That is an ignorant and short sighted viewpoint. There's all sorts of legal precedent tangling this up. While the math of where the water goes is straightforward you can't just invalidate prior agreements and rules and whatnot without going through the process otherwise you just cause more problems because you send a message and set a precedent that the state will not honor its own rules. In the long term that is very damaging.
If the circumstances significantly changed in an unforeseen way since farmers were given water rights, many in 1800s, the State should be able to curtail those rights in the public interest. I do agree that there must be proportionality and due process, of course.
It’s complex: agricultural water usage is by giant corporations with expensive lawyers. Home water usage doesn’t get defended by an all-star legal team.
