San Joaquin River

Farmers Water District Groundwater Sustainability Plan Delta-Mendota Subbasin

Farmers Water District | January 1st, 2020

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) was signed into law in 2014 for the purpose of protecting California’s groundwater resources. SGMA requires all high

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) was signed into law in 2014 for the purpose of protecting California’s groundwater resources. SGMA requires all high and medium priority basins to develop Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSP) to prevent overdraft and achieve sustainability in the utilization of groundwater resources. The Delta-Mendota Subbasin (Basin 5-022.07 in the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Bulletin 118) (Subbasin) is a high priority Subbasin that has been assigned a critical overdraft designation by DWR. The Subbasin consists of 23 Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSA) who together created six individual GSA groups, each preparing a GSP in a coordinated manner as required by SGMA. Farmers Water District elected to form a GSA on June 14, 2016 in order to represent the interest of local landowners in the District in the development of a GSP with FWD designated as a Management Area in GSP. This GSP includes a description of groundwater conditions and basin settings of the Subbasin that is common to all six of the GSPs developed for the Delta-Mendota Subbasin in addition to describing the hydrogeologic conditions and management practices in the area of FWD. It also contains the steps that will be taken to achieve sustainability over the next 20 years by preventing undesirable results by monitoring for the following sustainability indicators as defined by SGMA: • Chronic Lowering of Groundwater Levels • Reduction in Groundwater Storage • Degraded Water Quality • Subsidence • Depletion of Interconnected Surface Water • Seawater Intrusion All but seawater intrusion applies to FWD, and each applicable sustainability indicator will be addressed in this GSP and is integrated into the Subbasin-wide and FWD monitoring program. Measurable objectives and minimum thresholds have been set for each sustainability indicator based on projected hydrologic conditions through the use of a numerical groundwater flow model. This GSP, in coordination with the five other GSPs for the Subbasin, will be implemented and result in the sustainable use of groundwater resources for all beneficial users in FWD and the Subbasin.

Farmers Water District Revised Groundwater Sustainability Plan Delta- Mendota Subbasin

Farmers Water District | July 18th, 2022

This work product is the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the Farmers Water District Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA). This GSP is one of six (6) individ

This work product is the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the Farmers Water District Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA). This GSP is one of six (6) individual GSPs being prepared for the Delta-Mendota Subbasin (DMS, Subbasin).

Federal Investments for the California Bay-Delta Region

U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) | February 5th, 2014

The San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Bay-Delta) region of California is an ecosystem of national significance. It is also the hub of the nation’s largest

The San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Bay-Delta) region of California is an ecosystem of national significance. It is also the hub of the nation’s largest water delivery system—infrastructure that is the foundation for economic activity in the agricultural, industrial, and recreational sectors of the economy, and provides drinking water to a population of over 25 million Californians. This document is intended to provide an overview of the federal land and water programs in and around the Bay-Delta region, their purpose, options for future programs or actions, and an overview of the actions in which agencies are engaged already. Successful long term management of water resources and the environment to achieve the co-equal goals of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) and overall Delta sustainability requires continued improvement in managing California’s finite water supply. Contents I. Introduction II. Bay Delta-Big Picture: A Holistic Approach • State and Federal Integrated Water Management • Reducing Water Demand • Increasing Water Reliability and Supply • Improve Operational Efficiency and Transfers/Exchanges • Potential Federal Water and Ecosystem Management Actions III. Role of the Federal agencies • Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • Environmental Protection Agency • Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration • Army Corps of Engineers • Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Service U.S. Forest Service Rural Development Farm Services Agency Agriculture Research Service IV. Conclusion

Field-scale crop water consumption estimates reveal potential water savings in California agriculture

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | March 25th, 2024

Final Environmental Impact Report for Adoption of a Regulation for the Hexavalent Chromium Maximum Contaminant Level

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | April 17th, 2024

As the lead agency in accordance with sections 15089 and 15132 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.),

As the lead agency in accordance with sections 15089 and 15132 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.), this document is the Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) for the adoption of statewide regulations setting the maximum contaminant level (MCL) for hexavalent chromium (Proposed Regulations). The Proposed Regulations include a maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 10 μg/L for hexavalent chromium. (Cal. Code Regs. tit. 22, § 64431 Table 64431-A.) The Proposed Regulations also include a compliance schedule based on public water system size, by adding subdivision (p) and Table 64432-B to section 64432 of title 22 of the California Code of Regulations, identifies a detection limit for purposes of reporting, sets monitoring and reporting requirements and public notice requirements for violations of the MCL, and establishes the Best Available Technologies (BAT) for treating hexavalent chromium in drinking water. California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Chrom VI MCL rulemaking chronology.

Final Environmental Impact Statement: Long-Term Operation of the Central Valley Project and State Water Project Central Valley Project, California

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | November 15th, 2024

The United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) prepared this environmental impact statement (EIS) for the 2021 Endangered Species Act R

The United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) prepared this environmental impact statement (EIS) for the 2021 Endangered Species Act Reinitiation of Section 7 Consultation on the Long-Term Operation of the Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP). This EIS is meant to inform the public and decision makers on potential federal actions by examining a range of reasonable alternatives and the potential effect on the environment. Reclamation manages the CVP. The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) manages the SWP. Collectively, the operation of the CVP and SWP provides flood control and navigation; delivers water to 30 million people; supports 4 million acres of agriculture; maintains 19 wildlife refuges on the Pacific Flyway; protects numerous iconic and endemic species such as Chinook salmon, coho salmon, steelhead, sturgeon, and smelt; generates 4.5 million megawatt hours of electricity; maintains water quality for beneficial uses in the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta Estuary (Bay-Delta); and supports recreation throughout Northern California. 

Final Sensitive Beneficial Use Literature Review (Task 3.1.1)

Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV-Salts) | May 16th, 2023

Final Value Planning Study Report for Through Delta Facility, Sacramento, California

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | July 1st, 2007

Financing Delta Improvements and Environmental Mitigation

California Research Bureau (CRB) | September 1st, 2008

Resolution of the Delta’s water supply, water quality, and fish problems may involve building various structures, possibly including gates, pumps, canals, levees, and d

Resolution of the Delta’s water supply, water quality, and fish problems may involve building various structures, possibly including gates, pumps, canals, levees, and dams, and undertaking landscaping rearrangements to improve habitat for several species of flora and fauna. Resolution also involves changing water flow regimes in ways that would make more or less water, but probably less, available for human uses. This work and these changes will cost serious money. Cost estimates for many of these actions have not yet been developed. This paper explores approaches to financing these “improvements” and “mitigations.” While a little abstract, this is abstraction that matters. It will determine from whose pockets a good deal of money will come. California has a long history of financing water projects. The first section of this paper reviews this history, in hopes of identifying water-financing principles that might be adapted to Delta improvements and mitigation. Some deep-seated controversies about how Delta improvements should be financed have roots in this history, and it may be helpful to point them out. A core idea in California’s approach to financing water projects is that beneficiaries should pay for them. Decades ago, this was a straightforward proposition – people or water districts should pay for the necessary dams, canals, and pumps and the costs of operating them in proportion to the amount of water they received. In the current age of rising environmental sensitivity, it is a little muddier. An alternative formulation that applies, at least crudely, to housing developments and highway projects, is that project proponents should pay to mitigate at least some of the environmental harm that their project is likely to cause. The second section of this paper explores this controversial subject. It seems unlikely that any consensus can be reached about how to finance facilities in the Delta without reaching some agreement about how to deal with this matter. This paper was first issued in July, 2008. This version contains a few clarifications made in response to the Blue Ribbon Task Force’s reviewers. The author is grateful for their suggestions.

Fire influence on land–water interactions in aridland catchments

Oxford University Press (OUP) | January 9th, 2025

Wildfires have increased in size, frequency, and intensity in arid regions of the western United States because of human activity, changing land use, and rising temperatu

Wildfires have increased in size, frequency, and intensity in arid regions of the western United States because of human activity, changing land use, and rising temperature. Fire can degrade water quality, reshape aquatic habitat, and increase the risk of high discharge and erosion. Drawing from patterns in montane dry forest, chaparral, and desert ecosystems, we developed a conceptual framework describing how interactions and feedbacks among material accumulation, combustion of fuels, and hydrologic transport influence the effects of fire on streams. Accumulation and flammability of fuels shift in opposition along gradients of aridity, influencing the materials available for transport. Hydrologic transport of combustion products and materials accumulated after fire can propagate the effects of fire to unburned stream–riparian corridors, and episodic precipitation characteristic of arid lands can cause lags, spatial heterogeneity, and feedbacks in response. Resolving uncertainty in fire effects on arid catchments will require monitoring across hydroclimatic gradients and episodic precipitation.