If the numbers in this article are correct, more water goes to environmental purposes (ie. Protecting the Delta Smelt) than for Agricukture. http://www.nationalreview.com/article/416918/no-farmers-dont... I don't know if the numbers are correct, but this use of water was not included in the water you chart in he article.
TL;DR: No, more water does not go for environmental purposes than agriculture. California uses about as much water for growing just Alfala (used as food for cows, among other things) as it does for the whole Delta.
Don't worry its numbers are not correct. The most obvious example is they ignore Agricultures use of both rainwater and ground water. But, also environmental diversion often counts water several times as the same water passes several dams. Not that 80% is actually 100% true either, but it's much closer to the truth than 40%.
PS: "During a normal year, 30% of the state’s water supply comes from groundwater (underground water). In times of intense drought, groundwater consumption can rise to 60% or more." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_in_California
Doesn't it strike you as strange that he doesn't provide any source for this 50% claim, after providing 4 links in the previous paragraphs to what he claims are untruthful media narratives about agriculture's overuse of water. All those links make it look like a really well-sourced article, and yet he expects you to accept his major factual claim on nothing more than his say-so, because he holds political office.
