Colorado River deal forever changes the price of water in the West

calmatters.org

11 points·jelliclesfarm··8 comments

I'm concerned that this is going to make it much more profitable to clear forest land in wetter areas.

Speaking as a Minnesotan, this is probably pretty fucking good for alfalfa prices, not so good for marginal wetlands.

Why do you think the Supreme Court just gutted the EPA on wetlands?

Wonder who has already bought those wetlands? And how long ago did they buy them?

This article, if accurate (and I think it is), has serious implications for the food supply, and the economy, of not only the West but the entire country.

I'm waiting for the comment(s) to tell me why this isn't as scary as it sounds.

> it’s 25 times higher than what farmers have paid for the last 75 years.

Just another catastrophe that I naively thought, 15-years ago, wouldn't explode as an issue in my lifetime.

That’s interesting, I interpreted the article more positively. Certainly there will be massive disruptions and that’s not good. Ideally however goods including food should be produced where they can be economically created, not where they are subsidized. Given the scarcity of water in the west all the downstream users need to be paying as close to the proper price as possible.

That’s my understanding as well. It’s forcing farmers to think about water as a sustainable resource rather than depleting the aquifers completely.

It will bring about more efficient use of water.

All the technology needed is already available thanks to the Israelis.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_Israel

This is for the best. There's much wetter locations we should be growing food, and we certainly shouldn't be exporting our water (in the form of food). These western farms could be converted into solar panel farms to help with climate change.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com