This article, written by my colleague Gail Wadsworth for the Civil Eats Blog, is very insightful. Nice job Gail! – Jeremy
When we think of “the rural,” California may not come to mind, though it’s estimated that 80 percent of the land area in California is rural.
Now the lines between urban and rural there are blurring. California faces an unusual challenge: productive agricultural regions are growing cities in addition to fruits, vegetables and grains. This is causing a change in federal classification which makes it harder for truly rural areas to get needed government funding.
California’s counties are vast–San Bernardino County, for example, stretches over 20,000 square miles–that’s larger than nine states. But if you spread the population of San Bernardino County over the area equally, the population density would be sparse at about 100 people per square mile. However, because there are cities in the county with more than 50,000 inhabitants, the county as a whole is designated metropolitan.
The change to metropolitan status has on-the-ground repercussions. For California health agencies and non-profits, for example, this redefining of rural areas has resulted in the inability to apply for funding that is channeled to rural regions. This, in turn, results in the decline of public health services, rural development and food access for rural residents. Much of rural California is now more populous, more Hispanic, but less healthy, poorer and less well educated than urban areas. The conclusion is inescapable: the divide between California’s rich and poor is becoming ever wider.