The San Francisco Bay-Delta Agreement: Principles for Agreement on Bay-Delta Standards Between the State of California and the Federal Government

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | December 15th, 1994

The San Francisco Bay-Delta: A failure of decision-making capacity

Environmental Science & Policy (Elsevier) | August 12th, 2009

The paper reviews the history of Bay-Delta decision-making in California in order to highlight the continuity between what happened with CALFED and what happened in the

The paper reviews the history of Bay-Delta decision-making in California in order to highlight the continuity between what happened with CALFED and what happened in the preceding decades since water project deliveries began in 1949. Throughout this period, there has been intense conflict about whether and how to transfer water from the Bay-Delta to users elsewhere—a conflict marked by a fundamental opposition of interests among stakeholders. We document how the State of California has failed to organize itself effectively to resolve this conflict and make a decision on how to manage the Delta. The strategy consistently adopted by the State was to encourage the main parties – agricultural and urban water diverters, and fisheries and other instream-protection interests – to work out a solution among themselves, rather than imposing one externally. However, economic theory suggests that a bargaining solution is unlikely to exist because of the extreme opposition of interest among the parties. The Bay-Delta history amply confirms this theoretical prediction. Thus, the State’s strategy of relying on voluntary agreement to resolve the issue is fundamentally misconceived and is, at some level, an abdication of its responsibility.

The Science and Prediction of Post-Fire Debris Flows in the Western United States

U.S. Forest Service (USDA) | August 1st, 2017

Debris flows are among the most destructive hydrological consequences of fires in steep watersheds. The high likelihood of catastrophic wildfires in the western U

Debris flows are among the most destructive hydrological consequences of fires in steep watersheds. The high likelihood of catastrophic wildfires in the western United States and the encroachment of human activities into steep fire-prone areas have created the need to better understand, predict, and mitigate these hazards. This article highlights recent advances in understanding post-fire debris-flow generation and provides an overview of the evolution of hazard assessments in the western United States. Specific emphasis is placed upon free, publicly available toolsdeveloped by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and available for analyses in support of Burned Area Emergency Response (BAER) and Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) program activities. These tools consist of empirical models that predict the likelihood, potential volume, and the rainfall intensity-duration thresholds for debris flows in recently burned watersheds.

The Science Charade in Species Conservation

Supreme Court Economic Review | September 2nd, 2017

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is among the nation’s most important and powerful environmental laws. It is also a source of great conflict and controversy.  The list

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is among the nation’s most important and powerful environmental laws. It is also a source of great conflict and controversy.  The listing of individual species, the designation of critical habitat and the implementation of conservation measures often prompt fierce legal and political battles. In these conflicts, activists on all sides claim that “sound science” supports their respective positions, and scoff at the “junk science” relied upon by the other side. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service fails to rely upon the best science, critics claim.  If it did, they charge, it would adopt policies more to their liking.  The debate over the use of science under the ESA is part of the “science charade” that clouds substantive policy debate about species conservation.3 What typically divides competing interest groups is not a devotion to science, but sharply divergent policy preferences dressed up in scientific garb. The political debate over the use of science under the ESA tends to obscure the dividing line between science and policy and undermines the development of more effective and equitable conservation strategies. Further, efforts to reform the ESA by mandating additional scientific procedures or increasing judicial scrutiny of the use of science by federal agencies will do little to address the ESA’s underlying problems or make species conservation efforts more effective.  Scientific research is necessary to inform species conservation decisions. But species conservation is not – and cannot be – a wholly scientific exercise. Judgments about what constitutes a distinct species or how to evaluate incomplete scientific data necessarily draw upon normative premises. More significantly, policy decisions about what sorts of conservation measures should be adopted are not scientific at all. Whether habitat loss will reduce the likelihood that a given species or population will survive in the wild may be a scientific question, but what measures should be adopted to conserve such habitat, and at what cost, is a normative policy judgment. Science can – indeed, must – inform such inquiries, but science cannot tell us what to do. Engaging in the “science charade,” either by pretending that ESA implementation may be guided by scientific judgment alone or by claiming that reforms of how science is used is unlikely to improve species conservation. To the contrary, efforts to constrain or control the use of science in ESA listing decisions or enhance judicial review of agency scientific determinations will undermine the quality and reliability of ESA science and lead to less effective conservation policy.  Whatever ails the ESA, a failure to incorporate adequate science is not the cause of the disease. As this Article explains, efforts to augment the amount or type of science used in ESA decision-making, whether through additional procedural mandates or altered standards of judicial review, will not address the conflicts that afflict species conservation policy. In some cases, such measures could further undermine the ESA’s ability to conserve species.  Part I of the Article gives a brief overview of the ESA, its operation, and the scientific requirements written into the Act. Part II describes the “science charade,” through which policymakers and others pretend that policy judgments are purely scientific questions, and the legal and political incentives that ensure this artifice persists. Part III details how the ESA’s structure generates political pressure on the use of science and encourages the science charade in species conservation. Part IV explains why various “sound science” reforms will not address these problems, and Part V outlines alternative policy reforms. 

The Science of Non-native Species in a Dynamic Delta

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | May 21st, 2022

Invasion of non-native species is one of the greatest global threats to the integrity of ecosystems and one of the five main drivers of ecosystem change. When a new speci

Invasion of non-native species is one of the greatest global threats to the integrity of ecosystems and one of the five main drivers of ecosystem change. When a new species becomes part of the ecosystem, it can alter the food web, nutrient and contaminant cycling, abundances of other species, and habitat structure. The resultant changes in ecosystem services (e.g. water quality, water flow, fisheries, endangered species) and even ecosystem stability can impact a broad range of stakeholders and impinge on the responsibilities of many government agencies. The California San Francisco Bay-Delta ecosystem is one of the world’s most invaded estuaries. Indeed, non-native species comprise much of today’s Delta ecosystem. Non-native species threaten the Delta Plan’s coequal goals of “protecting, restoring, and enhancing the Delta ecosystem,“ and “providing a more reliable water supply for California” as well as state and federal objectives for preserving native species and ecosystems. The Delta Reform Act of 2009 recognized the importance of this issue and stipulated that the Delta Plan should restore a healthy ecosystem by promoting “self-sustaining, diverse populations of native and valued species by reducing the risk of take and harm from invasive species.” Reducing the impact of non-native species is also a core strategy highlighted in the Ecosystem Amendment to California’s Delta Plan.

The Scientist and Engineer in Court

American Geophysical Union (AGU) | January 1st, 1983

Published by the American Geophysical Union as part of the Water Resources Monograph Series, Volume 8. The gavel goes down, the witness is called and sworn in: "Will y

Published by the American Geophysical Union as part of the Water Resources Monograph Series, Volume 8. The gavel goes down, the witness is called and sworn in: "Will you tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?" Every court day scientists and engineers take this oath, yet few know the duties of an expert witness and fewer still know the procedures in a lawsuit. Unprepared for the courtroom, they watch a drama unfold without benefit of the plot (Ball, 1975). Courtrooms swirl with costume and ceremony. Jury, judge, and spectators assume roles: audience, director, trier of the facts. And the lawyers! Lawyers are the key dramatis personae. Protagonist and antagonist confront one another as lawyers argue their clients cases in the courtroom. They object endlessly. They cross-examine opposing witnesses mercilessly. They speak an opaque jargon of "laches," "remittitur" and "stare decisis." They speak Latin: "ab initio," "in pari causa," "lex loci actus." They speak old French: "estoppel," "fee simple," "voire dire." And they speak law-speak: "abuse of discretion," "clearly erroneous," "malice aforethought" (Mellinkoff, 1963). They call contrary versions of the same story true. They plead for understanding and compassion. They mix independent variables called "facts" and a dependent variable called "law" into an argumentative gruel for court consumption. Then it's over, and the judge delivers his or her opinion. One lawyer calls it the decision of the decade, a magnificent example of benign, reasoned law. The other darkly threatens to appeal all the way to the Supreme Court, if necessary, to relieve an onerous and oppressive injustice. All of this is fascinating theatre, but to the unprepared scientist or engineer, the drama has none of the charm and all of the clarity of a Japanese "Noh" play.

The season for large fires in Southern California is projected to lengthen in a changing climate

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | February 17th, 2022

Southern California is a biodiversity hotspot and home to over 23 million people. Over recent decades the annual wildfire area in the coastal southern California region h

Southern California is a biodiversity hotspot and home to over 23 million people. Over recent decades the annual wildfire area in the coastal southern California region has not significantly changed. Yet how fire regime will respond to future anthropogenic climate change remains an important question. Here, we estimate wildfire probability in southern California at station scale and daily resolution using random forest algorithms and downscaled earth system model simulations. We project that large fire days will increase from 36 days/year during 1970–1999 to 58 days/year under moderate greenhouse gas emission scenario (RCP4.5) and 71 days/year by 2070–2099 under a high emission scenario (RCP8.5). The large fire season will be more intense and have an earlier onset and delayed end. Our findings suggest that despite the lack of a contemporary trend in fire regime, projected greenhouse gas emissions will substantially increase the fire danger in southern California by 2099.

The Seasonal Cycle of Surface Soil Moisture

American Meteorological Society (AMS) | June 29th, 2022

The seasonal cycle contributes substantially to soil moisture temporal variability in many parts of the world, with important implications for seasonal forecasting releva

The seasonal cycle contributes substantially to soil moisture temporal variability in many parts of the world, with important implications for seasonal forecasting relevant to agriculture and the health of humans and ecosystems. There is considerable spatial variability in the seasonal cycle of soil moisture, yet a lack of global observations has hindered the development of parsimonious theories explaining that variability. Here, we use 6 years of global satellite observations to describe and explain the seasonal cycle of surface soil moisture globally. An unsupervised clustering algorithm is used to identify five distinct seasonal cycle regimes. Each seasonal cycle regime typically arises in both hemispheres, on multiple continents, and across substantially different local climates. To explain this spatial variability, we then show that the observed seasonal cycle regimes are reproduced very well by a simple but physically based water balance model, which only uses precipitation and downwelling surface shortwave radiation as inputs, and includes no free parameters. Surprisingly, no information on vegetation or land cover is required. To our knowledge, this is the first characterization of the seasonal cycle of surface soil moisture based on global observations.

The seven Colorado River Basin states letter to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 5/22/23

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | May 22nd, 2023

The shrinking Great Salt Lake contributes to record high dust-on-snow deposition in the Wasatch Mountains during the 2022 snowmelt season

Environmental Research Letters (IOP) | June 15th, 2023