Latest news with #StateWaterResourcesControlBoard
Associated Press
5 days ago
- Politics
- Associated Press
Key player in California's water wars embraces controversial pact
After decades of deterioration and ecological collapse in the heart of California's water system, state regulators embraced the Newsom administration's controversial plan to overhaul how farms and cities take water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and rivers that feed it. It's a major development in a long-running battle over how much water must flow through the Delta for the survival of iconic Chinook salmon, sturgeon and other species — and how much can be tapped for tens of millions of Californians and vast tracts of Central Valley farmland. On one side are conservationists, the fishing industry, Delta communities and Native tribes: They want stringent rules requiring cities and farms to take less water from the imperiled watershed. On the other are Gov. Gavin Newsom, major urban and agricultural water suppliers, and the state and federal agencies tasked with exporting Delta water to farms and cities further south. They back a $2.9 billion pact reached three years ago that would allow water users to help restore fish habitat and forgo some water, rather than face strict requirements mandating how much water must remain in the rivers. On Thursday, staff with the State Water Resources Control Board threw their support behind the pact as the major path forward in a long-awaited update. Next comes a period of public comment and hearings before the water board's five governor-appointed members will consider adopting the plan. The pact, backed by $1.5 billion in state funding, is called the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes program but better known as the 'voluntary agreements.' Under the plan, if adopted, those who don't sign on to the deal would face minimum flow requirements, which the water board may also consider adopting if the voluntary agreements fail to show 'sufficient benefits' at the end of an eight year term. The stakes are high for revamping the Delta's rulebook as fish populations plummet, commercial salmon fishing faces an unprecedented third year of shutdowns, and farmers struggle with unpredictable water supplies and restrictions on groundwater pumping. Participants in the deal — including Westlands Water District, the nation's largest agricultural supplier — say the Newsom-backed voluntary agreements will keep water flowing for farms and cities, and promote restoration of floodplains and other river features. '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,' said Allison Febbo, general manager 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 provide too little water and too little habitat to protect the fragile Delta ecosystem and the fish, industries and residents that rely on it. 'This latest plan is a shocking display of cowardice,' said 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 said. Newsom also said today that he intended to use the budget process to push through a bill that would waive requirements under the landmark California Environmental Quality Act for water quality control plans like this one. Lawmakers punted on Newsom's bill earlier this summer during the thick of budget negotiations, but could still take it up before the end of session. Environmental groups fear that, if the bill passes, it could limit disclosures about how the plan would affect the Bay-Delta, and their ability to sue. Ashley Overhouse, water policy advisor for Defenders of Wildlife, said the exemption is 'bordering on undemocratic because you are cutting out the public in an important process … For the Bay-Delta, that is particularly important.' Rosenfield added: 'If it's such a great plan, why would you want to hide the results from the public?' Epicenter of water wars California's Bay-Delta has long been the epicenter of the state's water wars. The watershed, formed by the Sacramento and San Joaquin river systems, stretches from about Fresno to beyond the Oregon border and drains about 40% of California. It's the core of the state's water supply, supports much of the state's imperiled commercial salmon fishery, and is home to hundreds 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,' including endangered winter-run Chinook salmon and the tiny Delta smelt. Current requirements have 'failed to protect fish and wildlife' and must be updated 'in an expedited manner to halt and reverse the ecosystem collapse,' according to a 2017 fact sheet from the water board. But the rulebook hasn't been meaningfully updated in 30 years. State regulators adopted new flow requirements in 2018 for portions of the Lower San Joaquin River and its major tributaries, but they have been tied up by litigation and, according to the Legislative Analyst's Office, by 'consideration of (voluntary agreements).' They have not yet been implemented. Now, regulators are considering updates for the rest of the watershed. This much larger portion includes the Sacramento River and its tributaries as well as the Calaveras, Cosumnes, and Mokelumne Rivers and the San Francisco Bay-Delta. Newsom has long pushed for a deal with water-users over mandates. 'Our first task is to cross the finish line on real agreements to save the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta,' he said 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 officials say that they expect this approach will engender more cooperation and avoid lawsuits that could delay action. 'Sometimes people say, 'Well, isn't it just politics and not science that's driving this?'' Wade Crowfoot, California Secretary of Natural Resources, which supports the agreements, told CalMatters in April 2024 before a series of workshops about the agreements. 'And I say, 'Well, ultimately, in California water, the decisions are often validated through legal challenge.'' The voluntary agreements are the culmination of years of negotiations with powerful urban and agricultural suppliers such as the Westlands Water District and the agencies that make up the State Water Contractors. Though called 'voluntary,' water board executive director Eric Oppenheimer says they would still be legally enforceable. The proposal meters out an average of up to 700,000 acre-feet of water in certain years, according to state officials — enough to supply up to 2.5 million households for a year. The amount varies, though depending on how wet or dry the year. Water users have not committed to leaving any additional water in several rivers including the Sacramento, Yuba, and Feather in critically dry years. It also calls for restoration of around 45,000 acres of spawning, rearing and floodplain habitats, backed by about $1.5 billion in state funding, $600 million from the water providers, and $740 million expected from federal funds, according to Jennifer Pierre, general manager for the State Water Contractors. By also promoting habitat restoration under the voluntary agreements, 'we think we can achieve significant ecosystem improvements, and we think it can be done with a lower water supply impact,' said Eric Oppenheimer, executive director of the State Water Resources Control Board. But, he said, at the end 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, by contrast, calls for maintaining flows of 35% to 55% of the amount of water that the rivers would have carried were they not dammed or diverted — an amount called unimpaired flow. For some, rain-fed tributaries that provide municipal supplies, there would be no flow requirement at all in the driest conditions. Water suppliers say such mandates would strike a major blow to their ability to provide water for cities and farms, and touted the habitat projects supported by the voluntary agreements. 'We're talking … about significant reductions in delivery to the San Joaquin Valley during dry years,' Pierre said. '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 needs water Opponents, however, say there is far too little water provided in the voluntary agreements, and that the updated flow requirements are also far weaker than previous proposals. State officials did not provide a comparison between the two pathways. Oppenheimer said that the comparison is not 'apples to apples' because of the inclusion of habitat restoration efforts under 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 said. 'There is no translation between habitat and water.' That, environmentalists say, is the problem. Fish habitat, they say, needs to be wet. '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 said. Conservationists and fishing organizations also fear that the voluntary agreements would pave the way for more water to be diverted from the Delta by future water projects such as Sites Reservoir and the deeply controversial Delta tunnel. A state analysis, published 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 also warned that thousands of acres of the habitat restoration promised under the voluntary agreements are already in the works, which they say reduces how much the deal would benefit fish species. (Pierre counters that this is a plus of the agreements, and reflects early action during negotiations.) And critics say that the voluntary agreements require money and cooperation from a federal government that has slashed environmental programs and called for 'Putting People over Fish' in a memorandum issued on President Trump's first day in office. 'This is a sad day for the State Water Board and one more on a long list of bad days for salmon,' Scott Artis, executive director, Golden State Salmon Association, said in a statement. '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 story was originally published by CalMatters and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
Los Angeles Times
6 days ago
- Politics
- Los Angeles Times
State board backs Newsom's plan to give water agencies more leeway in meeting rules
California regulators are supporting a controversial plan backed by Gov. Gavin Newsom — and opposed by environmental groups — that would give water agencies more leeway in how they comply with water quality rules. The Newsom-backed approach is included as part of a proposed water plan for the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, released by the State Water Resources Control Board on Thursday. The plan would give water agencies two potential pathways to comply with water quality goals — either a traditional regulatory approach based on limiting water withdrawals to maintain certain river flow levels, or an alternative approach supported by the governor in which water agencies, under negotiated agreements, would make certain water flow commitments while contributing funding for wetland habitat restoration projects and other measures. The proposed plan is intended to protect native fish species and the ecosystem through water quality standards and flow objectives for the Delta and San Francisco Bay. Major water agencies have lined up to support these so-called voluntary agreements, which Newsom and his administration have touted as a solution to break away from the traditional conflict-ridden regulatory approach and improve the Delta's ecological health. Newsom called the plan 'a testament to California's commitment to a collaborative, science-driven approach to managing our water for the benefit of our communities, economy, and fish and wildlife.' The proposed plan, developed by the state agency's staff, will now go through a public comment process, and will eventually go before the five-member state water board for a decision on adoption. Members of the board are appointed by the governor. Environmental and fishing groups, as well as leaders in Delta communities, have argued that the voluntary approach would harm the estuary's deteriorating ecosystem andfish species that have suffered dramatic declines. The Delta draws together rivers from a vast watershed and flows toward San Francisco Bay. On the south side of the Delta, pumps operated by the state and federal governments send water flowing to cities and farms. Eric Oppenheimer, executive director of the state water board, said the proposed update of the water quality plan would 'improve conditions for fish and wildlife through a combination of flow and habitat measures while considering the needs of cities, towns and farms.' Oppenheimer noted that the state water board would track agencies' commitments under the voluntary agreements, which have also been called the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes Program. Under the draft plan, state officials would review the voluntary agreements after eight years to determine if they should be extended, modified or terminated. The board could decide to return water agencies to the traditional regulatory approach if they determine the voluntary agreements haven't achieved the desired results. 'We included the voluntary agreement pathway because we think the voluntary agreements have merit,' Oppenheimer told reporters during a briefing. 'The basic concept behind these voluntary agreements is that by combining both flow and habitat, we think we can achieve significant ecosystem improvements, and we think it can be done with a lower water supply impact.' Oppenheimer said state officials believe this approach will 'engender a high degree of cooperation and buy-in from the water users.' Environmental and fishing groups have condemned the agencies' proposed voluntary agreements as backroom deals struck without input from Native tribes, Delta communities or conservation advocates. They have said that by failing to protect existing flows, the agreements are aimed at setting the stage for massive additional water diversions. Newsom and his administration are pushing for the proposed Delta Conveyance Project, seeking to build a 45-mile water tunnel beneath the Delta, and are also moving ahead with plans to build Sites Reservoir, the state's first new major reservoir in decades, in a valley north of Sacramento. Ashley Overhouse, water policy advisor for the environmental group Defenders of Wildlife, said she is very concerned about the state board's approach. 'This is just the latest attempt by the Newsom administration to promote the woefully inadequate and inequitable voluntary agreements, undercutting bare minimum protections,' Overhouse said. 'The proposal to cut freshwater flows through the Delta during wet and dry years will be devastating for species and the overall health of the estuary.' Overhouse and other environmental advocates argue that the voluntary deals struck by major water suppliers would be disastrous for threatened and endangered fish, including salmon, steelhead, green sturgeon, longfin smelt and Delta smelt. They have called for more stringent flow requirements to help populations recover. This year, populations of Chinook salmon were so low that regulators shut down the commercial fishing season along the coast for a third straight year, though limited recreational fishing was allowed. The state water board 'seems to be collapsing under pressure from the Governor to approve the fatally flawed voluntary agreements,' said Scott Artis, executive director of Golden State Salmon Assn., a nonprofit group that represents fishing communities. Artis said the voluntary approach would worsen the environmental crisis in the Delta and set the stage for 'even more damaging diversions by the massive Delta tunnel.' His group has also criticized the $2.9 billion in proposed funding that would be needed to carry out the agreements, much of it from state and federal funds. The group has called it a 'shell game' and a 'taxpayer rip off.' The update of the Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan has been years in the making. The last substantial changes in water quality and flow requirements were adopted in 1995 for much of the watershed. In 2018, the State Water Board released new standards to increase flows in the San Joaquin River. The pending update will set rules for the Sacramento River watershed and the rest of the Delta. The State Water Resources Control Board plans to hold a public hearing on the draft plan Sept. 8-9, and will be accepting written comments until Sept. 10. A date for a decision by the board has not been set. The proposal also calls for establishing tribal 'beneficial uses' of water in recognition of the connections between Native tribes and fish populations. There are over 100 tribes in the Bay-Delta watershed. State officials say this designation would not guarantee tribes a certain volume of water, but would ensure that cultural uses of water, including for fish species, have protections under the plan. Wade Crowfoot, the state's natural resources secretary, said the approach outlined under the plan will 'improve the health of our rivers by both restoring river flows and revitalizing habitat.' Newsom noted that he has also proposed legislation to create an exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act for all such water quality plans. The governor said this would 'accelerate the time it takes to get these critical plans done by removing unnecessary and redundant process requirements.'
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Newsom seeks to short-cut process to build $20-billion Delta water tunnel
Gov. Gavin Newsom is proposing to accelerate his administration's plan to build a $20-billion water tunnel beneath the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta by short-cutting permitting for the project and limiting avenues for legal challenges. Newsom urged the Legislature on Wednesday to adopt his plan to 'fast-track' the tunnel, called the Delta Conveyance Project, as part of his revised May budget proposal. 'For too long, attempts to modernize our critical water infrastructure have stalled in endless red tape, burdened with unnecessary delay. We're done with barriers,' Newsom said. 'Our state needs to complete this project as soon as possible, so that we can better store and manage water to prepare for a hotter, drier future. Let's get this built.' The tunnel would create a second route to transport water to the state's pumping facilities on the south side of the Delta, where supplies enter the aqueducts of the State Water Project and are delivered to 27 million people and 750,000 acres of farmland. Supporters of the plan, including water agencies in Southern California and Silicon Valley, say the state needs to build new infrastructure in the Delta to protect the water supply in the face of climate change and earthquake risks. Opponents, including agencies in the Delta and environmental advocates, say the project is an expensive boondoggle that would harm the environment and communities, and that the state should pursue other alternatives. Read more: Newsom in fight to advance plans for $20-billion water tunnel in the Sacramento Delta 'It's a top-down push for an unaffordable, unnecessary tunnel that fails to solve the state's real water challenges,' said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of the group Restore the Delta. She said the governor 'wants to bypass the legal and public processes because the project doesn't pass the economic or environmental standards Californians expect.' Newsom, who is set to serve through 2026 and then leave office, is pushing to lay the groundwork for the project. Newsom said his proposal would: simplify permitting by eliminating certain deadlines from water rights permits; narrow legal review to avoid delays from legal challenges; confirm that the state has authority to issue bonds to pay for the project, which would be repaid by water agencies; and accelerate state efforts to acquire land for construction. Announcing the proposal, the governor's office said that "while the project has received some necessary permits, its path forward is burdened by complicated regulatory frameworks and bureaucratic delays." The State Water Resources Control Board is currently considering a petition by the Newsom administration to amend water rights permits so that flows could be diverted from new points on the Sacramento River where the intakes of the 45-mile tunnel would be built. The governor's latest proposal was praised by water agencies including the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which is currently spending about $142 million on the preliminary planning. MWD General Manager Deven Upadhyay called Newsom's proposal a 'bold step' toward protecting water supplies, saying the approach would support completion of the planning work, reduce 'regulatory and legal uncertainties,' and allow the MWD board to make an informed decision about whether to make a long-term investment to help foot the bill for construction. Jennifer Pierre, general manager of the State Water Contractors, said the governor's approach makes sense to address costly delays and upgrade essential infrastructure that is 'in dire need of modernization.' Environmental and fishing groups, however, called Newsom's proposal a reckless attempt to bypass the existing legal process and make it harder for opponents to challenge the project over what they contend would be harmful effects on the Delta region and the environment. Read more: U.S. panel calls for suspending commercial salmon fishing in California for third year Scott Artis, executive director of the Golden State Salmon Assn., a group that represents fishing communities, called Newsom's proposal 'an attack on the salmon fishing industry and the state's biggest rivers.' Commercial salmon fishing has been canceled for three consecutive years because of a decline in the Chinook salmon population. Artis said building the tunnel would represent a 'nail in the coffin of California's once mighty salmon runs.' This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
14-05-2025
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
Newsom seeks to short-cut process to build $20-billion Delta water tunnel
Gov. Gavin Newsom is proposing to accelerate his administration's plan to build a $20-billion water tunnel beneath the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta by short-cutting permitting for the project and limiting avenues for legal challenges. Newsom urged the Legislature on Wednesday to adopt his plan to 'fast-track' the tunnel, called the Delta Conveyance Project, as part of his revised May budget proposal. 'For too long, attempts to modernize our critical water infrastructure have stalled in endless red tape, burdened with unnecessary delay. We're done with barriers,' Newsom said. 'Our state needs to complete this project as soon as possible, so that we can better store and manage water to prepare for a hotter, drier future. Let's get this built.' The tunnel would create a second route to transport water to the state's pumping facilities on the south side of the Delta, where supplies enter the aqueducts of the State Water Project and are delivered to 27 million people and 750,000 acres of farmland. Supporters of the plan, including water agencies in Southern California and Silicon Valley, say the state needs to build new infrastructure in the Delta to protect the water supply in the face of climate change and earthquake risks. Opponents, including agencies in the Delta and environmental advocates, say the project is an expensive boondoggle that would harm the environment and communities, and that the state should pursue other alternatives. 'It's a top-down push for an unaffordable, unnecessary tunnel that fails to solve the state's real water challenges,' said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of the group Restore the Delta. She said the governor 'wants to bypass the legal and public processes because the project doesn't pass the economic or environmental standards Californians expect.' Newsom, who is set to serve through 2026 and then leave office, is pushing to lay the groundwork for the project. Newsom said his proposal would: simplify permitting by eliminating certain deadlines from water rights permits; narrow legal review to avoid delays from legal challenges; confirm that the state has authority to issue bonds to pay for the project, which would be repaid by water agencies; and accelerate state efforts to acquire land for construction. Announcing the proposal, the governor's office said that 'while the project has received some necessary permits, its path forward is burdened by complicated regulatory frameworks and bureaucratic delays.' The State Water Resources Control Board is currently considering a petition by the Newsom administration to amend water rights permits so that flows could be diverted from new points on the Sacramento River where the intakes of the 45-mile tunnel would be built. The governor's latest proposal was praised by water agencies including the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which is currently spending about $142 million on the preliminary planning. MWD General Manager Deven Upadhyay called Newsom's proposal a 'bold step' toward protecting water supplies, saying the approach would support completion of the planning work, reduce 'regulatory and legal uncertainties,' and allow the MWD board to make an informed decision about whether to make a long-term investment to help foot the bill for construction. Jennifer Pierre, general manager of the State Water Contractors, said the governor's approach makes sense to address costly delays and upgrade essential infrastructure that is 'in dire need of modernization.' Environmental and fishing groups, however, called Newsom's proposal a reckless attempt to bypass the existing legal process and make it harder for opponents to challenge the project over what they contend would be harmful effects on the Delta region and the environment. Scott Artis, executive director of the Golden State Salmon Assn., a group that represents fishing communities, called Newsom's proposal 'an attack on the salmon fishing industry and the state's biggest rivers.' Commercial salmon fishing has been canceled for three consecutive years because of a decline in the Chinook salmon population. Artis said building the tunnel would represent a 'nail in the coffin of California's once mighty salmon runs.'
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Newsom asks lawmakers to fast-track Delta tunnel project
SACRAMENTO, California — Gov. Gavin Newsom is proposing to fast-track a project to reroute more water around the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to farmers and cities as part of his revised budget blueprint set to be unveiled on Wednesday. 'We're done with barriers — our state needs to complete this project as soon as possible, so that we can better store and manage water to prepare for a hotter, drier future,' Newsom said in a statement provided to POLITICO. 'Let's get this built.' A version of the proposed project has been floating around — first as a canal, then a pair of tunnels — for more than half a century, during which it has reliably brought out opposition from environmental groups and Delta elected officials concerned about habitat loss and construction impacts. Newsom is asking state lawmakers to pass a trailer bill to shorten judicial review of lawsuits challenging the project and streamline its pending water rights permit by removing deadlines for when the project has to be under construction and using water. Newsom has called the $20 billion, 45-mile long tunnel through the crumbling Delta — now known as the Delta Conveyance Project — key to the state's climate adaptation as it stares down an expected 10 percent reduction in water supplies by 2040. He has said he wants to finish the project's permitting by the end of his term in early 2027. He's also sought to show off how he's increasing water storage and supplies in his state in the wake of President Donald Trump's repeated calls for more water deliveries in California. Newsom got lawmakers to sign an infrastructure streamlining package two years ago, but the package did not include the Delta Conveyance Project after heavy pushback from environmental groups and Delta lawmakers. The language required judges to resolve any lawsuits under the California Environmental Quality Act within 270 days. The State Water Resources Control Board is in the middle of a contentious months-long hearing to decide whether to grant the project a revised water right. Environmental and tribal groups are fighting the Department of Water Resources, the state agency which would oversee the project, to release more information about its historic water use. On Tuesday, they filed a petition asking the Water Resources Control Board to cancel the hearing if the information wasn't provided.
