California drying up right before your eyes...

[ag_dude]

59. Thank you, been looking for that.

The number is so far off from government estimates and higher than anything else out there. I can see why people that are trying to make a point would choose it over the government numbers.

Have you looked at their methodology?

They choose methods that (I would say intentionally) inflate the water footprint of beef and dairy production in California. They don't actually measure water use by beef and dairy production, they estimate it. They tally corn/feed grown in other states against the water footprint of California. They apply precipitation on inarable land to the water footprint of beef production.

If you look at actual feed sources grown on arable land in California, that number is nowhere near the 47% number.

That's the danger is looking at a quote from a study instead of the study itself.

There's a reason it's the extreme outlier.