Guide to Compliance with California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act: How to avoid the “undesirable result” of “significant and unreasonable adverse impacts on beneficial uses of surface waters"

Stanford University | September 4th, 2018

In enacting the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) the California Legislature, for the first time ever, expressly linked the two historically distinct legal r

In enacting the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) the California Legislature, for the first time ever, expressly linked the two historically distinct legal regimes governing water in the state that previously had been entirely separate: one governing surface water use and the other groundwater use. SGMA requires Groundwater Sustainability Agencies (GSAs) and their Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs or Plans) to consider and address the groundwater-surface water interaction, and specifically the impacts of groundwater pumping on surface water beneficial uses. SGMA defines sustainable groundwater management as the avoidance of six “undesirable results” identified in the law. The purpose of this guide is to help GSAs and other stakeholders understand and comply with the requirement of SGMA that groundwater withdrawals must not cause “significant and unreasonable adverse impacts on beneficial uses of the surface water,” known as “undesirable result no. 6.” This guide is based on the principle that existing legal frameworks (laws, regulations, court decisions, etc.) provide the clearest and most pertinent guidance on what constitutes undesirable result no. 6. This guide addresses only the explicit legal aspects of this statutory mandate. It does not address technical and scientific aspects of SGMA compliance and offers no advice on the steps GSAs must take to get an adequate technical understanding of the groundwater-surface water connections under their purview. GSAs may look to other sources for guidance on that front. In addition, “Navigating Groundwater-Surface Water Interactions under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act,” authored by experts at the University of California Berkeley provides a helpful overview of the steps involved in implementing SGMA provisions relating to groundwater-surface water interactions.  

Hemet San Jacinto Stipulated Judgment

Superior Court of California, County of Riverside | April 18th, 2013

Background from "An Evaluation of California’s Adjudicated Groundwater Basins," Langridge et al, 2016 (UC Davis) Groundwater problems in the San Jacinto Basin were f

Background from "An Evaluation of California’s Adjudicated Groundwater Basins," Langridge et al, 2016 (UC Davis) Groundwater problems in the San Jacinto Basin were first addressed by the court in a 1954 judgment that allocated pumping rights for the Fruitvale Mutual Water Company in the upper San Jacinto Basin. Declining groundwater levels persisted into the 1970s, and local water purveyors attempted to develop a groundwater management plan to address the declines. Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), which had acquired the Fruitvale Company in 1972, worked with the water purveyors in the 1990s to implement an AB 3030 groundwater management plan for the West San Jacinto Groundwater Management Area. In 2001, a Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and local agencies required a water management plan for the Hemet/San Jacinto Groundwater Management Area, the eastern portion of the San Jacinto Basin, and a plan was released in 2007. At the same time, the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians, negotiating with the local agencies to specify their groundwater rights from the Hemet/San Jacinto Groundwater Management Area, also pushed for a management plan. These negotiations culminated in the 2008 Soboba Settlement Agreement Act that established their water rights. A 2013 stipulated judgment allocated pumping rights for public water agencies, provided for water rights outlined in the Soboba Settlement Agreement, incorporated the Water Management Plan, and mandated a Watermaster."

How are Western water districts managing groundwater basins?

California Agriculture (UCANR) | March 13th, 2018

Making the transition from open-access groundwater rights to sustainable groundwater management is a formidable task for newly formed groundwater sustainability age

Making the transition from open-access groundwater rights to sustainable groundwater management is a formidable task for newly formed groundwater sustainability agencies in California. As agencies begin to decide how to make equitable water allocations, how to monitor groundwater use and what mix of supply- and demand-side mechanisms to adopt to satisfy sustainability criteria, the groundwater management strategies in place across other basins in the western United States are worth studying. We surveyed 18 groundwater districts in California and other Western states to identify the management approaches and practices they have instituted. The conclusions we draw suggest a correlative rights framework of water allocation with phase-ins for heavy users; metered pumping; flexible arrangements for trading and carrying over allocations for multiple years; and incentivizing groundwater recharge, including recharge from deep percolation from crops. Rigid formulas for significantly reducing groundwater use in medium- and high-priority basins are likely to have significant negative effects on the regional economy.

How Native Americans will Shape the Future of Water in the West

New Yorker | January 27th, 2023

As a child, Stephen Lewis heard stories about a river that, for the most part, no longer flowed. “How I grew up was that it was a theft, that it was stolen from us,”

As a child, Stephen Lewis heard stories about a river that, for the most part, no longer flowed. “How I grew up was that it was a theft, that it was stolen from us,” he told me late last year. “There was what we used to call the Mighty Gila River, and now it was just pretty much dry. There was no water.” Lewis is the governor of the Gila River Indian Community (gric), a group that has occupied land south of Phoenix for centuries. When I met him, in the dining room of the Whirlwind Golf Club, which the tribe owns, Lewis had recently returned from Santa Fe. There, he’d attended a celebration marking the centennial of the Colorado River Compact, an agreement that continues to shape water politics in the Southwest. In Santa Fe, Lewis took note of a black-and-white photograph of the compact’s signers—white men in dark jackets, gathered around a wooden desk.

Hudson v. Dailey

Supreme Court of California | December 1st, 1909

Identifying organic contaminants at trespass cannabis grows on federal land in California, USA

Elsevier | September 25th, 2025

Despite the legalization of recreational cannabis in California, USA, illegal cannabis cultivation remains pervasive, partly through the establishment of illegal cult

Despite the legalization of recreational cannabis in California, USA, illegal cannabis cultivation remains pervasive, partly through the establishment of illegal cultivation on public lands (trespass grows). These operations often illegally divert water for irrigation and perform unauthorized applications of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. This work investigates a broad suite of these chemicals, focusing on their persistence in topsoil and presence in water and bed sediment in adjacent streams. Quantitative analyses of pesticides were conducted (183 compounds in water; 176 in topsoil/bed sediment), supplemented by qualitative nontargeted screening at three trespass grows that had no active cultivation for 8 months to 2 years. Targeted multi-residue analysis of topsoil detected the insecticides bifenthrin, cyfluthrin, malathion and imidacloprid (with concentrations up to 38 ng/g dry weight, d.w.), and the fungicides fluopyram, myclobutanil, and triadimefon (concentrations up to 8.1 ng/g d.w.). No pesticides were detected in the companion water or streambed sediment samples from adjacent streams. In addition, no water samples were found to have measurable estrogenic activity. Nontargeted screening uncovered additional pesticides (i.e., spiromesifen, trinexapac) in the topsoil and cannabis-related compounds (i.e., cannabidol, delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol) in both topsoil and streambed sediment suggesting the likelihood of offsite transport of cannabis related compounds. Phthalate plasticizers, rubber-related compounds, pharmaceuticals and personal care product chemicals were detected in topsoil, water, and streambed sediment and may be related to extensive irrigation infrastructure installed at these trespass grows. This work begins to establish a contaminant profile associated with illegal cannabis growing activities, providing a foundation for future research focused on their potential ecological impacts.

Implementing Climate-Smart Conservation

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | March 4th, 2025

In our first report, Climate-Smart Tools to Protect California’s Freshwater Biodiversity (Sommer et al. 2024), we reviewed a broad suite of tools available to a

In our first report, Climate-Smart Tools to Protect California’s Freshwater Biodiversity (Sommer et al. 2024), we reviewed a broad suite of tools available to address the urgent problem of safeguarding California’s freshwater biodiversity in the changing climate. This toolbox includes some familiar approaches—such as various ways to improve freshwater habitat—as well as approaches that may be less familiar, more experimental, and more controversial. We also recommended the adoption of a climate-smart conservation planning process, involving a broad range of stakeholders, to prioritize the selection of tools within watersheds and to adaptively implement those tools. In this follow-up report, we explore the feasibility of implementing these tools and climate-smart planning in light of legal, policy, and institutional factors.2 Our analysis draws on an extensive review of the legal literature on ecosystem and protected species management, as well as interviews and small workshops with a wide-ranging set of 45 experts from all over the state. These experts are working on the frontlines of ecosystem policy and management; they include state and federal regulators, members of the environmental conservation community, legal professionals, and representatives of many entities involved in water and land management.

Improving Water Right Enforcement Authority

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | April 5th, 2012

The State Water Board’s enforcement authority for water right is inconsistent with its broad enforcement authority over water quality matters. The recommendations conta

The State Water Board’s enforcement authority for water right is inconsistent with its broad enforcement authority over water quality matters. The recommendations contained in this report would enhance the ability of the State Water Board to take appropriate enforcement actions over water right matters.

In the Field and In the Stream: California Reasonable Use Law Applied to Water for Agriculture

Golden Gate University (GSU) | August 1st, 2016

When it comes to fresh water consumption in California, going forward we will need to learn to do more with less. There are at least two main reasons why California will

When it comes to fresh water consumption in California, going forward we will need to learn to do more with less. There are at least two main reasons why California will need to learn to do more with less water. First, there is a growing population in the state, a population that is increasingly urban which means there will be greater demand for urban municipal domestic water supplies. Second, there are now increasing demands to leave additional amounts of surface fresh water instream. The demands for additional instream flow relate in part to the declining condition of California’s native fisheries (such as salmon, steelhead and smelt). The demands for additional instream flow also relate to  water quality and salinity concerns. With reduced fresh water flows in our coastal rivers, seawater is pushing further upriver, and increasingly saline water cannot be used for drinking or irrigating.6 With seawater intrusion, excessive upstream diversion of fresh water threatens the very supply of fresh water. The long-standing debate over water exports from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, and the impact of such Delta exports on salinity, water quality and native fisheries, is perhaps the most prominent illustration of such demands for additional instream flow.

Incomplete Determination for Groundwater Sustainability Plan submitted for Owens Valley Subbasin (Basin No. 6-012.01)

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | April 14th, 2025