Farmland

* Re “Keep Farmers Farming With Cheaper Water,” by Marc Reisner, Commentary, Dec. 30: Preserving California’s farmlands is a most worthy goal. However, there are far better ways to do this than by urban water customers subsidizing agriculture’s water rates. As a large portion of our state’s agricultural products are shipped to other states and approximately 26% are exported abroad, this would be a particularly unfair economic burden for Californians to bear.

While 85% of California’s water is used by agriculture, nearly 100% of the water conservation has been required of urban users. A far better plan would be for the state to provide low-cost loans for up-to-date, water-conserving irrigation systems to be installed. This would automatically lower the amount of water used by growers.

ELLEN STERN HARRIS

Beverly Hills

* Cheap, subsidized water for California’s agricultural corporations has led to wasteful irrigation practices, a huge percentage of California’s “liquid gold” being used to irrigate low-value crops such as alfalfa, rice and cotton, and to an insatiable thirst for more water projects to be built at taxpayer expense. California leads the nation in damaged ecosystems, dried-up rivers and endangered fish species.

Market pricing of agricultural water coupled with legal water transfers would lead to increased water conservation investments by agriculture, reduced farming of marginal lands and crops, more water for urban growth and the environment, higher profits for farmers and reduced pressure for more public works projects.

NICK DI CROCE

Board of Governors

California Trout, Solvang