You are now in California and the U.S. category.

The California Water Data Challenge, announced on Friday, invites interested individuals and teams to develop apps, websites, data visualizations or other tools “that leverage publicly available data sets in novel ways to support creative solutions to California’s water challenges, as outlined in the Brown administration’s California Water Action Plan,” according to a joint release by several state agencies supporting the competition. Sponsors of the challenge include the State Water Board, the California Department of Water Resources, California Fish and Wildlife, California Government Operations Agency, and the California Department of Technology.

California agriculture, which had been plowing ahead in the face of a major drought, finally had an off year in 2015, according to data released recently by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The state’s farms brought in cash receipts of an estimated $47.1 billion (this will be revised in the months and years to come), down from a record $56.6 billion in 2014. Here’s how that looks in historical context, with the numbers adjusted for inflation.

On his first visit to Melbourne in 2009, Stanley Grant, a drought expert and professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of California, Irvine, had a question for his taxi driver. “How’s the drought?” he asked. “It’s about 28 percent,” came the reply. Grant was puzzled. But shortly afterward, they drove past an electronic road sign announcing that the city’s reservoirs were indeed at just 28 percent of capacity. The taxi driver knew the state of the reservoirs exactly.

A drop-off in Californians’ water conservation efforts seems to have leveled off, state officials said Tuesday, though residents still used more water during the month of September than they did the same month in 2015. The news comes one month after the State Water Resources Control Board expressed concern that savings were slipping. Earlier, the board had decided to relax the rules and allow cities to set their own numeric targets; most decided that none were needed. So when conservation starting slumping, critics said the board wasn’t taking aggressive enough action.