evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Palo Verde Land Fallowing — Metropolitan Water District Paying Farmers to Fallow for Colorado River Supply (California, USA)

United States of America · Blythe · See the United States of America profile

Top 89% 27/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

A 1992-94 test paid Palo Verde farmers $620/acre/yr to fallow 20,215 acres, saving ~186,000 acre-ft at ~$135/acre-ft; since 2005 a 35-year deal fallows up to 26,000 acres. Independent work questions how much water is really saved.

Palo Verde Land Fallowing — Metropolitan Water District Paying Farmers to Fallow for Colorado River Supply (California, USA)

Details

Promoter
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California / Palo Verde Irrigation District
Period
1992-1994 pilot; 2005-2040 programme
Keywords
agriculture, water transfer, fallowing, Colorado River

Description

From 1992 to 1994 the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) paid farmers in the Palo Verde Valley $620 per fallowed acre per year, fallowing 20,215 acres and saving about 186,000 acre-feet (roughly $135 per acre-foot), stored in Lake Mead for MWD. A 1996 study (Davisson and Kamand) found the programme well received by farmers and community representatives, a slight (~1.3%) reduction in average regional employment, and that farmers spent 93% of payments above fallowing costs on farm investments, purchases and debt repayment.
In 2004 MWD and the Palo Verde Irrigation District agreed a 35-year transfer of up to 120,000 acre-feet a year through fallowing of up to 26,000 acres; a 2023 verification report lists 25,947 acres enrolled, with the programme running to 2040.
Caution: an Arizona State University study (Wright et al.) reportedly found that actual savings were far smaller than MWD's estimates over the period studied, by analysing farmer behaviour on enrolled and non-enrolled fields. A local committee member disputes this in public comments, so the true net saving remains contested. This is a water-supply payment scheme rather than a biodiversity one, and its transferable lesson is the need for independent verification of 'saved' water.

Read the full analysis: https://mountainscholar.org/items/7042a823-6012-458b-bcc0-338255b3f3a4

Implementation

Implementation detail (cost, timeline, staffing, conditions for success) is not yet available for this practice.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful