A dry irrigation canal passes between fields in Maricopa, Arizona, on August 18, 2022.
Matt York/Associated Press
hide caption
toggle caption
Matt York/Associated Press
A dry irrigation canal passes between fields in Maricopa, Arizona, on August 18, 2022.
Matt York/Associated Press
Kathy England is a fifth generation farmer in Pinal County, Arizona. For decades, her family has grown cotton, alfalfa, and grain as part of a vibrant farming community in the southern part of the state.
But this year she faces an unexpected challenge. She has to manage her crops with half the normal water.
Agriculture in this area depends on the Colorado River, and historical droughts have resulted in severe agricultural shortages. Just as she was beginning to plan her planting season, England was informed that her farms could not draw water from the river and had to subsist on available groundwater instead.
“We had to cut about 50% of our acreage, which reduced our income,” England explained. “Maybe at least he’s going to have 30% of his normal revenue cut, so that’s going to be a really big impact.”
Farmers in Southern Arizona are among those in the West bearing the brunt of climate change. Droughts, worsening wildfires, temperature fluctuations and monsoons are all impacting businesses, food production, utility bills and livelihoods.
Rural communities also tend to lean more toward the Republican political party, which can put them at odds with climate change activists and environmental groups, who tend to be more closely aligned with Democrats.and the agricultural sector Estimated 11% of US greenhouse gas emissionsleaving farmers directly targeted by climate change advocates.
But farmers in the region go beyond their political stance, saying they also want solutions to climate problems now.
Arizona farmer Craig Alameda stands next to his tractor on his farm near Yuma.
Craig Alameda
hide caption
toggle caption
Craig Alameda
Arizona farmer Craig Alameda stands next to his tractor on his farm near Yuma.
Craig Alameda
“We’re not anti-environmentalists at all. That’s how we make our living,” said farmer Craig Alameda, who grew up in a conservative family for many years in Yuma. “If we fail to make a living, we have nothing, so we must cherish what we get.”
Alameda is one of thousands of farmers across the United States who have benefited from the USDA’s voluntary nature conservation program.
“I remember when we were young, when you were seen as a farmer, you were seen as a conservationist,” Alameda recalled. “We took charge of the open space and took care of everything.”
“I wonder how we ended up being the bad guys,” he said.
He used some of the money for projects such as trench coverings, a strategy that uses concrete to prevent water from seeping into the earthen walls of trenches.
Another grower in the area, Cary Jensen, who calls herself a Republican, also said she’s looking to use these conservation programs to help grow winter vegetables in Yuma.
The USDA and agricultural advocacy groups say the current program is “oversubscribed”, meaning more farmers and ranchers want to participate in voluntary conservation programs than they do for incentives. claims to do so.
Those programs also received a historic $20 billion in support from Democrats in last fall’s Control Inflation Act. Republicans in Washington are trying to get this dollar back.
Regardless of political party, farmers want people to know their money is being put to good use.
Jensen says this has ripple effects throughout the economy, but isn’t always noticeable far from the farm.
“There is still a disconnect with some of these very large cities, you can go to the grocery store and get the produce. could you get to?” she said.
The solution seems far off.The water level of the river is still falling
Decades of water use agreements between the federal government, states, and Native American tribes have resulted in an unintended over-allocation of water. Robert Medler, Arizona state affairs manager for grower advocacy group Western Growers, said more water is allocated along rivers, streams and canals than the rivers actually produce. This is especially true of multi-year exacerbations of drought.
almost 80% of the Colorado River This means that farmers will be the first to receive cuts.
“It will be difficult to solve,” Medler said. “Everyone is aware of it and everyone seems willing to come to the table. But each situation is different and there is conflict there.”
Ministry of the Interior in April Presented three proposals About how to distribute water. One option is to make no changes.
Farmer England in Pinal County has already been cut off from access to the river’s water. When the issue first came up in her community, she explains, there was a split between conservative farmers, who insisted there was plenty of groundwater, and farmers who were more concerned about the drying canals.
But now that water reduction works have been done and groundwater has been pumped, she doesn’t feel those political divisions anymore.
“Everyone has the same opinion,” said England. “It’s just a problem and everyone wants to solve it.”
And the clock is ticking. Many countries, including England, will not be able to get their water back for the foreseeable future.
“Every day that goes by without some sort of solution only makes the problem worse,” Medler said.
