Beneath the farms and cities of the American West and Great Plains, aquifers that took thousands of years to fill are losing water faster than rain and snowmelt can replace it. The states paying the steepest price so far are concentrated in a belt stretching from the Texas Panhandle through western Kansas and into California’s Central Valley, where decades of heavy pumping have already triggered land sinking, canal damage, and well failures. The most overlooked dimension of this crisis is not the water loss itself but the permanent, irreversible nature of the damage in regions where the ground has physically compacted, eliminating storage capacity that no future wet year can restore.
Eight States Share One Shrinking Aquifer
The High Plains Aquifer, also known as the Ogallala, stretches beneath eight states: Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming. A U.S. Geological Survey investigation mapped water-level changes across this entire footprint from predevelopment, around 1950, through 2019, along with a shorter comparison window from 2017 to 2019. The report documents both falling water levels and shrinking recoverable water in storage, with the sharpest declines concentrated in the southern and central portions of the aquifer where irrigation demand is heaviest. Kansas and Texas stand out as the states where drawdown has been most severe over that roughly seven-decade span, with some local areas losing more than a hundred feet of saturated thickness.
What makes these numbers so alarming is the pace relative to recharge. The Ogallala refills slowly, fed primarily by limited rainfall percolating through thick layers of soil and rock. In the southern High Plains, natural recharge rates are a fraction of what farmers extract each year. Communities in Kansas are already feeling the consequences, with sinkholes opening in the earth as underground voids left by depleted water layers collapse. Reporting on this region has emphasized how the breadbasket identity of these states, and by extension America’s status as a food superpower, depends on water that is measurably running out, raising hard questions about how long current cropping patterns can be sustained.
California’s Central Valley Is Sinking Into Itself
California faces a different but equally severe version of the same problem. In the San Joaquin Valley, groundwater overpumping has caused aquifer-system compaction and land subsidence on a scale that is difficult to overstate. By 1970, more than one foot of subsidence had occurred across roughly 5,200 square miles, with local maximum sinking reaching approximately 28 feet. Modern drought periods have driven renewed pumping, restarting the cycle and creating fresh problems for canal capacity and freeboard along water delivery infrastructure. The result is a landscape where roads, bridges, and levees no longer sit at the elevations for which they were designed, compounding flood risk at the same time that water scarcity is intensifying.
A modeling effort using the Central Valley Hydrologic Model (CVHM2) estimates approximately 158 cubic kilometers of groundwater storage loss in the Central Valley from predevelopment to 2019, with roughly 15 percent of that loss classified as permanent because subsidence-related compaction has physically crushed the pore spaces that once held water. That distinction matters enormously for policy. Temporary depletion can theoretically be reversed through managed recharge or reduced pumping. Permanent compaction cannot. Once the clay layers compress, the aquifer’s total capacity shrinks forever, meaning even full recovery of water levels would leave less water underground than existed before development began. This permanent loss also undermines the promise of using depleted aquifers as storage banks for future managed recharge, because the very space needed to store imported or stormwater has already been destroyed.
The infrastructure toll is mounting in parallel. A November 2025 conveyance study from the California Department of Water Resources found that groundwater-driven subsidence has caused measurable reductions in the carrying capacity of major delivery systems, including the California Aqueduct and Friant-Kern Canal, with multi-foot sinking documented along specific reaches. When the canals that move water from where it is stored to where it is needed lose capacity, the knock-on effects ripple through farms, cities, and ecosystems that depend on those deliveries. Operators must either move less water or invest in expensive fixes such as canal lining, raising embankments, or building entirely new conveyance segments to bypass the worst subsidence zones.
California’s Regulatory Experiment Shows Mixed Results
California is the only major agricultural state that has attempted a statewide regulatory response through the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, known as SGMA. Under SGMA, local agencies must develop Groundwater Sustainability Plans and submit annual reports documenting water levels, subsidence, and well conditions. The state’s evaluation portal for plans serves as the canonical compliance hub where these documents are assessed and reporting requirements are tracked. No other state in the Ogallala footprint has anything comparable in scope or enforcement, leaving many of the nation’s most stressed aquifers to be managed through voluntary measures or fragmented local rules.
An October 2025 update from the Department of Water Resources offered a mixed snapshot. Reports from local agencies included shares of wells that were stable, rising, or declining between spring 2024 and spring 2025, alongside trends in dry wells and new well installations. Active subsidence was still being observed in specific hydrologic regions, according to the state progress summary. The data suggests that regulation is producing real but uneven gains. Some basins are stabilizing or even recovering modestly as growers fallow acreage, switch to less water-intensive crops, or invest in recharge projects. Others continue to sink, reflecting both legacy overdraft and the difficulty of cutting pumping quickly in areas where groundwater is the only reliable supply.
The Colorado River Basin Adds a Third Front
Beyond the Ogallala and California’s Central Valley, a third front in the groundwater crisis is emerging across the Colorado River Basin. Here, surface water shortages on the river itself are pushing cities and irrigation districts to lean harder on the aquifers that underlie Arizona, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Colorado and New Mexico. As declining flows and shrinking reservoirs constrain deliveries, groundwater becomes the fallback option, even in places where long-term overdraft is already documented. The pattern is familiar: when surface supplies falter, pumping ramps up, and the hidden costs of that shift (land subsidence, well interference, and water-quality degradation) often appear years later.
Scientific work coordinated by the national geological survey has highlighted how intertwined these surface and groundwater systems really are. In many reaches of the basin, rivers and aquifers exchange water seasonally, so heavy pumping can reduce baseflows and further stress ecosystems and downstream users. At the same time, climate-driven aridification is shrinking the snowpack that historically recharged both surface reservoirs and shallow groundwater. The result is a double squeeze, less natural input from the atmosphere and more human demand from below. Without coordinated management that treats rivers and aquifers as a single connected resource, efforts to stabilize one will tend to destabilize the other.
Irreversible Loss Demands a Different Kind of Planning
The thread connecting the High Plains, California’s Central Valley, and the Colorado River Basin is the growing recognition that not all groundwater depletion is created equal. Where pumping simply lowers water levels temporarily, aggressive conservation and recharge can, in principle, restore conditions. Where subsidence has compacted the aquifer matrix, however, the damage is effectively permanent. The reporting on drying wells across farm country underscores how communities often discover this distinction only after homes lose water or fields can no longer be irrigated at economically viable depths. By the time cracks appear in walls or canals, the lost storage cannot be engineered back into existence.
That reality should reorder priorities. Instead of treating groundwater as a reserve to be drawn down in bad years and refilled in good ones, planners need to identify which aquifer zones are most vulnerable to compaction and treat their remaining storage as a nonrenewable asset. Tools developed through regional monitoring of aquifer trends and site-specific subsidence studies can help map where the line between reversible and irreversible damage lies. With that information, states and local agencies can target stricter pumping limits, invest in recharge where it will truly pay off, and rethink land-use decisions, such as permanent orchards in highly stressed basins, that lock in long-term water demand. The alternative is to continue managing to short-term economic signals while quietly destroying the underground infrastructure that has made modern agriculture and urban growth in the American West possible.
More from Morning Overview
*This article was researched with the help of AI, with human editors creating the final content.
