Readers React: Make California drought tolerant by increasing the price of water


To the editor: Brad Gleason states that farmers are paying, on average, $1,000 an acre-foot for water. This equates to about a third of a penny per gallon. (“Why almond growers aren’t the water enemy,” op-ed, March 25)

Here in the San Diego area, residential customers pay more than double this amount for water, so maybe $1,000 per acre-foot isn’t so bad.

In either case, rural or residential, the cost for one of man’s most precious resources (water) is absurdly cheap. Is there anything someone could buy for less than a penny per gallon?


If serious inroads are to be made to deal with the severe drought in California, the cost of water should be used as one of the most effective tools available to reduce water use. Let the law of supply and demand work its magic.

Gary Koop, Encinitas


To the editor: The real enemy is us.

It takes about 2,500 gallons of water to produce a pound of beef. So how ridiculous it is to ask diners to forgo a glass of water in the interest of conservation when a couple may order a meal that can include a pound of beef?

It is probably true, to paraphrase what one conservationist said, that the water it takes to produce 100 pounds of beef could float a destroyer.

Lou Del Pozzo, Pacific Palisades


To the editor: The director of the California Farmer Water Coalition, Mike Wade, made a ridiculous comparison of the rights of a farmer to grows what he wishes to a Times columnist writing what he chooses.


A columnist has the constitutionally guaranteed right to freedom of the press. It is the only business mentioned in the Constitution, as it was considered a foundation of a workable republic.

There is no such guarantee to grow lima beans or almonds, despite farmers being well represented by the framers of the Constitution.

Mark Temple, Huntington Beach

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook