Key participant in Sacramento River Delta water wars embraces pact

By Rachel Becker, CalMatters

This story was initially printed by CalMatters. Sign up for his or her newsletters.

After a long time of degradation and ecological collapse within the coronary heart of California’s water system, state regulators in the present day embraced the Newsom administration’s controversial plan to overtake how farms and cities take water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and rivers that feed it. 

It’s a serious improvement in a long-running battle over how a lot water should circulation via the Delta for the survival of iconic Chinook salmon, sturgeon and different species — and the way a lot might be tapped for tens of tens of millions of Californians and huge tracts of Central Valley farmland. 

On one facet are conservationists, the fishing business, Delta communities and Native tribes: They need stringent guidelines requiring cities and farms to take much less water from the imperiled watershed. 

On the opposite are Gov. Gavin Newsom, main city and agricultural water suppliers, and the state and federal companies tasked with exporting Delta water to farms and cities additional south. They again a $2.9 billion pact reached three years in the past that will permit water customers to assist restore fish habitat and forgo some water, somewhat than face strict necessities mandating how a lot water should stay within the rivers. 

Today, workers with the State Water Resources Control Board threw their assist behind the pact as the key path ahead in a long-awaited replace they launched in the present day. Next comes a interval of public remark and hearings earlier than the water board’s five governor-appointed members will take into account adopting the plan. 

The pact, backed by $1.5 million in state funding, known as the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes program however higher often called the “voluntary agreements.” Under in the present day’s plan, if adopted, those that don’t signal on to the deal would face minimal circulation necessities, which additionally can be thought of if the voluntary agreements fail to indicate “sufficient benefits” on the finish of an eight 12 months time period. 

The stakes are excessive for revamping the Delta’s rulebook as fish populations plummet, business salmon fishing faces an unprecedented third 12 months of shutdowns, and farmers battle with unpredictable water provides and restrictions on groundwater pumping.  

Participants within the deal — together with Westlands Water District, the nation’s largest agricultural provider —  say the Newsom-backed voluntary agreements will maintain water flowing for farms and cities, and promote restoration of floodplains and different river options. 

“It’s a false narrative that it’s people in cities, against agriculture, against fish. I think we as Californians need all of that to be able to function,” stated Allison Febbo, basic supervisor of Westlands Water District. “We can actually maintain water delivery for our cities and our farms, but we can actually also be pretty thoughtful for our ecological systems.” 

But opponents are dismayed. They say that the voluntary agreements present too little water and too little habitat to guard the delicate Delta ecosystem and the fish, industries and residents that depend on it.  

“This latest plan is a shocking display of cowardice,” stated Jon Rosenfield, science director of San Francisco Baykeeper. 

“Even if the pledged water is delivered as promised, which is a big if, it barely moves the needle on the lack of adequate flows for fish, wildlife, fisheries and the communities that depend on those things,” Rosenfield stated. 

A protracted-running battle

California’s Bay-Delta has lengthy been the epicenter of the state’s water wars. The watershed, fashioned by the Sacramento and San Joaquin river methods, stretches from about Fresno to beyond the Oregon border and drains about 40% of California. 

It’s the core of the state’s water provide, helps a lot of the state’s imperiled business salmon fishery, and is dwelling to tons of of native plant and animal species.  

For years, state regulators have warned that the Delta is experiencing an “ecological crisis” with a “prolonged and precipitous decline in numerous native species,” together with endangered winter-run Chinook salmon and the tiny Delta smelt. 

State analyses report that present necessities governing water high quality and circulation within the watershed have “failed to protect fish and wildlife” and have to be up to date “in an expedited manner to halt and reverse the ecosystem collapse.” 

But the rulebook hasn’t been meaningfully up to date in 30 years. State regulators adopted new circulation necessities in 2018 for parts of the Lower San Joaquin River and its main tributaries, however they’ve been tied up by litigation and, in keeping with the Legislative Analyst’s Office, by “consideration of (voluntary agreements).” They haven’t but been carried out.

Now, regulators are contemplating updates for the remainder of the watershed. This a lot bigger portion consists of the Sacramento River and its tributaries in addition to the Calaveras, Cosumnes, and Mokelumne Rivers and the San Francisco Bay-Delta.

Newsom has lengthy pushed for a take care of water-users somewhat than strict mandates. 

“Our first task is to cross the finish line on real agreements to save the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta,” he stated in his first State of the State address. “We must get this done — for the resilience of our mighty rivers, the stability of our agriculture sector, and the millions who depend on this water every day.”

State officers say that they anticipate this method will engender extra cooperation and keep away from lawsuits that might delay motion. 

“Sometimes people say, ‘Well, isn’t it just politics and not science that’s driving this?’” Wade Crowfoot, California Secretary of Natural Resources, which helps the agreements, advised CalMatters in April 2024 earlier than a sequence of workshops in regards to the agreements. “And I say, ‘Well, ultimately, in California water, the decisions are often validated through legal challenge.’”  

The voluntary agreements are the end result of years of negotiations with highly effective city and agricultural suppliers such because the Westlands Water District and the companies that make up the State Water Contractors. Though known as “voluntary,” water board govt director Eric Oppenheimer says they’d nonetheless be legally enforceable. 

The proposal meters out a mean of as much as 700,000 acre-feet of water in sure years, in keeping with state officers — sufficient to provide as much as 2.5 million households for a 12 months.  

The quantity varies, although relying on how moist or dry the 12 months. In critically dry years, a number of rivers together with the Sacramento, Yuba, Feather would obtain no extra water. Water may very well be bought if sellers are keen to supply extra flows, stated Jennifer Pierre, basic supervisor for the State Water Contractors.  

It additionally requires restoration of round 45,000 acres of spawning, rearing and floodplain habitats, backed by about $1.5 billion in state funding, round $600 million from the water suppliers, and round $740 million anticipated from federal funds, Pierre stated. 

By additionally selling habitat restoration underneath the voluntary agreements, “we think we can achieve significant ecosystem improvements, and we think it can be done with a lower water supply impact,” stated Eric Oppenheimer, govt director of the State Water Resources Control Board. 

But, he stated, on the finish of eight years, if the “board made a determination that the voluntary agreement pathway wasn’t achieving sufficient benefits, it could then start a process to shift over to the regulatory pathway.” 

The regulatory pathway, against this, requires sustaining flows of 35% to 55% of the quantity of water that the rivers would have carried had been they not dammed or diverted — an quantity known as unimpaired circulation. For some, rain-fed tributaries that present municipal provides, there can be no circulation requirement in any respect within the driest circumstances. 

Water suppliers say stringent necessities would strike a serious blow to their potential to supply water for cities and farms, and touted the habitat initiatives supported by the voluntary agreements.

“We’re talking … about significant reductions in delivery to the San Joaquin Valley during dry years,” Pierre stated. “I would never argue that fish don’t need water. They of course do. But in that water are things like refuge and food and adequate temperatures that are really being promoted.” 

Like a fish wants water

Opponents, nonetheless, say there’s far too little water supplied within the voluntary agreements, and that the up to date circulation necessities are additionally far weaker than earlier proposals. 

State officers didn’t present a comparability between the 2 pathways. Oppenheimer stated that the comparability just isn’t “apples to apples” due to the inclusion of habitat restoration efforts underneath the voluntary agreements.

“I know everybody wants to know how the two compare when you compare flow. But you know, from my perspective, it’s not a valid comparison,” he stated. “There is no translation between habitat and water.” 

That, environmentalists say, is the issue. Fish habitat, they are saying, must be moist. 

“For fish, flow is the habitat. There is no evidence that restoring floodplains or tidal marshes, in the absence of adequate flow, produces any benefit,” Rosenfield stated. 

Conservationists and fishing organizations additionally concern that the voluntary agreements would pave the way in which for extra water to be diverted from the Delta by future water initiatives similar to Sites Reservoir and the deeply controversial Delta tunnel. 

A state evaluation, printed in 2023, reported that without additional protections, “existing flows may be reduced in the future, particularly with climate change and additional water development.” 

Opponents have additionally warned that 1000’s of acres of the habitat restoration promised underneath the voluntary agreements are already in the works, which they are saying reduces how a lot the deal would profit fish species. (Pierre counters that it is a plus of the agreements, and displays early motion throughout negotiations.)

And critics say that the voluntary agreements require cash and cooperation from a federal authorities that has slashed environmental packages and known as for “Putting People over Fish” in a memorandum issued on President Trump’s first day in workplace. 

“This is a tragic day for the State Water Board and yet another on an extended record of unhealthy days for salmon,” Scott Artis, govt director, Golden State Salmon Association, stated in an announcement. “Commercial fishing in California has been closed for three years because of unsustainable water diversions. This looks like a plan to kill California’s most important wild salmon runs and fishing jobs.”

This article was initially printed on CalMatters and was republished underneath the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.