In The News

May, 2009

Longfin smelt doesn't qualify for federal listing
By Kate Campbell, Ag Alert

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service finds the longfin smelt population in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta doesn't meet the legal criteria for listing under the federal Endangered Species Act.

The service said last week, however, it will initiate a broader evaluation of the species throughout its range, which includes San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, as well as other West Coast estuaries, extending as far north as Alaska.

The petition to list the longfin smelt as threatened or endangered was filed in August 2007. The petition asserted that the Bay-Delta longfin population is physically and reproductively isolated from populations farther north, that it's genetically different and lives in a unique ecological setting.

The petition also claimed that reduced outflow caused by water exports from the delta have contributed to decline of the longfin smelt.

The FWS decided, however, that because some Bay-Delta longfin smelt migrate into the Pacific Ocean and can travel up the coast to breed with longfin farther north, they fail to meet the criteria for protection as a distinct population segment.

Commenting on the FWS findings, Kari Fisher, associate counsel for the California Farm Bureau Federation Natural Resources and Environmental Division, said, "This decision highlights the need for sound science before a determination on the status of a species is made."

Longfin smelt is a species that lives mostly in coastal estuaries, but breeds in fresh water and can live in the ocean. It grows to about five inches in length and tolerates wide ranges of salinity. It generally has a two-year life cycle, spawning from November to June in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and then traveling with currents downstream to Suisun and San Pablo bays.

Population indicators for longfin smelt in the delta have been low since 2000, but historically have fluctuated, with low numbers often occurring in dry years.

A close cousin of the already protected delta smelt, the longfin smelt occasionally appears in the vicinity of the water export facilities in the south delta that serve the State Water Project and the federal Central Valley Project.

If the longfin smelt had been listed as a unique species and its survival deemed threatened under the ESA, that could have posed additional management problems for project operators and those who depend on water supplies from the delta.

Fisher noted that while the longfin smelt has been declining in the delta, it is an abundant species whose range includes 1,900 miles along the Pacific Coast of North America, ranging from Alaska in the north to California in the south.

California Farm Bureau Federation pointed out in a letter to the FWS on the proposed ESA listing that recent scientific studies do not support the assertion by environmental groups that longfin smelt in the delta or San Francisco Bay are a distinct subspecies.

The Bay Institute, Center Biological Diversity and Natural Resources Defense Council petition to list the Bay-Delta population of the longfin smelt as a distinct subspecies warranting protection relied on a study from the 1990s that had noted some genetic differences between a Washington State population of longfin smelt and the Bay-Delta population of the species.

The FWS's recent decision, however, found that the comparison between a landlocked Washington State population and the estuarine population of the California Bay-Delta was inappropriate and inconclusive as to the Bay-Delta population's genetic "distinctness" from other populations within the species' larger geographic range.

A 1992 petition sought to list the entire longfin smelt population, but the FWS determined in 1994 that the species as a whole did not warrant protection.

Farm Bureau's letter to the FWS noted that the petition to list the longfin smelt as threatened or endangered focused "myopically and disproportionately on a single possible factor in the longfin smelt's recent decline—namely, operations of the State Water Project and Central Valley Project export facilities in the south delta.

"This approach attempts erroneously to saddle a single source of possible harm with responsibility to mitigate for the effects of all harms," Farm Bureau said in its comment letter on the proposed listing. In addition, Farm Bureau's letter advised the FWS to adopt a broader view of the problems facing the delta, its habitat and species. Best available science shows a wide range of causes contributing to declines in both delta and longfin smelt, Farm Bureau told federal officials.

The petition to list the longfin smelt had maintained that proposals to increase water exports present a grave and immediate threat to the species.

"The reality is, of course, that the CVP and SWP pumps are more constrained today than at any point in the past," Fisher said. "This represents a dramatic decrease in exports and, without some significant change in water management or water conveyance, it's unclear when or if exports will return to anything resembling previous levels, let alone increase.

"Meanwhile, water users throughout the state are in the grips of a regulatory drought that shows no signs of relenting, at least for the foreseeable future," she said. "Obviously, petitioners' allegations of imminently increasing water exports ignored the actual and very dire situation on the ground."

Fisher said that while the federal decision not to list the longfin smelt as threatened or endangered is encouraging, in March the California Fish and Game Commission voted to protect longfin smelt as a threatened species under the California Endangered Species Act.

While the state listing of the longfin smelt does not apply directly to the federal Central Valley Project, the state listing may lead to further restrictions on operations of the State Water Project.

"That could further erode water supply reliability overall," Fisher said. "And, the legal effect of the state's up-listing of the delta smelt is that the species is now considered a species in serious danger of becoming extinct."

She said that is perceived as a more dire condition than if the species were deemed likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future.

March, 2009

In An Unusual Step, State Board Warns Water-Right Holders
By Ching Lee, Ag Alert

Farmers and ranchers who hold water right permits and licenses could lose access to the state's rivers and creeks this year if current drought conditions do not improve, the State Water Resources Control Board warned.

In a letter that went out in late February to some 7,400 water right holders in the Sacramento, San Joaquin and Russian rivers and the Central Coast and Tule Lake watersheds, the state water board said unless there is sufficient additional rainfall this season, no water will be available for many surface water diverters.

California's water supply has dwindled due to three consecutive dry years. And while recent rainfall provided some relief, the storms were not enough to lift the state's current drought status, with reservoirs far from capacity and the snowpack still below average.

The letter from the board said when there is not enough water for all users, allocations will be made in order of water right priority. In addition, it noted that it might even be necessary this year to curtail more senior water rights, such as riparian rights or pre-1914 rights, which pre-date legislation for appropriating water and do not require a permit from the state water board.

"This is notice to direct diverters that they are in the same boat as the farmers who get water service through contracts with the big State Water Project and the Central Valley Project," said Chris Scheuring, managing counsel for the California Farm Bureau Federation Natural Resources and Environmental Division.

"Just about all classes and types of agricultural water users are going to have to deal with this drought and are likely facing a very difficult water year," he said.

Not since 1988, when California was facing a similar drought, did the state water board send out warning letters to water right holders. That year, the water picture eventually improved and no curtailments were ever issued, said Bill Rukeyser, spokesman for the board.

The last time the board issued actual curtailment notices on a widespread basis was in 1977, considered the driest year in modern state history. Even then, Rukeyser said the most senior water right holders were not affected by the drought. But that doesn't mean they are safe from cutbacks this year, he warned.

"A lot of people who are high up the list may have the feeling of, 'Oh, it'll never get that bad,'" he said. "That's why we very purposely put in the letter, 'Be aware if things work out badly this year, we may have to get very high up the list.'"

He said the board sent the warning letters out in February to give agricultural water users enough time to make planting decisions or alter their normal cropping plans.

Scheuring said the letter is fair warning, particularly to water right holders who have lower priority, that the state board may later in the year tell them that there's no water available for them this year. For the more senior water right holders whose rights are not directly subject to the state board's permitting jurisdiction, Scheuring said they are also warned that if the drought worsens, they too may have to curtail diversions, although that will be more complicated and less likely.

"In my view, the letter is prudent by the state board," he said. "It hopefully is going to lead to some sound management decisions going forward about water for all classes of surface water users. And it rightly recognizes the shortages are going to be dealt with in order of seniority of the right."

Sib Fedora, a walnut farmer in Sutter County and president of the Meridian Farms Water Co., a water district, said the water board's letter did not come as a surprise because he was well aware of the state's dire water outlook. He noted that he has received similar warning letters in the past, specifically recalling the one in the 1970s. This time around, he's more aware and prepared, he said. He drilled a well on his farm a couple of years ago so that he could have access to water when he needs it.

"We went into this with our eyes wide open, thinking this could happen," he said. "We planned our cropping based on a dry year, so we made that change last fall."

Rukeyser said the warnings in the letter should have no effect on the prospect of water marketing, provided there is actual water to sell, and that would depend on Mother Nature. He noted that the governor has instructed the state water board to expedite handling and consideration of requests for water transfers.

If water shortages get bad enough that even junior water right holders are asked to cut back, then those with pre-1914 water rights may have "a pretty good market for water because they're the only ones left with some water," Scheuring noted.

But there shouldn't be any long-term implications to the state's letter considering how seldom it issues these warnings, he said. If the state receives adequate rainfall next year or even the rest of this year, "this letter may turn out to be not that important," he added.

Donn Zea, president and chief executive officer of the Northern California Water Association, said the letter should serve as a reminder to all California water users that the state needs to fix its antiquated and broken water system.

"We're living off the same loaf of bread that we were living off of in the early '60s," he said. "There are more demands on the system than ever before, but we've not elevated the system to meet those demands." Taking water away from agriculture is not a solution, he added, and taking water from one part of the state to feed another is merely putting a Band-Aid on a much more serious problem.

"It just denies or ignores that problem that we've got to build more water storage," he said.

February, 2009

Drought Keeps State Water Project Allocation Critically Low
By Jeanne Varga, Kern County Water Agency

The water supply crisis facing Kern County and other parts of the state became even more critical today. California’s severe drought has prevented the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) from increasing the State Water Project (SWP) water delivery allocation any higher than 15 percent.

Each year, DWR issues a conservative initial allocation estimate that typically is increased as the water year progresses. However, this year, according to DWR, recent rain storms have not been significant enough to replenish reservoirs or increase the 15 percent allocation. SWP allocations have never been this low since DWR began allocating water in 1968, except on two other occasions: 10 percent in February 1991 and briefly in 1993, before estimates were later increased.

“This news from DWR is yet another devastating blow to people, farms and businesses in California,” said Adrienne J. Mathews, Kern County Water Agency Board of Directors President. “The incredibly dry period over the past two years combined with recent regulatory restrictions have resulted in a loss of jobs and millions of dollars in revenue, with no end in sight.”

In such a busy world, marketing and branding are valuable tools to catch customer's attention and hold it. Some agencies have developed local and regional branded landscaping programs. The state and the federal governments and others have developed statewide and national programs as well.

Some argue that the way to solve the ongoing water shortage is to become better at conserving it. Kern County farmers rank among the most efficient irrigators in the nation, and water conservation has been promoted and practiced locally for many years. But water conservation cannot solve the water supply crisis California now faces.

To offset droughts and court orders affecting water supplies, California must (1) construct a canal to deliver water around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta’s fragile levee system; and (2) construct additional water storage facilities. “These actions will be part of our legacy for current and future California generations,” added Mathews.

November, 2008

Branding Landscapes
By Judy Colvin and Julie Saare-Edmonds, DWR

Newspaper headlines capture the reality of water shortages in California on a daily basis nowadays. This year people are being asked to save water and water agencies are updating their drought contingency plans and rejuvenating water conservation programs. Newer and catchier water conservation slogans are being aired on the radio to encourage residents to use less water indoors and outdoors. One way water suppliers get the word out is an effective marketing tool called branding. A brand should be easy to remember, easy to recognize and translate well into various languages and demographics. Brands should also convey the benefits and value of the program featured.

Today, outdoor water use efficiency programs are getting extreme makeovers to appeal to customers who embrace green living. For example, innovative local and regional landscape programs are popping up across the state and grabbing homeowner's attention. Homeowners are responding to their water provider rebates to replace old irrigation clocks with "smart" controllers and getting advice to redesign their yards with lower maintenance and lower water using plants. Many water providers host gardening contests and give customers plant lists to help them choose the right plants for beautiful water efficient gardens. Some water providers are able to give their customers interactive gardening software that answers all sorts of gardening questions.

Water purveyors, city and county government agencies (including water, sewer, wastewater, water recycling, storm water, land use, parks, and planning) have teamed up to develop new landscape programs with regional and holistic approaches. A regional landscape program can be described as an interagency alliance to promote a consistent sustainable landscape program that includes plant lists, design criteria and guidelines, certification or recognition programs for landscape contractors, and best management practices. These programs utilize existing landscape ordinances and guidelines adopted by local agencies. This kind of regional coordination can have direct environmental, economic, and social benefits for business and residential communities, and integrate practices to solve multiple resource management issues.

In such a busy world, marketing and branding are valuable tools to catch customer's attention and hold it. Some agencies have developed local and regional branded landscaping programs. The state and the federal governments and others have developed statewide and national programs as well.

Examples of such "brand name" landscape programs include California Friendly Landscapes, Bay Friendly Landscaping, River Friendly Landscaping, and Lush & Efficient. Many cities and counties also promote and specify plant lists within their own landscape ordinances. On a national level, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promotes a sustainable program called Greenscapes. Wildfire-prone areas have developed plant lists and fire prevention landscaping practices for their citizens too. Some statewide programs, though not exclusively landscape programs, have been very successful in getting the message out to the public. Some state programs and campaigns include "Flex Your Power at the Tap" and "Why 100 Feet?"

Marketing, public outreach, and education programs should occur throughout the calendar year, not only seasonally, and deliver a coordinated water efficiency message. The best marketing campaign sends the message that water should and can be used year round, not just in the summer or during a drought. The long-term impacts of such landscape marketing will be measureable and successful. Homeowners can easily implement the ideals and objectives of these programs and the professionally oriented programs often emphasize that healthy businesses can go along with efficient landscapes.

Beyond being the "trendy" thing to do, these programs expose all water users to examples of beautiful water-efficient landscapes in their own communities. Seeing is believing!

October, 2008

New Water Year Brings a Grim Picture
By Kate Campbell, Ag Alert

After a summer in which drought conditions and court rulings combined to cause fallowing of fields and abandonment of crops, San Joaquin Valley water managers say there's little reason for optimism in the new water year.

The new state water year began Oct. 1, but officials have warned it will take several good water years to replenish California's shriveled supply. The federal Central Valley Project is carrying over about 3.9 million acre-feet of water, 35 percent of system capacity, into 2009.

The 15-year carry-over average, however, is 6.7 million acre-feet. Carry-over storage in CVP facilities represents the combined amount of water remaining at the end of the water year in Shasta, Trinity, Folsom and New Melones reservoirs and the federal share of the joint federal/state San Luis Reservoir.

Those participating in a mid-September water tour conducted by the California Farm Water Coalition found water storage at San Luis Reservoir at just 12 percent of capacity.

"What was made clear during the tour is the system's shortcomings, given today's demands on the water system, including the effect of population growth and environmental needs," said Danny Merkley, California Farm Bureau water resources director.

"Most concerning is the ability to replenish off-stream storage facilities like San Luis Reservoir," he said. "Right now, it's a mud hole. Our supply cushions and safety valves have been taken away."

"We're looking at a circumstance today where we have about the same amount of water in storage as we did in the single worst recorded drought year in state history, 1977," Jason Peltier, chief deputy general manager of Westlands Water District, told tour participants.

"But now we have twice the number of people and that makes (water managers) pretty nervous," Peltier said.

Westlands buys water from the CVP, which took the unusual step of reducing water allocations this year. Water supplies had already been constrained for people south of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta because of dry weather and a court decision reserving more water for a protected fish, the delta smelt. In June, citing "extremely dry" conditions, the CVP told its farm customers it could supply only 40 percent of contract water, down from its earlier projection of 45 percent. The cut forced some farmers to abandon crops they had already planted.

"If we have a critically dry year, we could end up with a zero allocation next year," Peltier said. "The modeling shows it can happen, and that's before factoring in the effects of court-ordered pumping restrictions to protect the delta smelt."

As farmers in the western San Joaquin Valley face that grim prospect, those in the eastern valley brace for what water managers say would be an "unprecedented" situation.

Millerton Lake, behind Friant Dam, now holds about 40 percent of its capacity, lower than average for this time of year. The facility is primarily used for flood controlh--but that could change next year.

Farmers on the east side of the valley have been buying about 1.5 million acre-feet of water through the federal water project, which is delivered through canals operated by the Friant Water Authority. They also rely on a coordinated program that includes groundwater use.

"The problems we face are not only the lack of precipitation above Millerton Lake in the upper San Joaquin River basin, but also the status of the delta and restrictions on water transfers," said Mario Santoyo, Friant Water Users Authority assistant general manager.

"Basically we got through 2008, but the hydrologic conditions are such that we expect a drought season coming up," he said.

Downstream from Friant Dam, the Lower Tule River Irrigation District supplies irrigation water to about 100,000 acres of farmland, about a third of it in permanent crops. One of the largest irrigation districts in California, the district uses a combination of groundwater and supplies from the CVP.

"If 2009 ends up looking anything like 2008, there's a good chance the CVP may have to make exchange contractor water available from the San Joaquin River that's being stored behind Millerton Dam," said Dan Vink, Lower Tule River Irrigation District general manager.

"It would be unprecedented for us to take water from the dam and not from the delta," Vink said. "If it were to happen, it would have a significant effect on local water supplies."

Santoyo agrees: "That has never happened before in our history. We hope it doesn't happen, but it illustrates how bad things are."

The Kern County Water Agency is the second largest customer of the State Water Project and agency officials say the outlook for the 2009 water year is as bleak for them, too. The agency relies on water transferred from the delta for about a third of the surface water used in Kern County.

"In 2008, which was classified as critically dry, our allocation from the state water project was cut to 35 percent of our contract amount," said Curtis Creel, water resources manager for Kern County Water Agency. "Our total county average has been about 70 percent in past years, so we had a pretty significant amount of water to make up."

The agency participates, along with a handful of other rural water districts, in the Kern Water Bank. Located in the southwestern San Joaquin Valley, the underground facility can store 1 million acre-feet of water on a long-term basis. It's the largest direct-recharge water-banking project in the world.

It's also the reason the impacts of water shortages weren't more devastating in 2008 for farmers and communities in Kern County. Even so, Kern County crop losses in 2008 due to drought totaled about $70 million.

"We were able to make up much of this year's shortage by relying on stored groundwater and this advanced planning helped significantly," Creel said. "But that does not mean there weren't significant crop losses due to fallowing and abandonment."

Creel says farmers cut back on their water use and that rationing by districts was widespread.

"We believe it is possible in 2009 that the state water project may announce allocations of 10 percent to 15 percent of allotment," Creel said. "At that level of reduction, we won't be able to extract water fast enough to cover the shortfall."

He said it's possible permanent plantings of orchards and vineyards would have to be removed or abandoned under that scenario, causing significant losses for farmers in the agency's service area.

Mike Wade, executive director of the California Farm Water Coalition, said 2008 included heightened activity in the water transfer market and that groundwater pumping increasingly became a necessity to finish crops or protect permanent plantings.

"Many farmers have struggled to make it through this year's dismal irrigation season," Wade said. "More than 100,000 acres of cropland was fallowed and more than 1,000 full-time jobs were lost."

Orland almond grower Greg Overton, second vice president of Glenn County Farm Bureau, was part of the Leadership Farm Bureau class that participated in the tour and called it "an eye opener."

He said given the dire water outlook, it's clear new water storage and conveyance facilities are needed.

September, 2008

ACWA Comments on Report Regarding Ag Water Use
Courtesy of Association of California Water Agencies

Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) Executive Director Timothy Quinn issued the following statement regarding a new Pacific Institute report on agricultural water use efficiency:

"We agree that California must invest in water use efficiency in all sectors and at every level. It is imperative for our future. But this latest report from Pacific Institute does not offer practical approaches to achieve increased water use efficiency. Further, the report sidesteps the most pressing issue before us -- how to improve the sustainability of our water supply infrastructure so it can work for the environment as well as our economy.

California must find workable ways to significantly increase our investments in water use efficiency and local resource development. But the command-and-control, heavy-handed regulatory approach to dictating water use decisions suggested in the report has little chance to succeed. The Delta's downward spiral will not be solved by mandating farmers to produce certain crops instead of others. Crop decisions are based on real-world market demands, not academic studies. Growers have a long record of responding to price signals, and they will continue to do so without the specter of water rights proceedings or other command-and-control approaches. Replacing reliance on market forces to make these decisions with centralized regulation is simply a bad idea.

The Pacific Institute report completely ignores some of the most pressing problems facing California resource managers. ACWA believes the best way to restore the Delta while keeping our economy intact is to modernize our water storage and conveyance system as part of a comprehensive solution that invests in every water management tool at our disposal, including water use efficiency. Two important public processes now under way -- the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force and the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan -- have concluded that the current physical system for storing and conveying water does not work for the environment or the economy. Does California need to do more to improve water use efficiency? Absolutely. But it also needs to fix an ailing water system that poses a direct threat to our environment and our economy."

July, 2008

Peripheral canal around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is the best strategy for California
Courtesy of Kern County Water Agency

The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) released another report on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta). Its 2007 report concluded that the Delta is no longer sustainable and the need for a new Delta strategy is urgent and critical. The latest PPIC report evaluated four water export alternatives and concluded that a peripheral canal to carry water around the Delta is the most promising strategy to balance two critical goals: reviving a threatened ecosystem and ensuring a high-quality water supply for Californians.

This report makes several recommendations:

1. Move away from levees as the primary means of managing Delta land and water.
2. Transition from through-Delta pumping to other export strategies.
3. Build a peripheral canal to satisfy both economic and environmental objectives.
4. Actively plan and prepare for a changing Delta ecosystem.
5. Develop a new framework for governance and regulation of the Delta.

In early July, U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger proposed what has been called "a compromise plan" to the California Legislature to update California's water system by increasing storage, improving conveyance, protecting the Delta ecosystem and promoting greater water conservation. The water plan includes a $9.3 billion water bond. The two PPIC reports underscore the importance of acting now to develop a comprehensive water plan for California that includes resolution of the Delta issues. As stated in the latest PPIC analysis, "...the cost of inaction is too high to wait much longer. Done right, as part of a balanced, governance infrastructure, and operation solution, a peripheral canal offers the best promise for successfully managing the inevitable transitions of the Delta."

In the coming months, California can implement actions to ensure the long-term viability of the state, but it will require focus, courage and expediency. "We simply cannot pass up this incredible opportunity to demonstrate the type of leadership shown 50 years ago, when California's existing water systems were initiated," said Peter Frick, President of the Kern County Water Agency Board of Directors. "We must act now to ensure the long-term viability of the state."

February, 2008

Water stakeholders weigh in on Delta plans
By Ching Lee, Ag Alert

Debate on how to fix the ailing Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and California's water supply problems will intensify this year as stakeholders from around the state weigh in on the best approach to protect the delta ecosystem while ensuring reliable water deliveries to the 25 million Californians and 7 million acres of irrigated farmland that depend on delta water.

To help guide the debate is a 70-page report released in December by the governor-appointed, seven-member panel known as the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force. This committee developed 12 recommendations and several near-term actions that are intended to serve as a framework for a more detailed plan due in October.

While the report's sweeping proposals attempt to address the needs and concerns of a variety of interests, stakeholders in different parts of the state remain divided over key issues that pit those who receive water directly from the Sacramento River and delta and those that depend on state and federal pumping facilities in the south delta and the state's extensive, man-made water distribution system to the south.

The panel agreed that repairing the estuary's health and maintaining a reliable water supply are equally important. To achieve these goals, it recommends that more water conservation is needed, as well as possible reductions in the amount of water taken out of the delta, or at least changes to when that water is exported.

The report also mentions the need to build new facilities to move and store water, with dual conveyance as a preferred direction. Such a system would pump water both through and around the delta, an approach that state water officials hope would protect endangered fish such as the delta smelt.

In addition, the task force recommends creating a new governing structure that would have complete authority over delta levee standards, ecosystem restoration and water diversions and exports. As proposed, this new entity would have secure funding and the power to impose user fees.

For stakeholders south of the delta, one of the biggest sticking points in the report is the notion that water diversions from the watershed may have to be reduced, particularly when one of the recommendations also calls for investments in a new multi-billion-dollar conveyance system, which south-delta stakeholders support.

"Reducing those exports means you reduce the ability to pay for the kind of infrastructure fixes recommended by the report," said Brent Walthall, assistant general manager of Kern County Water Agency. "It seems contrary to logic that you would fix the delta with a new conveyance facility that is intended to allow you to continue to export enough water to pay for that facility but then reduce the exports."

Other water groups, including State Water Contractors and Westlands Water District, also have been critical of the Delta Vision report, saying it makes premature judgments about how much water a new and improved system can deliver to its users. Both are pushing for new conveyance.

Tom Birmingham, general manager of Westlands Water District, which represents west valley growers who rely almost entirely on delta water, said in a statement that the public will not support paying for a system if they're going to wind up getting less water in the end.

"Not only is there no basis for this 'spend more to get less' assertion, from a political perspective, it would make passage of a bond issue virtually impossible," he said.

However, many stakeholders in and north of the delta are concerned that building a canal around the delta, also known as an isolated conveyance facility, could result in a water grab by the south state. California voters rejected plans for a conceptually similar canal back in 1982 known as a "peripheral canal."

Topper van Loben Sels, a north-delta farmer who vice chairs the Delta Protection Commission and is on the board of directors of the North Delta Conservancy, said he would rather see the hydrology of the existing through-delta facility modified to better protect fish species and improve how water is routed to the pumps.

He is also in favor of building more water storage facilities so that southern users could have access to "new" water from the system. Delta stakeholders fear that a canal that bypasses the delta would allow the south state to take water from the system when there is not an adequate supply, thereby damaging the ecosystem and the delta's water quality.

"We have to create new storage upstream, more groundwater storage and more above-ground storage downstream so we can take the water out of the delta when it doesn't do damage to the ecosystem, when it doesn't do damage to the in-delta agricultural interests," van Loben Sels said.

"Without it, people are going to be faced with the court systems running the water system for the state of California, which is a very sad state of affairs," he added, referring to last year's court ruling in which a federal judge imposed limits on how much water can be pumped south through the delta due to declining fish populations.

As a farmer who also lives and recreates in the north delta, van Loben Sels said it is imperative that the Delta Vision implementation plan include strategies that would protect and enhance water quality, levees, delta recreation, upstream flood control structures and contracted water rights.

For Laura King Moon, assistant general manager of the State Water Contractors, whose 27 member agencies include a number of irrigation districts and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, that plan must also include new conveyance options for managing the delta.

"This is a key and central component for any comprehensive fix for the state's broken water system," she said. "New conveyance facilities will ensure that we have a reliable water supply for the state and will also help protect the delta's valuable ecosystem."

Whether it's going to be an isolated facility or a continued operation of a through-delta conveyance, Ryan Broddrick, executive director of Northern California Water Association, said he wants to make sure that the operating rules don't rely upon Sacramento water agencies having to alter water diversions in a way that is not integrated with the needs of the Sacramento Valley.

For those in the west delta, maintaining water quality is another huge issue, said Mike Reagan, a Solano County supervisor. Specifically, the concern is about salinity intrusion in the western part of the Suisun Bay, which Reagan said the Delta Vision report did not adequately address.

By not building water storage needed upstream, he said, more freshwater will be exported out of the Suisun Bay, doing potential damage to the ecology, agriculture and communities in the western delta.

Another issue of concern for Reagan is the Delta Vision report's near-term recommendation to acquire development rights in floodplains to prevent urbanization. This could remove thousands of acres of prime farmland out of production, at least seasonally, to be flooded.

While it is important to encourage good land-use decisions, Reagan said the plan doesn't go far enough to mitigate impacts on neighboring farmers who would have water intrusion seepage into their properties or local governments that would experience economic losses due to farmlands being taken out of production or removed from the tax rolls.

But the one Delta Vision recommendation that has raised red flags on all sides of the debate is the idea of creating a new, independent governing body that would have total authority over management of the delta water supply. Some fear that such a "super agency" will usurp land use authority from local governments and diminish the responsibilities of many existing agencies.

"The proposed governance structure is so large and so broad that it will bring into the process many opponents who otherwise would not be in opposition to the report's recommendations," said Walthall.

Reagan characterized the idea of this new governance structure as "a can of worms" that is likely to collide with opposition from local governments.

"From a local government perspective, obviously what we have is some entity arrogating to itself land use authority over lands now managed from local government's hands," he said. "I don't see the League of Cities or the California Association of Counties rolling over for that."

The Blue Ribbon Task Force identified excessive fragmentation, duplication and lack of strong centralized authority as a fundamental obstacle to effective management of the delta. With so many existing interrelated governing bodies that have different constitutional and legislative obligations, however, Broddrick said he's not sure putting another governance structure on the top of that will resolve any conflicts.

"If you're going to establish a different governance structure and consolidate, make sure that they have both the authority and the financial wherewithal to accomplish that authority, and that authority is not dependent upon a process that is so onerous that we spend millions and millions of dollars on process and pennies on implementation," he said.

Linda Fiack, executive director of the Delta Protection Commission, also questioned the need for a new governing structure. She said she would rather see existing entities such as the Delta Protection Commission, which has diverse stakeholder representation, be used and built upon.

"Our perspective is that there are some good existing models that can be looked at without creating something new," said Fiack. "You could look at all those models and determine what's lacking and then enhance the Delta Protection Commission to accomplish a governance structure."

Despite such outstanding concerns about the Delta Vision report, Chris Scheuring, managing counsel for California Farm Bureau Federation Natural Resources and Environmental Division, said it is important to "keep moving forward to address outstanding issues and put actual detail to the concepts."

"Any solution to California's water supply problems must begin, first and foremost, with additional surface water storage. Beyond that, Delta Vision is trying to get to a perfect solution set that protects the environment, improves water supply reliability to users currently dependent upon the delta for conveyance and respects the historical agricultural landscape of the delta," Scheuring said. "A tall order to be sure, but one it seems stubborn optimists and reluctant skeptics alike must shoot for in the next year and beyond."

December, 2007

Huell Howser Visits The Kern County Water Bank
Courtesy of Kern County Water Agency

Huell Howser's visit to the Kern Water Bank Huell Howser came to Kern County on November 6, 2007 to film another segment in the "California's Water" series, which was produced by the Association of California Water Agencies and contributing member agencies for public television. The latest segment is entitled "Groundwater Banking: California's Water Savings Account." The Kern County Water Agency is a sponsor of the multi-part series for public television, which explores California's water resources and the complex system of natural and man-made features that have allowed growing communities, productive farms, industry and ecosystems to co-exist in a state that receives little or nor rain for months at a time. More information on the series is available here.

September, 2007

Climate Change Imperative: Protecting & Conserving California's Water Resources
By Lester Snow, DWR

Although scientists have documented that our climate has been changing for some time, only recently has the general public begun to understand the significance of the changes looming in both the short and long term. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, effects that we see or expect in California include: a reduction in snowpack; reductions in average annual runoff as well as shifts in seasonal timing; and more extensive or extreme weather events (deeper droughts and higher flood peaks).

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, now a nationally recognized spokesman for climate change action, recently summarized the importance of California in a speech he gave in Georgetown, "What we do in California has unbelievable impact and it has consequences. As a matter of fact, when you look at the globe, California is a little spot, but the kind of power of influence that we have on the rest of the world is an equivalent of a whole huge continent."

The IPCC conveys that some impacts are dependent no so much on climate change itself but on the vulnerability (and adaptive capacity) of a system or region to that change. The report recommends that more adaptive action is needed, emphasizing a portfolio approach. For water, a portfolio approach means developing diverse tools to provide a reliable supply, including water storage - both groundwater and surface - water recycling, desalination, and of course, conservation. Such a portfolio approach is already a fundamental part of the California Water Plan Update, as well as our Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) grant programs.

Our approach to fighting global climate change must be two-pronged: mitigation, meaning reduction in the greenhouse gas emissions which accelerate global warming and climate variability, and adaptation, referring to the ways in which our culture and infrastructure will have to change in order to successfully manage the extremes that global warming threatens.

As one of many water management tools, conservation is uniquely suited to address the concerns associated with climate variability for the very reason that it can reduce GHGs, but also help us to adapt to reduced (or at best more varied) supplies. Conserving one acre foot of water (enough to serve two families of four for one year) reduces GHG emissions by approximately one metric ton.

California's population is expected to grow to 48 million by 2030. This growth increases demand for both water and energy. Water conservation, while preparing our state to adapt to impending water supply uncertainty, is also a major tool for coping with tremendous population growth.

Recently passed by the Legislature, The Global Warming Act of 2006 (AB32) sets target GHG reduction goals for California. As a member of the Governor's Climate Action Team, DWR has put forth an early goal of increasing water use efficiency through grants. DWR will adopt standards for projects and programs funded by recently passed water bonds that will require consideration of water use efficiency in construction and operation.

Already, it seems shocking that just one year ago the reality of climate change was still widely debated. It has been said that hindsight is always 20/20, but focusing on past errors will not help us to prepare for changes ahead. Climate change only underscores the importance of the IRWM planning approach in general, and the value of conservation can help us to meet future water needs and reduce GHG emissions and will result in greater water supply reliability.

The challenge could not be more clearly defined, and the solution is within reach: We must redouble our efforts to conserve water.

August, 2007

Gov. Schwarzenegger and Sen. Feinstein Meet with Experts on Delta Fix & CA Water Infrastructure

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Senator Dianne Feinstein met in mid-August to hear presentations by California's top water experts working to fix the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta. Experts and stakeholders discussed plans to improve California's water infrastructure and fix the deteriorating Delta, which supplies clean water to 25 million people in Southern California.

At the meeting, the Governor and Senator brought together state water experts and more than 30 stakeholders representing water agencies, environmental organizations, businesses, labor groups, the agriculture industry, various municipalities and Delta landowners to discuss California's water future. Presentations were made by the Department of Water Resources, Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force and CALFED, followed by an interactive question and answer session.

"A healthy Delta is vital to our environment and it is vital to our economy today and far into the future. And that's why I appointed the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force, to develop a sustainable management program for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta," said Governor Schwarzenegger.

"Senator Feinstein and I agree that we need a long-term, sustainable Delta fix that improves conveyance, restores the ecosystem and increases water storage and conservation. We cannot wait until we have a Katrina-like disaster to attack this problem. Twenty five million Californians rely on the Delta for clean, safe water. It also irrigates hundreds of thousands of acres of Central Valley farmland and it is the backbone of California's $32 billion agricultural industry."

"The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is on the brink of disaster. And the decline of the Delta Smelt is the canary in the coal mine," Senator Feinstein said. "We must take action to prevent catastrophe in the future. I've been working to help strengthen California's water infrastructure for well over a decade now. And I look forward to working with Governor Schwarzenegger to develop immediate and sustainable solutions for the future of the Delta. The stakes are simply too high to fail."

The meeting took place on the same day as an evidentiary hearing began in the Fresno courtroom of Judge Oliver Wanger relating to the health of the delta smelt. The judge's ruling, expected later this year, will have significant impacts on the Delta and state water deliveries to Southern California, the Central Valley and other parts of the state.

Earlier this year, Senator Feinstein endorsed Governor Schwarzenegger's $5.9 billion comprehensive water infrastructure plan. Building on his Strategic Growth Plan from last year, the Governor introduced the plan in January that invests $4.5 billion to develop additional surface and groundwater storage, so we can protect communities against flooding and capture water from storms and snowmelt run-off to supply cities, farmers and business with water during drought conditions. The plan also includes $1 billion toward restoration of the Delta, including development of a new conveyance system, $250 million to support restoration projects on the Klamath, San Joaquin and Sacramento rivers and the Salton Sea project and $200 million for grants to California communities to help conserve enough water for about 400,000 families.

Last year, the Governor directed the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force to develop a Delta management plan. The task force will present its findings and recommendations by January 1, 2008 and its Strategic Plan by October 31, 2008. The Bay Delta Conservation Plan is also underway, being developed with broad participation from water agencies, environmental organizations and local representatives. The $1 billion proposed in the Governor's comprehensive plan will be used to fund their recommendations.

Southern California relies on imported water for more than 60 percent of its drinking and agricultural supplies. Between 2000 and 2006, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California received 36 percent of its total supplies from the Delta.

This summer, drought conditions are causing water districts statewide to call for people to voluntarily cut their usage by ten percent. Two districts in Sonoma and Santa Cruz Counties have implemented mandatory rationing.

The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which provides water to 18 million people from Ventura County in the north to San Diego County in the south, is calling for users to reduce water consumption.

The Governor has proclaimed a State of Emergency in both Kings and Riverside Counties due to the drought.

July, 2007

Agency approves Governor's call regarding Delta

"Kern County Water Agency staff attended Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's press conference at the San Luis Reservoir and supports his call for a new canal around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta) to supply water for millions of acres of farms, two-thirds of our population and business interests throughout the state," said Brent Walthall who is the Assistant General Manager of the Kern County Water Agency.

"Kern County receives much of its water supply from the Delta and ensuring that we continue to receive that water while protecting the Delta's environment and water quality is the target goal for the Agency. In the 1950's, water leaders provided a clean and secure water supply for us. Now it is our turn to provide a clean and secure water supply for future generations. The importance of this issue deserves the attention of the Governor and we applaud his efforts," Walthhall concluded.

June, 2007

Water Agency adopts emergency declaration in spite of limited DWR pumping

The Kern County Water Agency Board of Directors has adopted an emergency declaration due to: (1) the continued loss of water from reduced State Water Project (SWP) pumping in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta); (2) the inability of existing recovery capacity in local groundwater banking projects to alleviate that loss; and (3) the damage to existing crops from reduced water supplies.

Kern County's allocation this year from the SWP is only 60 percent of the requested amount, and recent actions by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) to limit pumping at the SWP Harvey O. Banks Pumping Plant (Pumps) have exacerbated water shortage conditions. DWR voluntarily shut down the Pumps on May 31, 2007, in an effort to help protect threatened Delta smelt. Then on June 10, 2007, DWR resumed pumping at a very limited level -- less than 10 percent of what is normally pumped this time of year. Resuming pumping operations was necessary to meet vital public health and safety needs in the San Francisco South Bay area. However, Kern County and many other areas in California will not benefit from this minimal pumping activity, and DWR has not been able to determine if and when the pumps can be returned to their normal operating levels.

Agency staff has analyzed the situation and concluded that if normal SWP pumping levels are not resumed within one week, local water districts will be receiving only one third of their normal SWP supplies. Agency staff has also determined that full utilization of local water resources and current banking programs is insufficient to meet the water demands of the Agency's Member Units without implementing emergency measures, and the resulting effects present an immediate and clear danger to Kern County's economy. This is especially critical since the County's other major water sources, the Friant Division of the Central Valley Project and the Kern River, are also facing extremely dry conditions.

General Manager Jim Beck said, "The current water supply situation is critical. Immediate emergency measures are necessary to position Kern County for expeditious, proactive actions to reasonably minimize the damage to crops and the resulting negative effects on the local economy." The emergency measures include (1) suspension of new transfers and exchanges of water from the SWP service areas of Kern County to areas outside of Kern County, until such time that delivery of SWP water to Kern County is restored to normal levels; (2) implementation of a water conservation campaign in coordination with other Kern County agencies; and (3) implementation of water management programs with areas outside of Kern County.

The Agency will seek similar declarations of emergency from its Member Units, Improvement District No. 4 Customers and the Kern County Board of Supervisors, in order to provide the greatest amount of assistance to resolve this emergency. The Agency will also pursue assistance from Governor Schwarzenegger and his administration to resolve the current issues, so Kern County doesn't face a crisis of greater magnitude next year.