Friends of the River v. Sites Project Authority

California Courts of Appeal, Third Appellate District | September 20th, 2024

Governing Nature: Bambi Law in a Wall-E World

Social Science Research Network (SSRN) | January 28th, 2021

Humanity has disrupted many of the fundamental processes that shape nature worldwide. Virtually no places remain unchanged. Many ecosystems have moved far from their hist

Humanity has disrupted many of the fundamental processes that shape nature worldwide. Virtually no places remain unchanged. Many ecosystems have moved far from their historic conditions and no longer support native species or traditional human uses. In the Anthropocene, a new geologic era dominated by the human impact on Earth, these problems will continue to get worse. In response, humans are intervening in ecosystems at a massive scale. This Article argues that, even as humanity engages in an unprecedented level of ecosystem management, existing environmental governance structures are ill suited to manage this new nature. Ecologists who focus on restoring ecosystems have begun to abandon efforts to recreate idealized historical ecosystems, recognizing that such efforts will fail. Instead, they embrace new approaches that acknowledge continuing human impacts and seek to shape impacted habitats in a way that benefits both human and other life. This Article examines the new ecological approaches, using their migration of purpose and approach to illuminate ecosystem management in the Anthropocene and the new obligations it places on environmental law. To sharpen this focus, the Article considers three case studies of managed ecosystems, detailing the extent to which humans are controlling nature. The case studies suggest that the existing literature seriously underestimates the magnitude of the questions society will soon face. The Article concludes that although we face the daunting prospect of reshaping the very fabric of nature, we lack the governance structures to decide what shape it should take. Society will need environmental law governance that can answer fundamental questions about humanity’s role in managing nature at all scales. This Article proposes several starting principles to encourage legal scholars to address this need.

Governor's Commission to Review California Water Rights Law Summary Final Report

State of California | December 1st, 1978

Governor's Commission to Review California Water Rights Law: Final Report

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | December 22nd, 1978

The Final Report of the Governor's Commission to Review Water Rights Law, dated 12/22/1978.  The report contains the Commission's analysis of existing California water r

The Final Report of the Governor's Commission to Review Water Rights Law, dated 12/22/1978.  The report contains the Commission's analysis of existing California water rights law and recommendations for modifications. The Commission recommended 'modernization' in four areas:  water rights, efficiency in water use, instream uses of water, and groundwater.

Grand theft water and the calculus of compliance

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | August 24th, 2020

Water crises constitute a challenge for humanity. Uncertain supply and growing demand are driving higher water theft, particularly by agricultural users who account for a

Water crises constitute a challenge for humanity. Uncertain supply and growing demand are driving higher water theft, particularly by agricultural users who account for approximately 70% of global use. However, research into water theft is underexplored in all disciplines. This paper provides a conceptual framework and modelling approach designed to improve understanding of both individual and institutional barriers to water theft. The framework and model explore how effective detection, prosecution, conviction and penalties can be assessed. Three case studies test the validity of our framework. Our findings suggest that while individuals and companies may be responsible for the act of theft, the phenomenon reflects a systematic failure of arrangements (political, legal, institutional, and so on). In addition, when regulators fail to understand the value of water, inadequate prescribed penalties increase the risk of theft. We invite others to test our framework, apply our model and engage in a wider conversation about water theft.

Groundwater Exchange Pools and Urban Water Supply Sustainability: Modeling Directed and Undirected Networks

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) | August 1st, 2018

Groundwater basins are important sources of water supply and storage for many cities. Groundwater exchange pools offer additional opportunities for utilizing these

Groundwater basins are important sources of water supply and storage for many cities. Groundwater exchange pools offer additional opportunities for utilizing these common pool resources, but their potential role in urban water management is not clear, and modeling such exchanges can be challenging. This paper presents an analysis of the potential for groundwater basin exchange pools to contribute to urban water supply sustainability. Building on an existing model of urban water management in Los Angeles, the analysis assesses the potential for groundwater exchange pools to reduce scarcity and demonstrates a method for modeling two-way (undirected) flows within a directed-network model using linear programming. Results indicate that exchange pools can help alleviate shortages from operational changes (reduced imported water) in Los Angeles, but providing more parties with access to storage improves their effectiveness. Exchange pools could potentially provide 6–12% of total supplies and reduce shortages as much as 86%. Considerations for organizing exchange pools are discussed to explore policy implications for managing common pool resources. The analytical method for embedding undirected network flows within a larger directed-network model has wide applicability for water resource systems analysis applications, including modeling water markets and interbasin transfers. * U.C. Davis hosts a discussion of the content by the authors at California Water Blog. 

Groundwater Pumping Allocations under California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act: Considerations for Groundwater Sustainability Agencies

Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) | July 1st, 2018

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) became law on January 1, 2015, forever changing the manner in which groundwater will be managed in California. It requir

The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) became law on January 1, 2015, forever changing the manner in which groundwater will be managed in California. It requires local Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) to be formed and Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) to be prepared in order to achieve sustainable groundwater management within 20 years of adopting a GSP. SGMA applies to 127 medium and high priority groundwater subbasins around the state. Over 100 of the medium and high priority groundwater subbasins are in conditions of chronic overdraft (DWR, 2018), meaning average annual groundwater extractions exceed average annual water replenishment to many of the subbasins. These conditions have resulted in a variety of undesirable impacts to the subbasin, including, but not limited to, increasing depth to groundwater, reductions of groundwater storage, seawater intrusion, degraded water quality, and land subsidence. In many subbasins, groundwater overdraft conditions will require GSAs to impose reductions in pumping in order to achieve sustainable conditions in the subbasin. To do this, GSAs will need set a limit or “cap” on the overall amount of groundwater that is removed from the subbasin, assigning portions of this capped amount to groundwater pumpers in the form of a pumping allocation. Making pumping allocation decisions will be a difficult task for GSAs, as it will require restricting access to groundwater resources upon which the agricultural community, cities and towns, and others depend. SGMA expressly does not create or adjust groundwater rights and the basic law of groundwater rights remains largely unchanged. Simply put, this means that while GSAs are tasked with managing groundwater with the goal of bringing groundwater conditions into balance and stopping further depletions and other undesirable impacts, they do not have the authority to change or modify groundwater rights. Thus, GSAs should be mindful of the basic law of groundwater as articulated by the common law and a series of adjudicatory court decisions over the last 100 plus years. The subject of this paper is how to address this dilemma, with the reasoning that if GSAs devise groundwater allocation schemes in a manner consistent with the fundamental principles of groundwater law, the schemes are likely to be more durable, and GSAs are more likely to achieve sustainable groundwater management in a legally defensible manner. To do this, we first provide background on the nature of groundwater rights and how the hierarchy of groundwater rights may affect the legal defensibility of pumping allocations imposed by GSAs upon pumpers. We then discuss the role of groundwater allocations and methods for allocating groundwater pumping rights, and then offer a suggested allocation approach with criteria for consideration when using this approach. To help readers work through the allocation process, the paper includes a hypothetical decision tree graphic. We also discuss the importance of measurement, tracking, and enforcement, as well as additional considerations under SGMA before offering some concluding remarks.

Groundwater Sustainability Plan Fillmore Basin (Final - Revised)

Fillmore and Piru Basins Groundwater Sustainability Agency | July 8th, 2024

In January 2024, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) informed the Fillmore and Piru Basins Groundwater Sustainability Agency (FPBGSA or Agency) that the Gr

In January 2024, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) informed the Fillmore and Piru Basins Groundwater Sustainability Agency (FPBGSA or Agency) that the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) submitted to DWR in January 2022 for the Fillmore Basin was deemed incomplete and provided the Agency with a 180-day period to address the deficiencies. In consultation with DWR, the Agency Board of Directors, and stakeholders, the Fillmore Basin GSP has been revised to address the deficiencies. This revised version of the GSP is not a complete update of the GSP; rather, it only revises those sections of the GSP (and associated appendices) to address the DWR-identified deficiencies. A more robust revisit of the GSP will be part of the 5-year update due in 2027. Due to size, this file has been divided. Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9, Part 10, Part 11, Part 12, Part 13

Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the Delta-Mendota Subbasin

Delta-Mendota Subbasin Coordination Committee | July 31st, 2024

1. Table of Contents 2. Executive Summary 3. Introduction 4. Plan Area 5. Basin Setting 6. Groundwater Conditions 7. Water Budget 8. Sustainability Criteria 9

1. Table of Contents 2. Executive Summary 3. Introduction 4. Plan Area 5. Basin Setting 6. Groundwater Conditions 7. Water Budget 8. Sustainability Criteria 9. Monitoring 10. Projects and Management 11. Plan Implementation 12. References 13. Appendices For a full history of basin GSPs, go to the Department of Water Resources Sustainable Groundwater Management Act portal.

Groundwater: The Water-Budget Myth

National Academy of Sciences (NAS) | June 1st, 1982

Water-resource scientists are concerned that some basic principles are being overlooked by water managers. Rather than discuss the scope of groundwater hydrolog

Water-resource scientists are concerned that some basic principles are being overlooked by water managers. Rather than discuss the scope of groundwater hydrology, we have chosen to focus on a common misconception to illustrate the point. Perhaps the most common misconception in groundwater hydrology is that a water budget of an area determines the magnitude of possible groundwater development. Several well-known hydrologists have addressed this misconception and attempted to dispel it. Somehow, though, it persists and continues to color decisions by the water-management community. The laws governing the development of groundwater in Nevada as well as several other states are based on the idea that pumping within a groundwater basin shall not exceed the recharge. It is the intent of this paper to re-examine the issue.