The Public Trust Doctrine: Assessing Its Recent Past & Charting Its Future

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | January 1st, 2012

For over four decades, the public trust doctrine has served as a foundational principle of modern environmental and natural resources law. This issue of the UC Davis Law

For over four decades, the public trust doctrine has served as a foundational principle of modern environmental and natural resources law. This issue of the UC Davis Law Review , and the related, major symposium that drew a standing-room-only audience to King Hall in March 2011, demonstrate the continuing vitality of the public trust. The scholarship featured in these pages continues the UC Davis Law School’s leadership role concerning the doctrine, examines its recent development, and poses key questions regarding its future course. Much has been written about the public trust doctrine, and the articles in this volume explore many of its nuances and implications. Simply stated, however, the doctrine provides that certain natural resources are held by the government in a special status — in “trust” — for current and future generations. Government officials may neither alienate those resources in to private ownership nor permit their injury or destruction. To the contrary, those officials have an affirmative, ongoing duty to safeguard the long-term preservation of those resources for the benefit of the general public.

The Pulse of the Bay 2019: Pollutant Pathways

San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) | September 26th, 2019

Pollutants make their way to San Francisco Bay from near and far. Some pollutants come from the other side of the world, such as the mercury that is emitted into the atmo

Pollutants make their way to San Francisco Bay from near and far. Some pollutants come from the other side of the world, such as the mercury that is emitted into the atmosphere by coal-fired power plants in Asia, transported across the Pacific Ocean by the wind, and deposited on the surface of the Bay and in the Bay watershed. Some pollutants come from the far corners of the Bay’s watershed, which encompasses 40% of the land surface of California. Mercury used in historic gold mining regions in the Sierra Nevada is still flowing downstream into Central Valley rivers, through the Delta, and into the Bay.  Most pollutants, however, originate from activities closer to home in the small, local watersheds that surround the Bay. Rain that falls onto yards, roofs, parking lots, streets, farms, pastures, and other surfaces in the watersheds picks up pollutants and carries them to the Bay through an intricate network of thousands of miles of storm drain pipes, culverts, and creeks. Most of this stormwater flows to the Bay without any form of pollutant removal.  Another parallel and intricate network of thousands of miles of pipes carries wastewater from homes, business, and industries through sewage collection systems to municipal wastewater treatment plants. These treatment plants are highly effective at removing most pollutants from the wastewater stream, but some are not effectively treated and pass through to the Bay.  Some industrial operations, such as the Bay Area’s petroleum refineries, are large enough to warrant having their own wastewater treatment facilities that remove pollutants so the effluent can be safely discharged into the Bay, reused in plant operations, or applied to land.  Disposal of dredged material at designated sites within the Bay is another activity that introduces pollutants to specific areas in the Bay, but in this case the pollutants are simply transferred from one part of the Bay to another. Much of the pollutant mass in dredged material is also removed from the Bay via disposal in the ocean or beneficial reuse in wetlands and upland sites. This edition of the Pulse of the Bay features articles on the four major pollutant pathways that are the primary focus of Bay water quality managers: municipal wastewater, industrial wastewater, stormwater, and dredging and dredged material disposal.

The Pulse of the Bay 2022: 50 Years after the Clean Water Act

San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) | October 13th, 2022

This August an algal bloom of historic proportions blanketed San Francisco Bay. The most concerning aspect of the bloom was the death of thousands of fish across wide are

This August an algal bloom of historic proportions blanketed San Francisco Bay. The most concerning aspect of the bloom was the death of thousands of fish across wide areas of the Bay, including 10,000 yellowfin goby, hundreds of striped bass and white sturgeon, and other species like green sturgeon, bat rays, and sharks. This is the most widespread and deadliest fish kill in the Bay in recent memory.

The Pulse of the Bay: The 25th Anniversary of the RMP

San Francisco Estuary Institute (SFEI) | July 1st, 2017

San Francisco Bay is the defining feature of our region and a world-class ecosystem. The Bay Area is also known world-wide as a cradle of innovation, excellence, and succ

San Francisco Bay is the defining feature of our region and a world-class ecosystem. The Bay Area is also known world-wide as a cradle of innovation, excellence, and success, especially in the technology sector. Less well known is the fact that over the past 25 years the Bay Area has been a world leader in water quality monitoring, supporting a pioneering program for the Bay that demonstrates how regional collaboration can provide the science needed to protect and improve water quality in a treasured ecosystem. The Regional Monitoring Program for Water Quality in San Francisco Bay (RMP) was established in 1993 and, with sustained local funding and continuous improvement, is going stronger than ever a quarter century later.

The Radical Groundwater Storage Test

Scientific American | October 19th, 2017

IN BRIEF California could better survive flood years and drought years by capturing floodwaters and using them to recharge underground aquifers that farmers and muni

IN BRIEF California could better survive flood years and drought years by capturing floodwaters and using them to recharge underground aquifers that farmers and municipalities now pump from when rains are scarce. To do so, water users and managers have to regard surface water and groundwater as one connected resource. A variety of test projects are proving that this approach can work. For example, farm fields can be flooded even when crops are growing so the water can percolate down into aquifers. Revising water rights and paying landowners to allow flooding can help the techniques work across California and the world.

The Rainfall Intensity-Duration Control of Debris Flows After Wildfire

American Geophysical Union (AGU) | May 23rd, 2023

The Reasonable Use Doctrine and Water Use Efficiency Report

Publisher not available | April 5th, 2011

The purpose of the report is to review the breadth of the Reasonable Use Doctrine, which can affect all water uses, including urban, hydropower, recreation, environment,

The purpose of the report is to review the breadth of the Reasonable Use Doctrine, which can affect all water uses, including urban, hydropower, recreation, environment, and agriculture, and then to focus on how the Reasonable Use Doctrine can be used promote efficient use of water in the agricultural sector. The underlying premise of this report is that the inefficient use of water is an unreasonable use of water. Accordingly, the Reasonable Use Doctrine is available prospectively to prevent general practices of inefficient water use. Indeed, the Reasonable Use Doctrine, as set forth in the State Constitution and California Statutes is broad and inviolate in scope. As interpreted by case law and administrative decisions and used to its full potential, it can comprehensively address the inefficient use of water in California.

The Reasonable Use Doctrine in California Water Law and Policy

University of California College of the Law, San Francisco (UC Law SF) | August 30th, 2016

The cardinal principle of California water law is that all water rights, and all uses of water, must be reasonable. This seemingly simple and innocuous sentence masks a w

The cardinal principle of California water law is that all water rights, and all uses of water, must be reasonable. This seemingly simple and innocuous sentence masks a world of meaning and complexity, however, because the requirement of reasonable use embraces at least four interrelated concepts. The determination of reasonable water use is utilitarian: the law seeks to encourage relatively efficient, economically and socially beneficial uses of the state’s water resources. It is situational: the evaluation of individual reasonable use concerns not only the water right holder’s own uses but also other competing demands (both consumptive and ecological) on the water resource. The reasonable use doctrine is also dynamic: the definition of reasonable use varies as the economy, technology, demographics, hydrologic conditions, environment, and societal needs evolve. And, because all uses of water must be consistent with this interdependent and variable definition of reasonable use, the law renders all water rights fragile. A water right that was reasonable when first recognized, and which may have been exercised reasonably for many years, may become unreasonable as hydrologic conditions change, as California’s economy evolves, as population grows and new demands for water arise, as ecological needs are better understood, and as the environmental laws that protect the state’s aquatic ecosystems and native species are applied in ways that limit the impoundment and diversion of water for consumptive uses.

The Rebirth of California Fish & Game Code Section 5937: Water for Fish

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | July 1st, 2012

Swarms of living creatures will live wherever the river flows. There will be large numbers of fish, because this water flows there and makes the salt water fresh; so wh

Swarms of living creatures will live wherever the river flows. There will be large numbers of fish, because this water flows there and makes the salt water fresh; so where the river flows everything will live. Fishermen will stand along the shore; from En Gedi to En Eglaim there will be places for spreading nets. In an average year, California receives inflows and imports of water totaling around 200 million acre-feet,2 enough water to cover the entire state twenty-three inches deep. But California is a state of spatial and temporal water extremes. Spatially, precipitation varies wildly: Death Valley in the Southeast averages less than three inches per year, yet the northwestern corner of the state averages over 140 inches per year. More than 70% of California’s stream flow originates north of Sacramento, but more than 80% of the water is used south of Sacramento. Temporally, precipitation varies both seasonally and annually. California’s wet season typically runs from October or November to April or May, with little or no precipitation during the growing season, from May to September.7 Annual rainfalls of 40% or more below average and 36% or more above average each typically occur once every six to seven years.  To balance these extremes, over 1,300 dams store water across the state, supplying water for urban, industrial, and agricultural uses. While these uses sustain a tremendous part of California’s economy, they also come at high, often unappreciated costs. Fish also need water, so dams that alter water flows for human benefits may also have marked negative impacts on fish.

The reduced net carbon uptake over Northern Hemisphere land causes the close-to-normal CO2 growth rate in 2021 La Niña

American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) | June 7th, 2024