I went to a presentation put on by one of my colleagues today who is an economist specializing in economic forecasting. He has become involved in the debate over the economic/employment impact of Delta pumping restrictions. Shockingly, much of the data(80,000 farm jobs lost from pumping restrictions!) that has been thrown around by politicians has very little basis in fact (his estimate is 1/40th of that) Some of the highlights:
Farm employment in the valley has actually increased significantly since the "drought" began in 2006.
Until the collapse of the housing market, there was a shortage of farm workers. The recent glut of people unsuccessfully seeking employment in agriculture is primarily due to people formerly employed in the now-collapsed construction industry now seeking work on farms.
Unemployment rates of 40% in some valley communities that are thrown out as to illustrate the plight of agricultural employees are actually typical, and have been in the same ballpark even in wet years with 100% water deliveries.
The southern Central Valley has actually had a smaller increase in unemployment than the statewide average.
A report on job losses by UC-Davis that is repeatedly cited by the pro-canal crowd has been revised TWICE as a result of criticism over the faulty assumptions and methodologies used. In my colleague's opinion, it still overstates the job losses even after being revised downward dramatically. Pro-canal politicians are still using (bigger) "old" job loss figures that even UC-Davis no longer believes to be accurate.
Interesting stuff. More detail is available on the website for his forecasting center at: http://forecast.pacific.edu
Farm employment in the valley has actually increased significantly since the "drought" began in 2006.
Until the collapse of the housing market, there was a shortage of farm workers. The recent glut of people unsuccessfully seeking employment in agriculture is primarily due to people formerly employed in the now-collapsed construction industry now seeking work on farms.
Unemployment rates of 40% in some valley communities that are thrown out as to illustrate the plight of agricultural employees are actually typical, and have been in the same ballpark even in wet years with 100% water deliveries.
The southern Central Valley has actually had a smaller increase in unemployment than the statewide average.
A report on job losses by UC-Davis that is repeatedly cited by the pro-canal crowd has been revised TWICE as a result of criticism over the faulty assumptions and methodologies used. In my colleague's opinion, it still overstates the job losses even after being revised downward dramatically. Pro-canal politicians are still using (bigger) "old" job loss figures that even UC-Davis no longer believes to be accurate.
Interesting stuff. More detail is available on the website for his forecasting center at: http://forecast.pacific.edu