ambling over to the produce section of your local supermarket. Half of all U.S. fruit and nuts and a hefty portion of the nation’s veggies are grown in California. And growers of walnuts, almonds, peaches, citrus, avocados, grapes, lettuce and more all rely on the state’s scarce water supply.

California’s water dilemma brings up a central question that divides liberals and conservatives across the nation: Are we all in this together, or is it everyone for themselves?

When we as a society decide to use our finite water resources so that homeowners in arid climates can have lawns, golf courses, and swimming pools, it squeezes other water users — including farmers. Then prices go up for everyone.

Of course, nobody is being asked to give up golf courses and swimming pools. The failed voluntary conservation measures could be summed up as “Don’t do wasteful things you shouldn’t do anyway.”

Aside from voluntary conservation, the government could minimize or avoid altogether using the stick by offering more carrots.

Possible solutions

How about offering free rain barrels and classes in water-efficient irrigation? Or giving away drought-tolerant plants that require little water or maintenance to thrive? Couldn’t the state offer homeowners who purchase water-efficient toilets tax credits?

If it has the funds and the right priorities, California could transition all government property to drought-tolerant landscaping and shift from growing water-hogging Eucalyptus to water-sipping native plants along all freeways. As the price of water goes up, that might cut spending on maintenance.

At some point, we need to ask whether the rest of the country should put up with higher prices on fruit because Californians want to do things like hose down their driveways and sidewalks instead of sweeping them.

In that context, it seems pretty fair to fine those who persist in the most egregiously wasteful uses of water. Maybe after giving them a warning first, before levying that new $500 fine.

The same principle applies to other big environmental issues, like the climate crisis and air pollution. Reducing emissions is going to require effort from all of us, and it might be a tad inconvenient for some. But, alas, we all share our air and water, and there’s no getting around that.

We’re all in this together, and if we can’t come up with enough tax incentives or other voluntary approaches to fixing our problems, we’ll all need to follow some new rules.

OtherWords columnist Jill Richardson is the author of "Recipe for America: Why Our Food System Is Broken and What We Can Do to Fix It." 

Like what you see here? Become a member.

Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Ellis Smith August 4, 2014 | 1:34 p.m.

According to various sources, 70% of water used around the world is used for agriculture; about 20% is used industrially and the other 10% is used for all other purposes. Because the percentages can vary between countries, and definitely within local areas, it's easy to believe the percentages might be far different.

Reducing water usage for ANY purpose is a great idea, but if you wanted to significantly reduce water usage WHERE would YOU begin?

For example, cotton is being grown in our Southwest (for example, Arizona) in a situation where it can be grown ONLY with irrigation, and cotton is a crop that requires more water than some other common crops. Why is that done? Because with FEDERAL subsidies it pays to do that; otherwise, it probably wouldn't pay to do so.

Do we even need to grow cotton there, or could it just be grown where there is more natural rainfall?

It has been proven that with what's called "drip irrigation" we can irrigate some crops using only a fraction of the water used in traditional irrigation. (Ask your Ag faculty there on the MU campus.) Is there a cost associated with installing such a system. Hell yes, but it pays off in the long run. If the feds want to subsidize something, let them subsidize some of that initial cost.

Traditional irrigation in arid areas causes large losses of water due to EVAPORATION; the crop's roots only see a fraction of the water being used.

I can't resist: Let's attack the ROOT problem of water use, while at the same time doing our individual bits to conserve water. Ms. Richardson might want to read a few books on this subject.

[I've already said what I generally think of "OtherWords."]

(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.