The California Drought Is Making Some Fruit Taste…Better?!

Turns out watering certain fruits less can actually boost their flavor.

Tatakis/iStock

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


On July 20, California’s resources board fined a farming district near San Francisco $1.5 million for illegally diverting water to feed its rows of corn, tomatoes, cherries, and almonds. The Golden State, of course, continues to suffer from a dramatic drought, and many farmers face restrictions on pumping and diverting local supplies of water.

The underwatered pomegranates “tasted sweeter because there’s less dilution,” explained one scientist. “The sugary taste is enhanced because there’s less water.”

But national demand for California’s fresh fruit and veggies continues at a steady pace. What’s a thirsty farmer to do?

One simple solution looks a little like Greece’s austerity measures: Give each plant less water. A team of USDA scientists is exploring what happens after treating plants to a round of “deficit irrigation,” or the reduced application of H2O.

But they seem to have stumbled on a rare piece of good drought news: Early findings suggest that after undergoing deficit irrigation for two years, parched plants can produce the same or even higher quality fruit.

In a study (PDF) focused on Wonderful variety pomegranate trees, a team of researchers including Tiziana Centofanti and USDA soil scientist Gary Banuelos applied as little as 35 percent of the normal amount of moisture to the crop for two years. The resulting pomegranates were smaller, and more of them cracked. But in terms of the fruit’s levels of antioxidants—compounds with health benefits above and beyond nutrition—”no significant differences were observed,” wrote the researchers.

And the fleshy, fuchsia seeds tasted even more delicious than normal, says Banuelos. “They tasted sweeter because there’s less dilution,” he explained. “The sugary taste is enhanced because there’s less water.”

Farmers are paid by the pound, so growing smaller peaches means earning less.

California farmers grow around 30,000 acres of pomegranate trees each year. The USDA deems the plant “extremely drought tolerant,” so it’s no huge surprise that the researchers’ fruit proved hearty in times of duress. Yet other fruit varieties—like grapes and peaches—also seem to benefit in some ways from a drier diet. Preliminary results from an experiment Centofanti just completed on Crimson seedless and Sugarone variety table grapes in Delano and Mecca, California, reveal that giving the vines 25 to 50 percent less water yields darker, sweeter, and smaller grapes.

Faced with dwindling groundwater supplies this year, California peach farmer David “Mas” Masumoto experimented with watering parts of his orchards 30 to 50 percent less. His Gold Dust peaches were punier but brimming with flavor, “probably the most intense I’ve ever had,” he told the LA Times. “I realize all these years I’ve been pumping them up with fertilizer and water to try to get them artificially big.” Masumoto and his daughter Nikiko have launched a social media campaign they’re calling #SmallFruitRevolution to try to inspire consumers to support these types of conservation experiments.

Therein lies the rub: Reducing water tends to create undersized fruit. “You’re producing a leaner machine,” explains Banuelos. Farmers are paid by the pound, so growing smaller peaches means earning less. Even if they get a more flavorful bounty, they’d have to “look for a niche market to sell that product. That’s another layer of complexity for that farmer,” says Banuelos.

Farmers also tend to manage their watering intensively in order to boost yields. Chris Gertz, a fourth-generation stone fruit farmer from the Central Valley, says he tries not to overwater his fruit trees, because starving them makes the fruit sweeter. But he doesn’t want to underwater them for fear of crippling the plant’s future production. It’s a balancing act between flavor and “what’s going to sustain your tree for the next year. The new growth of the tree this year is next year’s crop.”

In the short term, the pomegranate trees in Centofanti and Banuelos’ study yielded roughly the same number of pomegranates. But they warn that more research is needed to determine the long-term effects of deficit irrigation.

Yet Banuelos argues that it’s a no-brainer solution for California’s current predicament. “We might not need to practice deficit irrigation forever, but during these troubled times—it might be needed to survive.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate