New research reveals that altering water use on farms presents the most financially sound method for conserving the Colorado River’s diminishing water supply, proving far more cost-effective than developing new infrastructure. A comprehensive study found that programs focused on agricultural conservation were able to save water at a cost as low as $69.89 for every acre-foot.
This economic efficiency stands in stark contrast to the high price of creating new water sources. Projects such as building reservoirs, digging wells, or establishing wastewater treatment facilities cost, on average, more than $2,000 for the same volume of water. With agriculture consuming 80% of the basin’s water, the study underscores that focusing conservation efforts on farms offers the greatest potential for savings at the lowest cost, a critical finding for the seven states and 35 million people who rely on the river.
A Comprehensive Economic Analysis
The pivotal findings emerge from an extensive study conducted by the School of Public Policy at the University of California, Riverside, in collaboration with the Utah Rivers Council. Researchers embarked on a detailed examination of 462 federally funded water projects in the Colorado River Basin implemented over a 20-year period, from 2004 to 2024. These projects represented a total investment of approximately $1 billion in 2023 constant dollars, with funding data sourced from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
Led by UCR graduate student Paloma Avila, the research team sought to evaluate the effectiveness of different investment strategies. The study’s core metric was the cost per acre-foot, a standard unit in water management representing the amount of water needed to cover one acre of land to a depth of one foot, which is equivalent to about 325,851 gallons. By comparing the cost-effectiveness of projects designed to create new water supply with those aimed at conserving existing supplies, particularly in the agricultural sector, the analysis provided a clear economic picture. The goal was to understand where investments were being made and which approaches yielded the most significant water savings for the money spent.
The High Cost of New Water Infrastructure
The study highlights the substantial financial burden associated with traditional water supply projects. Efforts to augment the water supply through large-scale infrastructure are consistently more expensive than conservation methods. The analysis identified an average cost exceeding $2,000 per acre-foot for projects such as the construction of new reservoirs, the drilling of groundwater wells, and the development of advanced wastewater treatment facilities.
These capital-intensive projects have long been a cornerstone of water management in the arid West, but their economic feasibility is increasingly coming under scrutiny as water scarcity intensifies. The high price tag reflects the significant costs of planning, construction, and long-term maintenance required for such infrastructure. The UC Riverside research makes a strong economic case that, while these supply-side projects may be necessary in some contexts, they are not the most efficient use of public funds when compared to the potential returns from agricultural conservation programs. This cost disparity is a central argument for shifting investment priorities toward demand-management strategies on farms.
Targeting the Largest Water Consumer
The strategic importance of focusing on agriculture is rooted in its sheer scale of water consumption. Agricultural operations use approximately 80% of the water drawn from the Colorado River Basin. This immense demand is largely driven by the irrigation of thirsty crops that are vital to the regional economy, particularly pasture grasses and alfalfa grown for cattle feed. These crops cover vast stretches of land across states like Wyoming, Colorado, and Arizona.
Mehdi Nemati, an assistant professor of public policy at UC Riverside and a co-author of the study, emphasized that the greatest savings naturally occur where the most water is used. By targeting the agricultural sector, conservation programs can achieve significant reductions in water use that would be impossible to match in urban or industrial settings. The study suggests that even modest improvements in irrigation efficiency or small changes in farming practices, when implemented across thousands of farms, can result in massive water savings for the entire river system. This makes agricultural conservation not just an option but a primary and necessary path forward.
Proven Strategies for Agricultural Savings
A variety of effective and tested methods are available to achieve significant water conservation in the agricultural sector. These strategies generally involve providing financial incentives to farmers, encouraging the adoption of more efficient technologies, and promoting flexible land-use practices that adapt to water availability.
Financial Incentives and Fallowing
Among the most successful strategies are incentive programs that compensate farmers for voluntarily reducing their water consumption. In areas like California’s Palo Verde Valley and parts of Arizona, federal funds have been used to pay farmers to fallow their fields, which involves leaving land unplanted and unirrigated for a season or more. This practice directly reduces the amount of water diverted from the river. Research into these programs indicates they are most effective in rural areas where farmers are less likely to adopt conservation measures without financial motivation, a concept known as “additionality.” By paying ranchers and farmers to cut back, even temporarily, meaningful water savings can be achieved at a relatively low cost.
Efficient Irrigation Techniques
Technological upgrades offer another powerful tool for water conservation. Many programs encourage and subsidize the replacement of traditional flood irrigation with modern sprinkler or drip systems, which deliver water to crops with much greater precision and less waste. Another key practice is “deficit irrigation,” in which growers intentionally apply less water than a crop would typically demand, carefully managing the stress to maintain a harvest while saving significant volumes of water. Infrastructure improvements, such as lining canals to prevent water from seeping into the ground before it reaches the fields, have also proven highly effective. For example, the lining of the Coachella Canal in Southern California saved 30,000 acre-feet of water, making it available for other uses.
Crop Switching
A third approach involves changing the types of crops being cultivated. Switching from high-water-use crops like alfalfa to alternatives that require less irrigation, such as wheat or oats, can substantially reduce a farm’s overall water footprint. While this strategy holds significant potential for conservation, it can present economic challenges for farmers, as less thirsty crops may not be as profitable. Therefore, successful crop-switching programs often need to be paired with financial support or market development to ensure that farmers do not bear an undue economic burden for contributing to the basin’s water security.
Broader Implications and Future Considerations
The findings of the UC Riverside study have wide-ranging implications for the future of water management across the American West. The Colorado River is not merely a body of water but the economic lifeblood for a vast region, supporting agriculture and providing drinking water for millions of people. As climate change and prolonged drought continue to strain this critical resource, the need for effective and economically viable conservation solutions has never been more urgent. Focusing on agricultural efficiency provides a clear path to stretching the available supply.
However, the implementation of these conservation measures is not without complexity. Some experts caution that improving on-farm efficiency does not always translate directly into more water in the river. Highly efficient irrigation systems can sometimes lead to crops consuming more water than they would have under less precise methods, reducing the amount of runoff that would have historically returned to the local water supply. This means that efficiency gains must be carefully paired with overall water use reduction targets, such as through seasonal fallowing or shortening growing seasons, to ensure that the water saved benefits the entire system. Preserving irrigated agriculture is recognized as important for rural economies, making voluntary, temporary, and compensated conservation programs a key policy tool for the future.
