Endangered and Threatened Species: Status for the San Francisco Bay-Delta Distinct Population Segment of the Longfin Smelt

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) | February 27th, 2023

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species Act Compensatory Mitigation Policy

Federal Register | December 27th, 2016

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or USFWS), announce the final Endangered Species Act (ESA) Compensatory Mitigation Policy. The new policy steps d

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or USFWS), announce the final Endangered Species Act (ESA) Compensatory Mitigation Policy. The new policy steps down and implements recent Executive Office, Department of the Interior, and Service mitigation policies that reflect a shift from project-by-project to landscape-scale approaches to planning and implementing compensatory mitigation. The new policy is established to improve consistency and effectiveness in the use of compensatory mitigation as recommended or required under the ESA. The ESA Compensatory Mitigation Policy covers permittee-responsible mitigation, conservation banking, in-lieu fee programs, and other third-party mitigation mechanisms, and stresses the need to hold all compensatory mitigation mechanisms to equivalent and effective standards. DATES: This policy is effective on December 27, 2016.

Endangered Species Act (ESA): The Exemption Process

Congressional Research Service (CRS) | January 27th, 2017

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is designed to protect species from extinction, but it includes an exemption process for those unusual cases where the public benefit fro

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is designed to protect species from extinction, but it includes an exemption process for those unusual cases where the public benefit from an action is determined to outweigh the harm to the species. This process was created by a 1978 amendment to the ESA, but it is rarely used. This report will discuss the exemption process for an agency action, with examples from past controversies, and its potential for application to actions that may affect current controversies, such as water supply. The ESA mandates listing and protecting species that are endangered or threatened with extinction. Listing a species limits activities that could affect that species and provides penalties for taking individuals of that species. The ESA also requires federal agencies to consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service (together, the Services) to determine whether a federal action may jeopardize the continued existence of a species or harm its critical habitat. The consultation process may lead to an opinion by one of the Services that the action will jeopardize listed species or harm their critical habitats unless certain reasonable and prudent alternatives are included in the action. Rarely, the federal action agency may hold that those alternatives are inconsistent with the agency action. In other extremely rare cases, the Services may find that no alternatives are available that would allow the project to proceed and still prevent jeopardy. In either case, the following are the categories of potential applicants that can apply for an exemption for a federal action despite its effects on listed species or their critical habitat: the federal action agency interested in proceeding with the action, an applicant for a federal license or permit whose application was denied primarily because of the prohibitions of ESA requiring that federal agency actions avoid jeopardy to threatened or endangered species or harm to their critical habitats, or the governor of the state where the action was to have occurred. An exemption application is considered by a specially convened committee which may exempt the federal agency’s action from the prohibitions of the ESA. The exemption process allows major economic factors to be judged to outweigh the ESA’s mandate to recover a species when the federal action is found to be in the public interest and is nationally or regionally significant. The exemption process has been invoked with a dam on the Tellico River (TN), a water project in the Platt River (WY and NE), and timber sales (OR). In three other instances, the process was begun but was aborted before a decision was reached. In addition, there has been interest over the years in invoking the process in light of controversies over management of federal and state water resource projects in California, although no application has ever been filed. When a project achieves such levels of controversy, Congress is sometimes asked to intervene in the outcome, as it did in the case of the Tellico Dam and an endangered fish in the late 1970s.

Endangered Species Status for the San Francisco Bay-Delta Distinct Population Segment of the Longfin Smelt

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) | July 30th, 2024

We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), determine endangered species status under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), for the San Francisco Ba

We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), determine endangered species status under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), for the San Francisco Bay-Delta distinct population segment (DPS) of longfin smelt (Spirinchus thaleichthys), a fish species of the Pacific Coast. This rule extends the protections of the Act to this DPS and adds it to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife.... This final rule is available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov. Comments and materials we received on the proposed rule are available for public inspection at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2022-0082. Availability of supporting materials: Supporting materials we used in preparing this rule, such as the species status assessment report, are available at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2022-0082.

Ending groundwater overdraft without affecting food security

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | June 14th, 2024

Enduring Solutions on the Colorado River

Arizona State University (ASU) | August 16th, 2024

As we work to reduce water use on the post-2026 Colorado River, two paths lie open before us. One is to incentivize conservation by giving water users the chance to bank

As we work to reduce water use on the post-2026 Colorado River, two paths lie open before us. One is to incentivize conservation by giving water users the chance to bank saved water for later use. Known most commonly as Intentionally Created Surplus (ICS), and more broadly in a series of increasingly creative implementations as “Assigned Water,” this creates short term savings. But in the long run, the approach entitles the users to take the water back out of thE bank. The other involves permanent reductions – “System Water.” Water use is reduced for the benefit of the Colorado River as a whole. Investment in Assigned Water, attractive to water managers because of the allure that they can get their water back, has crowded out investment in the more durable System Water reductions that will be needed to bring the Colorado River into balance. As we develop new operating rules for the river, we need to be mindful of the differences involved. Accounting for water as Assigned Water is a means to reduce total water use in the short-term but the basin requires a means to reduce total water use over the long-term. Enduring solutions on the river can only be found by addressing overallocation, which at its most basic means that there needs to be more unassigned water in Lake Mead. Click here for Part II

Enduring Solutions on the Colorado River Part II Floating Pools and Grand Bargains

Arizona State University (ASU) | April 18th, 2025

Conserving water now in reservoir savings banks, as a hedge against future risks associated with drought and declining flows, has emerged as one of the central tools for

Conserving water now in reservoir savings banks, as a hedge against future risks associated with drought and declining flows, has emerged as one of the central tools for managing the Colorado River. The Lower Basin "Intentionally Created Surplus" program, created in the 2007 Interim Guidelines, has shown the idea's promise and given the basin nearly two decades to learn the strengths and weaknesses of the approach. With tweaks to allow similar efforts in the Upper Basin and other modifications based on what we have learned about the current ICS approach, such "Floating Pools" are one of the key tools being considered as negotiators try to thread the needle of a seven-state agreement for post-2026 Colorado River management.mDone properly, they have the potential to finesse the states' disagreement over the terms of the 1922 Colorado River Compact in a way that could avoid potentially disruptive litigation. But getting the details right will be crucial to the development of an enduring bargain that can help the basin avoid the risk of interstate litigation. Click here for Part 1

Energizing Water Efficiency: California Energy Sector Experiences Can Advance State’s Water Conservation and Efficiency

Pacific Institute | December 29th, 2013

As a dry December accentuates the stress on California’s limited water supplies, the success of the state’s energy sector in implementing efficiency programs offers v

As a dry December accentuates the stress on California’s limited water supplies, the success of the state’s energy sector in implementing efficiency programs offers valuable lessons to the water sector. A new report from the Pacific Institute examines the rules, regulations, and policies that promote energy efficiency and finds models for water management in drivers like the energy sector’s appliance standards, building codes, pricing policies, and utility-sponsored efficiency programs. California has made remarkable improvements in energy efficiency over the last several decades and is recognized as a national leader. The state’s per capita electricity and natural gas consumption is about 45% and 30% less, respectively, than other Americans. Indeed, California’s per capita electricity consumption has remained largely unchanged since the mid-1970s – while increasing by more than 50% across the U.S.  Efficiency policies, including incentive and education programs, have been a major factor in reducing per capita energy use in California. In water conservation and efficiency, California has also made major advances. Many urban areas across the state, including Los Angeles and San Francisco, are serving a larger population with the same or even less water than 20 years ago. But with increasing pressure on water supply from population and economic growth, the need to restore freshwater ecosystems, and climate change, greater water conservation and efficiency are essential. “Reductions in per-capita water demand have been driven first by a shift to a less water-intensive service-oriented economy, and second by federal, state, and local policies as well as utility programs facilitating water-efficiency improvements,” said Heather Cooley, co-director of the Pacific Institute Water Program. “We must examine new approaches for achieving even greater savings to address the water challenges we now face.” The Pacific Institute report identifies programs that have worked for the energy sector and offers recommendations for how they could be adapted to the water sector. First among them are to continuously update standards and codes for fixtures and buildings to capture new technologies and practices.

Energy and water co-benefits from covering canals with solar panels

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | March 18th, 2021

Solar power development over canals is an emerging response to the energy–water–food nexus that can result in multiple benefits for water and energy infrastructure. C

Solar power development over canals is an emerging response to the energy–water–food nexus that can result in multiple benefits for water and energy infrastructure. Case studies of over-canal solar photovoltaic arrays have demonstrated enhanced photovoltaic performance due to the cooler microclimate next to the canal. In addition, shade from the photovoltaic panels has been shown to mitigate evaporation and potentially mitigate aquatic weed growth. However, the evaporation savings and financial co-benefits have not been quantified across major canal systems. Here we use regional hydrologic and techno-economic simulations of solar photovoltaic panels covering California’s 6,350 km canal network, which is the world’s largest conveyance system and covers a wide range of climates, insolation rates and water costs. We find that over-canal solar could reduce annual evaporation by an average of 39 ± 12 thousand m3 per km of canal. Furthermore, the financial benefits from shading the canals outweigh the added costs of the cable-support structures required to span the canals. The net present value of over-canal solar exceeds conventional overground solar by 20–50%, challenging the convention of leaving canals uncovered and calling into question our understanding of the most economic locations for solar power.

Energy Down the Drain: The Hidden Costs of California’s Water Supply

Pacific Institute | August 24th, 2004

As California’s electricity demand sets record highs and the Southwest is parched by drought, Energy Down the Drain: The Hidden Cost of California’s Water Supply b

As California’s electricity demand sets record highs and the Southwest is parched by drought, Energy Down the Drain: The Hidden Cost of California’s Water Supply by the Pacific Institute and the NRDC shows the hidden connection between energy and water. “With power shortages and a water scarcity a constant threat across the West, it’s time to look at water and energy in a new way,” said Dr. Gary Wolff a co-author of the report and Principal Economist and Engineer with the Pacific Institute. “But too often, policymakers and water and energy experts ignore the links. The good news is we can reduce our energy use, cut air pollution and create new energy supplies with cost-effective improvements to water efficiency.”