Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

​Reconsidering Agricultural Water Rights in the American Southwest

News

​Reconsidering Agricultural Water Rights in the American Southwest

Freshly plowed farmland with rolling green hills on a clear day near Marsh Creek Road, Brentwood, California, June 10, 2025.

(Photo by Smith Collection/Gado/Getty Images)

As the American West continues to experience a decades-long megadrought, an increasing focus has been placed on reducing water consumption, with the agricultural industry being the largest consumer.

Context


In the southwestern United States, recent depletions in water resources from groundwater aquifers to rivers have sparked debates over how to reduce water usage. The debate has intensified, particularly within states that depend on the Colorado River, which is currently experiencing an 18 percent drop in water flow compared to last century. These states, which constitute the Colorado River Basin, are divided into an Upper Basin, including Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico, along with a Lower Basin, including Arizona, California, and Nevada.

Aside from the Colorado River, recent data on groundwater indicates significant depletion of water resources across the Southwest. In 2023, a revised report on groundwater estimates in Arizona led to a pause on some housing construction on the outskirts of the Phoenix suburbs until assurances of 100-year water supplies could be met.

The increasing need for water use reductions has led to the implementation of water restrictions on state and local levels. In 2023, the Lower Basin states agreed to a proposal to cut their use of Colorado River water by approximately 13 percent of their allocated amount. In Phoenix, which receives around 40 percent of its water from the Colorado River through canals, the city government has instituted a new ordinance requiring businesses to submit water conservation plans to the city.

Amidst this debate, the agricultural industry in the Southwest has come under heavy focus as an area for greater cuts. This is primarily due to the high percentage of water being used for agriculture. In the western United States, 86 percent of all water consumption comes from agriculture. In 2023, discussions within the Arizona governor’s Water Policy Council fell through after supporters of state agriculture resigned in protest. In other parts of the state, proposals to establish regulatory oversight areas for groundwater pumping have led to opposition from crop growers.

Arguments Against Agricultural Water Restrictions

A major argument made against imposing water restrictions on southwestern agriculture is its indispensable role in supporting crop growth. During the winter, 90 percent of all United States vegetables are grown in warmer climates in Arizona and California, and in any given year, California alone produces around a third of all vegetables in the country. Farms in Arizona and California account for 98 percent of all leaf lettuce in the US, and California’s farms account for three-fourths of America’s fruits and nuts.

Opponents also highlight the beneficial impacts of certain crops. For instance, farmers’ groups point to some of the soil benefits of alfalfa in crop rotation systems. Through a symbiotic relationship with some bacteria, alfalfa fixes nitrogen from the atmosphere, allowing it to grow without nitrogen fertilizer and increasing the amount of nitrogen in the soil for later crops and microorganisms. In Arizona, the crop can be harvested on average nine times a year with greater efficiency in yields per acre than in other parts of the country. The year-round nature of the crop also allows its water use to be dispersed across the year.

Another major argument made against imposing strict water cuts on agriculture is its economic impact, particularly in rural areas. In Arizona alone, an estimated 128,000 jobs are in agribusiness. In the Fresno, Kings, Madera, Merced, and Tulare counties of California’s Central Valley, around a quarter of gross domestic product and 17 percent of all jobs are in agriculture. For rural counties heavily dependent on agriculture, such as Pinal County in Arizona, a loss of Colorado River water has been estimated to generate economic losses of up to $35 million.

Arguments For Agricultural Water Restrictions

Proponents of water cuts to agriculture in the Southwest critique the industry’s significant water consumption, particularly that of hays and cattle feed crops such as alfalfa. Across the Western United States, 86 percent of all water is used for crop irrigation, with 32 percent of all water use being alfalfa alone. This is significantly larger than the eight percent of water used for commercial purposes and the six percent of water used for residential purposes, such as showering, lawn watering, and drinking. Within the Colorado River Basin, alfalfa crops alone make up around 26 percent of all water consumed. In the Lower Basin, 54 percent of all water consumption is for agriculture, compared to 21 percent for all municipal, industrial, and commercial use combined. In the Upper Basin, around half of all water use is agricultural, of which alfalfa comprises 90 percent. In comparison, all other human consumption comprises 13 percent of Upper Basin water usage, with the rest being lost to evaporation in some form. In Mexico, agriculture constitutes an estimated 80 percent of consumption of Colorado River water.

The Gila River Basin, which includes southern and central Arizona and is a tributary system to the Colorado River, has its agricultural share at an estimated 34 percent of all water consumption, compared to 24 percent for municipal, commercial and industrial uses combined. Proponents of water restrictions argue that this level of consumption is disproportionate, and that other water users have already made significant efforts to cut back. For example, despite continuing to grow in population, the city of Las Vegas saw a 26 percent decline in water usage between 2002 and 2024. This is largely due to water conservation programs such as introducing less water-intensive landscaping and more water-efficient home construction.

Conclusion

As long term drought conditions in the Southwest continue to persist, a greater focus will be placed on implementing policies to reduce water consumption. Due to its high share of consumption, greater restrictions on water use for agricultural purposes will continue to be considered as an effective policy for meeting these goals. Given the extent to which the United States food supply and rural western economies depend on agriculture, any proposals will quickly become contentious. Going forward, policymakers in the Southwest will have to carefully consider how best to conserve water resources while balancing the economic and food supply needs of the Southwest and elsewhere.

Reconsidering Agricultural Water Rights in the American Southwest was first published on The Alliance for Citizen Engagement and republished with permission.

Artemis-June Torre is an Environment Policy Fellow with ACE.

Read More

Mandatory vs. Voluntary Inclusionary Housing: What Cities Are Doing to Create Affordable Homes

affordable housing

Dougal Waters/Getty Images

Mandatory vs. Voluntary Inclusionary Housing: What Cities Are Doing to Create Affordable Homes

As housing costs rise across United States cities, local governments are adopting inclusionary housing policies to ensure that some portion of new residential developments remains affordable. These policies—defined and tracked by organizations like the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy—require or encourage developers to include below-market-rate units in otherwise market-rate projects. Today, over 1,000 towns have implemented some form of inclusionary housing, often in response to mounting pressure to prevent displacement and address racial and economic inequality.

What’s the Difference Between Mandatory and Voluntary Approaches?

Inclusionary housing programs generally fall into two types:

Keep ReadingShow less
A thick cloud of exhaust rises up from a chimney in the blue sky

A comparative look at how New Jersey and Texas regulate refinery and chemical-plant pollution—and how weakened federal protections leave communities breathing unequal risks.

Getty Image, Hartmut Kosig

The Wind Doesn’t Know State Lines, Washington Doesn’t Seem To Care

As you cross the George Washington Bridge heading west, you can smell New Jersey. You pass through notorious Superfund marshes and speed through Newark's refinery smokestacks. East Coasters love to mock this “pollution alley," but here’s the twist: starting in the 1970s, New Jersey built some of the tightest refinery regulations in the country. If that corridor still feels toxic 50 years later, what's happening in states with far fewer protections?

When federal safeguards weaken, local rules decide how clean—or how dirty—the air gets. In mid-2025, the White House granted two-year delays for certain hazardous-air-pollutant standards covering dozens of large chemical-manufacturing facilities, including one within the Phillips 66 complex in Borger, Texas. Meanwhile, its sister refinery in New Jersey must carry on under the full force of both federal and state oversight. For families living near these plants, geography now dictates protection. Nearly 845,000 residents live within ten miles of New Jersey’s Bayway refinery—barely 2,200 around Borger’s—two very different stories emanating from similar operations and riding similar winds.

Keep ReadingShow less
California’s clean energy shift: how ending coal power impacts Latino communities

power station

Cover Photo: Pixabay

California’s clean energy shift: how ending coal power impacts Latino communities

California has taken another step away from fossil fuels. For the first time in decades, the state will no longer buy electricity produced from coal, ending a long-standing reliance on out-of-state power plants such as the Intermountain facility in Utah. The move is both symbolic and practical. It confirms that California’s grid, one of the largest in the world, has officially cut ties with the dirtiest source of energy still used in the United States.

The Intermountain Power Plant once sent electricity hundreds of miles through transmission lines that connected Utah’s coal fields with Los Angeles. That arrangement allowed California to meet part of its growing energy demand without technically burning coal at home. Now that contract has expired, and the plant itself is being converted to operate on natural gas and hydrogen. California officials say the end of coal imports is a turning point in the state’s decades-long effort to cut emissions and accelerate renewable energy.

Keep ReadingShow less
A landfill.

As Hurricane Melissa breaks records, scientists warn Earth’s life-support systems are failing—while U.S. leaders censor climate data and delay real action.

Getty Images, Pramote Polyamate

The Time for Comfort Is Over; Climate Change Won’t Wait Till We’re Ready

As Hurricane Melissa cements itself as the strongest storm ever recorded in the Atlantic basin—fueled by unseasonably warm ocean temperatures 2.5 °F above average—we must grapple with what this means for our future.

In a recent report, scientists found that seven of the nine planetary boundaries essential for sustaining life on Earth are in decline, with ocean acidification newly entering the list of concerns. As we all learned in elementary school, everything requires balance. Yet we are rapidly approaching tipping points that our communities and our lifestyles are ill-prepared to handle.

Keep ReadingShow less