California needs more than water usage reports. It needs water solutions.

Capitol Weekly welcomes Opinions on California public policy or politics. Please read our guidelines for opinion pieces before submitting an Op-Ed. Submissions that do not adhere to our guidelines will not be considered for publication. 

OPINION — With the rise of AI and the expansion of data centers, water is getting more attention. What industry is using too much? Are users reporting? Who is using water most efficiently? These are fair questions, and water stewardship depends on all users being good actors. But this conversation should not distract from the larger challenge: California needs more water supply, and state and federal agencies should support, not impede, the projects that can provide it.

For decades, California agriculture has been asked to do more with less, and farmers and ranchers have delivered. Since 1980, California’s farmers and ranchers have increased farm GDP by 23% while reducing water use by 15%. That means the local, nutritious food at your grocery store is being grown with less water than ever before, while working lands continue to provide the open space and environmental benefits Californians cherish. Today, more than half of irrigated acres in California use drip, micro or subsurface irrigation.

The same is true for urban communities. During extreme droughts, Californians have been required to cut water use significantly, and local water agencies continue to offer conservation programs to help ratepayers use water more efficiently. The state has also adopted policies such as Making Conservation a California Way of Life designed to encourage increased efficiency and strengthen drought resilience.

With so much pressure to conserve, it is natural for industries and communities to compare their water use against one another. Water applied to almond orchards is evaluated against AI data centers, environmental needs and urban use. But are these discussions solution-oriented? As the saying goes, that kind of thinking is penny-wise and pound-foolish.

The real issue is that California’s water infrastructure has not kept pace with population growth or changing water demands. The state’s last major reservoirs were completed in the 1970s, when California’s population was about 15 million. Today, our state is home to nearly 40 million people. At the same time, less surface water is being made available to farms and communities, and groundwater pumping restrictions are being implemented. We need new and reliable water supplies.

California has spent decades identifying solutions to its water challenges, including new storage, recycling, desalination and groundwater recharge projects. Yet too many of these proposals have remained trapped in planning, permitting and debate while the state’s needs continue to grow. The public understands what is at stake. A recent survey commissioned by the Association of California Water Agencies found that 88% of Californians believe the state needs to modernize its water infrastructure.

Importantly, Senate Bill 72 and the new California Water Plan also show a bipartisan commitment to securing California’s water future. Together, they recognize that conservation alone will not be enough to meet the needs of a growing population, a strong economy, healthy communities, agriculture and the environment in an increasingly variable climate. By establishing clear statewide water-supply targets, including an initial 9 million acre-feet, and focusing attention on developing new and more reliable supplies including storage, groundwater recharge, recycling, desalination, stormwater capture and improved conveyance, California can move from managing scarcity to building resilience. 

California’s next governor must fully embrace this bipartisan plan and encourage the state’s agencies to implement this vision for a more reliable water future.

Yes, understanding future water needs is important to help water managers plan supplies, demands and timing across the system. But transparency should inform solutions, not be weaponized. California should be planning water supplies for all needs, not picking winners and losers.

We do not need to choose between food production, future economic growth and the environment. They are inextricably linked. California must plan and take action to support all these important purposes. After decades of growth with no new major storage developed, we have a lot of catching up to do.

Michelle Paul is the executive director of the nonprofit California Farm Water Coalition.