Dried up farms, a changed Rio Grande basin landscape and millions of dollars in economic losses are some of the probable fallout from warming temperatures and changing water supplies, according to a new study released Tuesday by two New Mexico researchers.

The study, "Climate Change and Its Implications for New Mexico's Water Resources and Economic Opportunities," was conducted by Brian Hurd, an agricultural economics professor at New Mexico State University and Julie Coonrod, professor of civil engineering at The University of New Mexico.

"Under current climate there is virtually no spare water in New Mexico," the authors write in the study. "Imagine a very plausible future, as this study attempts, of significantly less water and at the same time significantly more people."

As snowpacks melt earlier in warmer temperatures and reservoir levels fall, the pressure for farmers to lease or sell their water to cities will continue to mount, the study finds.

The resulting loss of farmlands could have devastating impacts on rural communities along the Rio Grande and wildlife that also depend on irrigated lands. "Substantial and transformational disruption to New Mexico's agricultural and rural economy can be expected in the future as climate changes," the authors report.

In addition, cities like Santa Fe and Albuquerque could find decreased water shares from the San Juan-Chama Project over multiple years, leading to water fights with tribes, neighboring towns and other water users, the study finds.

The study looked at past precipitation records, several climate models, population predictions and economic measures to tally how much the state could lose.

Evaluating the economic costs of less water is something new about this climate change study compared to previous ones that focused on New Mexico, according to Bill Hume, water policy adviser for Gov. Bill Richardson. It's difficult to figure out how the state can prepare for the economic impact of climate change without knowing where it will hit first, he said. "We can't create water. All we can do is move water from where it is to where it is needed," Hume said. "Agriculture will be most impacted."

The 47-page study focused primarily on losses in agriculture. While it makes up only 1.7 percent of the state's economy, direct and indirect losses from dried up farmlands would range from $15 million to $115 million by 2030 and more than $300 million by 2080.

Closed farms would impact other agriculture-related businesses such as farm supplies, equipment repair shops, farmers markets and feed stores.

Harder to measure is the economic cost of dried up green belts formed by irrigated farmland and acequias. "Irrigated lands support more than crops," Hurd said. "They provide habitat for wildlife, open space and scenic vistas for the backdrop to New Mexico's thriving art, tourist and recreation economies."

If reservoirs dry up completely, one scenario the study looked at happening by 2080, the cost in lost water recreation amounted to another $100 million.

And those costs assume everyone would happily share water shortages, the authors say. It doesn't take into account the costs of lawsuits over disputed water rights, almost certain to take place in a long drought. "This is perhaps the most contentious and undervalued of all the omissions in the assessment," the authors note, because "unresolved water rights' issues flourish in the Rio Grande."

The study isn't the first to throw cold water on state efforts to plan for water shortages. The authors say the last 100 years of water record, used by the state engineer and water planners for figuring out historic shortages, is overly optimistic on water supplies.

Contact Staci Matlock at 470-9843 or smatlock@sfnewmexican.com.