The State Water Project’s Strategic Plan

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | February 22nd, 2024

The strategic plan, Elevate to ’28, projects the trajectory for the SWP for the next five years.

The strategic plan, Elevate to ’28, projects the trajectory for the SWP for the next five years.

The State Water Resources Control Board's Role in Implementing the Delta Plan

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | April 5th, 2011

The Delta Plan should identify the authorities of the State Water Board that may be employed to implement its goals, subgoals, and strategies. The State Water Board’s B

The Delta Plan should identify the authorities of the State Water Board that may be employed to implement its goals, subgoals, and strategies. The State Water Board’s Bay Delta Plan and Delta Strategic Workplan should be incorporated into the Delta Plan.

The Status of Perennial Estuarine Wetlands in the State of California

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | September 13th, 2008

The statewide initiative to monitor the condition of wetlands has produced a report on the status of wetlands in California’s estuaries. The report is the mos

The statewide initiative to monitor the condition of wetlands has produced a report on the status of wetlands in California’s estuaries. The report is the most comprehensive evaluation ever conducted on the overall health of any class of wetlands in California. It provides an estimate of how much estuarine wetland exists in California and the health of those wetlands. Benefits of the Report The report offers multiple benefits to wetland managers and policy-makers: It establishes a baseline of data in estuaries against which to measure future progress toward the state’s “No Net Loss of Wetlands” policy. Legislators and other policy makers can use the data to determine if wetland protection policies and programs are working and if the public is getting a return for its investment in wetlands. It helps local wetland managers compare the condition of their estuarine wetland or restoration project against the baseline for their region. It satisfies some important legal requirements, including a federal requirement that the state report on the status of wetlands to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) every two years. The Basics The report studied four questions: Where are the state’s estuarine wetlands, and how much do we have? What is the condition of existing estuarine wetlands statewide, and how does their condition vary by region? What are the primary causes of stress to wetland health, and do those causes vary among different coastal regions? How does the overall health of estuarine wetland restoration projects compare with similar wetlands in their region?

The Status of Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in the Stanislaus River Summary report of 2015 snorkel surveys

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | August 1st, 2016

The Status of Tribal Water Rights in the Colorado River Basin

Water and Tribes Initiative | April 9th, 2021

There are 30 federally recognized tribes in the Colorado River Basin. Twenty two of these tribes have recognized rights to use 3.2 million-acre feet (maf) of Colorado Riv

There are 30 federally recognized tribes in the Colorado River Basin. Twenty two of these tribes have recognized rights to use 3.2 million-acre feet (maf) of Colorado River system water annually, or approximately 22 to 26 percent of the Basin’s average annual water supply. In addition, 12 of the tribes have unresolved water rights claims, which will likely increase the overall volume of tribal water rights in the Basin. Under the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact and the U.S. Supreme Court’s decree in Arizona v. California, all tribal water uses are counted against the apportionments made to the states. Tribes’ rights are generally senior to state law-based water rights.

The Steam Wells of California

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | May 5th, 1928

The utilisation of the steam of the soffioni of Tuscany as a source of mechanical power has steadily developed since 1904 when the first pioneer experiments were

The utilisation of the steam of the soffioni of Tuscany as a source of mechanical power has steadily developed since 1904 when the first pioneer experiments were carried out at Larderello by Prince Ginori Conti. The remarkable results which have since been achieved were described in NATURE of Jan. 14 last. Similar sources of geothermal energy were first tapped in California in 1921, and since then several deep wells have been successfully sunk, some of them being superior both in pressure and steam output to any yet reported from Italy. The active region is known as ‘The Geysers,’ and lies on the western side of the St. Helena Range, one of the coast ranges of California. Along a line some twentyfive miles in length, which appears to mark a fault or shatter belt, hot springs, some of which are associated with quicksilver deposits, occur at intervals. There are no actual geysers at ‘The Geysers,’ but over an area of thirty-five acres the ground is dotted with hot springs and fumaroles and salt patches, and steam and gases are constantly seeping through the surface. A thorough investigation of the locality has been made by Dr. E. T. Allen and Dr. A. L. Day, and the results, beautifully published by the Carnegie Institution of Washington,1 add very materially to our knowledge of subterranean supplies of magmatic steam.

The Struggle for Water Justice in California’s San Joaquin Valley: A Focus on Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | February 1st, 2018

In California, lack of access to clean, safe, and affordable water is a threat to public health and well-being, and violates the state’s newly codified Human Ri

In California, lack of access to clean, safe, and affordable water is a threat to public health and well-being, and violates the state’s newly codified Human Right to Water (HRTW). In low-income communities located outside city boundaries (otherwise known as disadvantaged unincorporated communities or DUCs), drinking water is often unsafe to drink. In many such localities, drinking water is contaminated by industrial by-products (usually associated with agriculture, oil and gas production, transportation, and manufacturing) and compromised by inadequate wastewater treatment and disposal systems, as well as naturally occurring toxic substances like arsenic and uranium. Many DUC residents in the San Joaquin Valley pay a triple penalty to obtain safe water: they bear the health costs of unsafe drinking water; they purchase that unsafe water at high costs; and they must also purchase “substitute” water—typically expensive bottled water—for drinking and cooking purposes. Lack of access to clean, safe and affordable drinking water has a racial and ethnic component: the vast majority of the valley’s DUC residents are people of color who also face cumulative impacts from environmental contamination brought on by proximity to air pollution, pesticides, toxic facilities and waste disposal. Without city governments to directly represent their interests and provide essential services, residents of these DUCs have been systematically deprived of access to important means of democratic governance (Anderson 2008). California’s San Joaquin Valley is the source of much of the state and the nation’s agricultural wealth. Yet it is also a region where poverty persists amidst prosperity (Taylor and Mar n 1998). Many of the region’s DUC residents hold low-wage and dangerous jobs, and confront severe and cumulative environmental contamination of their air, water, and land (London, Huang, Zagofsky 2011). The well-being of the nearly 350,000 residents living in 450 DUCs throughout San Joaquin Valley is therefore an important environmental health, and social justice issue that demands urgent attention by policy makers, public agencies and advocates. Over the past two decades, community leaders, advocates, and policymakers have pursued a range of strategies to address unsafe drinking water in the valley’s DUCs and elsewhere in California. For example, in 2004, resident advocates won a case against the City of Modesto in 2003 for its systematic exclusion from city services of communities of color living in nearby DUCs (Molina 2014). In 2011, Senate Bill (SB) 244 required cities and counties to address the infrastructure needs of California DUCs in land use and municipal service plans, and in annexation decisions. In 2012, an HRTW policy was passed in response to massive community mobilization. Known as Assembly Bill (AB) 685, and signed by Governor Jerry Brown, it codified that every human being has a right to safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water to meet basic human needs, and required state agencies to consider this right when establishing policies and regulations. A 2013 report by the Community Equity Initiative (led by PolicyLink, California Rural Legal Assistance Inc., and California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation) developed a sophisticated analysis of the conditions of DUCs in the San Joaquin Valley. California Unincorporated: Mapping Disadvantaged Communities in the San Joaquin Valley (Flegal et al. 2013) put DUCs on the map by using a new methodology to identify these communities, and to highlight the need for new policies and funding mechanisms to address the significant challenges they face. This report, and the dedicated work of water justice advocates, have greatly increased public awareness of water inequality in DUCs. This has helped direct new public funding to improve water infrastructure, and encouraged collaborative solutions among interest groups that historically have been in conflict with each other. However, all parties agree that much more needs to be done to understand the complex issues facing DUCs, and to provide their residents with safe and affordable drinking water. Our report analyzes this situation in detail, and offers several recommendations to inform policy and advocacy on how to improve water access to these communities. To do so, we have used maps of DUCs, CWSs, and State Small Water Systems (SSWSs), as well as water quality reports, demographic data, and expert interviews. Together, these sources have helped us highlight gaps in the provision of safe and a ordable drinking water. Our main conclusion is that California’s legislature, regulatory agencies, and water suppliers need to undertake more concerted and well-resourced efforts to ensure that the HRTW is ensured for all of the San Joaquin Valley’s residents.

The Sustainability Outlook: A Summary

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | December 13th, 2018

Whether making water resource decisions or taking action, aligning desirable outcomes with four societal values — public health and safety, healthy economy, ecosystem v

Whether making water resource decisions or taking action, aligning desirable outcomes with four societal values — public health and safety, healthy economy, ecosystem vitality, and enriching experiences — is critical to managing water for sustainability. It can be as simple as being mindful of not wasting water, and as complex as predicting and planning for the next drought or flood. Daily, every Californian is responsible for doing their part. But how will Californians know whether their actions are moving the state in the right direction?  One basic long-standing challenge to water resource resilience and reliability in California is the lack of a consistent and practical method for assessing current and future sustainability (California Department of Water Resources, in prep.). Productive planning and the setting of policy priorities require a mutual understanding of challenges, resource limitations, management deficiencies, and shared intent. Managing for sustainability must be rooted in what Californians value, as expressed by stakeholders and corroborated by extensive outreach. Accordingly, there is a need to identify, through the lens of the four societal values, desirable water management outcomes (intended outcomes) and indicators to track status and progress toward sustainability.  The Sustainability Outlook, described in this document, provides a well-organized and consistent approach for tracking local, regional, and State actions and investments. It will also assist in setting future water management priorities. When applied at a watershed scale, the Sustainability Outlook can increase the effectiveness of State water policies and return on investments. Conducting and reporting watershed conditions will more clearly reveal trends, progress, and return on investment that would be difficult to discern at a statewide scale. Watershed evaluations will also allow for the introduction of additional indicators important to specific regions of the state. Through progressive application of the Sustainability Outlook, decision-makers will be able to identify needed analytical tools and data gaps, expand on the information available to make decisions, and build a common understanding of how individual and collective actions have affected the management of water resources for sustainability.  Because sustainability is not something achieved once and forever, the Sustainability Outlook will help water resource managers adapt to changing circumstances and lessons learned. This document underscores the urgency and rationale for the recommended actions in California Water Plan Update 2018 (Update 2018), Chapter 3, “Actions for Sustainability,” as well as the importance of follow-through by those who would implement those actions.” 

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act challenges the diversity of California farms

California Agriculture (UCANR) | November 16th, 2016

California’s agricultural sector, a major groundwater user, finds itself in the midst of the implementation of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). The la

California’s agricultural sector, a major groundwater user, finds itself in the midst of the implementation of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). The law mandates the formation of local groundwater sustainability agencies (GSAs) and adoption of groundwater sustainability plans (GSPs) for all overdrafted groundwater basins across the state by 2020. Each GSA will be unique, with its own governance structures and rules, including the size and composition of the governing board, mechanisms for representing different interests, opportunities for stakeholders to participate, and rules concerning the allocation of pumping “rights” and the use of economic instruments, such as pumping permits, pumping taxes or tiered pricing, to incentivize pumping curtailments (DWR 2016). This new water management landscape may threaten the diversity of the state’s farming operations.

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Governance Conference: Research and Practice Synthesis Report 2018

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | June 8th, 2018

“The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Governance Conference: Research and Practice,” held at the UC Davis in February 2018, assembled 55 social science research

“The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act Governance Conference: Research and Practice,” held at the UC Davis in February 2018, assembled 55 social science researchers as well as practitioners from across the state to discuss the ongoing implementation of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). The California Legislature passed SGMA in 2014. SGMA required the formation of new groundwater sustainability agencies (GSAs) by June 2017 in order to develop and implement Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) for 127 medium- and high-priority groundwater basins by 2020 and 2022. With such a large task at hand, and given the importance of groundwater to California’s public health, environment, and economy, strengthening collaboration across research teams as well as between researchers and practitioners is crucial to increasing the capacity for learning about governance processes and to bridging the science-policy divide in order to support the creation of effective governance institutions. The goals of this report are to synthesize key lessons learned about SGMA at the nexus of research and practice, and to create a roadmap and research agenda going forward. Sharing information and knowledge among research teams enables a comparative perspective that cannot be achieved by one team alone. Furthermore, perspectives from practitioners inform research directions, focus attention on relevant issues and knowledge gaps, and build relationships among the SGMA community for more collaborative applied research. Conference discussions focused on discovering what has been learned in the first three years of SGMA implementation and GSA development, identifying high priority questions for the next stage of GSP development, sharing research methods, and coordinating research activities.