Water Heist: How Corporations are Cashing in on California’s Water

Public Citizen | December 1st, 2003

In 1994, the largest contractors with the California State Water Project (SWP)—the state’s largest water delivery system—called the Department of Water Resources (D

In 1994, the largest contractors with the California State Water Project (SWP)—the state’s largest water delivery system—called the Department of Water Resources (DWR) into a closed meeting. The agreements that the SWP contractors and the state reached in that meeting led to a document known as the Monterey Amendments, named after the city where the meetings took place. These “amendments” to the SWP contracts included denying that the SWP delivers half of what the contractors say it does and effectively deregulating the SWP so that the contractors can sell contracts for precisely the half of the water that doesn’t exist. Sound confusing? It is. Welcome to the world of “paper water.” In the same Monterey meetings, the state also agreed to give away an underground water storage facility that DWR spent $74 million purchasing and developing.

Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin Third Edition

Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) | May 31st, 2018

Water quality control plans, or basin plans, contain California's administrative policies and procedures for protecting state waters. Basin plans are required by the sta

Water quality control plans, or basin plans, contain California's administrative policies and procedures for protecting state waters. Basin plans are required by the state Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (California Water Code Section 13240). In addition, Section 303 of the federal Clean Water Act requires states to adopt water quality standards that “consist of the designated uses of the navigable waters involved and the water quality criteria for such waters based upon such uses.” Each of California's nine regional water quality control boards must formulate and adopt a basin plan for all areas within its region. The basin plans must conform with statewide policy set forth by the legislature and by the State Water Resources Control Board. Basin plans consist of designated beneficial uses to be protected, water quality objectives to protect those uses, and a program of implementation needed for achieving the objectives {California Water Code, Section 13050(j)}. Beneficial uses, together with their corresponding water quality objectives, meet federal regulatory criteria for water quality standards. Hence, California's basin plans serve as regulatory references for meeting both State and federal requirements for water quality control {40 CFR Parts 130 and 131}.One significant difference between the state and federal programs is that California's basin plans establish standards for ground waters in addition to surface waters. Basin plans are adopted and amended by regional water boards under a structured process involving full public participation and state environmental review. Basin plans and amendments do not become effective until approved by the State Water Board. Regulatory provisions must be approved by the Office of Administrative Law. Adoption or revision of surface water standards are subject to the approval of the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency before they become accepted standards for the federal program. Basin plans complement water quality control plans adopted by the State Water Board. It is the intent of the state and regional water boards to maintain basin plans in an updated and readily available edition that reflects all current water quality control programs. The first edition of this Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin (Basin Plan) was adopted by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, on 25 July 1975, and became effective following approval by the State Water Board on 21 August 1975 and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in June 1976. Although several revisions have been adopted and approved since 1975, this revision is the first complete rewrite of the text of the Basin Plan. Regional Water Board resolutions adopted prior to 17 August 1995, that revise or supplement the first edition of the plan which are not expressly incorporated by reference into the second edition of the plan are superceded. In this Basin Plan, "Regional Water Board" refers to the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board and "State Water Board" refers to the State Water Resources Control Board. *Central Valley plans split between separate documents for Tulare basin and the Sacramento and San Joaquin basins. Click here for the plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin basins.

Water Quality in Basin-Fill Aquifers of the Southwestern United States: Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and Utah, 1993–2009

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | July 15th, 2014

Water Quality of Groundwater Used for Public Supply in Principal Aquifers of the Western United States

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | September 8th, 2020

Water Recommendations to the Next President

Pacific Institute | September 14th, 2020

The United States faces several severe and worsening water problems. Continuing to neglect these problems will impoverish and sicken this and future generations,

The United States faces several severe and worsening water problems. Continuing to neglect these problems will impoverish and sicken this and future generations, destroy beneficial aquatic ecosystems, and threaten our economy and food supply. Smart water policies will create hundreds of thousands of jobs, improve public health, and speed our economic recovery. In this letter, we offer a short assessment of four key problems and specific recommendations for addressing them.

Water shortage risks from perennial crop expansion in California's Central Valley

Environmental Research Letters (IOP) | October 15th, 2019

California's Central Valley is one of the world's most productive agricultural regions. Its high-value fruit, vegetable, and nut crops rely on surface water imports from

California's Central Valley is one of the world's most productive agricultural regions. Its high-value fruit, vegetable, and nut crops rely on surface water imports from a vast network of reservoirs and canals as well as groundwater, which has been substantially overdrafted to support irrigation. The region has undergone a shift to perennial (tree and vine) crops in recent decades, which has increased water demand amid a series of severe droughts and emerging regulations on groundwater pumping. This study quantifies the expansion of perennial crops in the Tulare Lake Basin, the southern region of the Central Valley with limited natural water availability. A gridded crop type dataset is compiled on a 1 mi2 spatial resolution from a historical database of pesticide permits over the period 1974–2016 and validated against aggregated county-level data. This spatial dataset is then analyzed by irrigation district, the primary spatial scale at which surface water supplies are determined, to identify trends in planting decisions and agricultural water demand over time. Perennial crop acreage has nearly tripled over this period, and currently accounts for roughly 60% of planted area and 80% of annual revenue. These trends show little relationship with water availability and have been driven primarily by market demand. From this data, we focus on the increasing minimum irrigation needs each year to sustain perennial crops. Results indicate that under a range of plausible future regulations on groundwater pumping ranging from 10% to 50%, water supplies may fail to consistently meet demands, increasing losses by up to 30% of annual revenues. More broadly, the datasets developed in this work will support the development of dynamic models of the integrated water-agriculture system under uncertain climate and regulatory changes to understand the combined impacts of water supply shortages and intensifying irrigation demand.

Water Supply Conditions in Southern California during 1958-1959, Volume II, Water Level Data, Central Coastal and Los Angeles Regions

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | May 1st, 1961

Water Supply in the Conterminous United States, Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico, Water Years 2010–20, Chapter B of U.S. Geological Survey Integrated Water Availability Assessment—2010–20

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | January 17th, 2025

The following are the key points of this chapter: Throughout much of the Great Plains and Northeast through Midwest aggregated hydrologic regions, low precipitation

The following are the key points of this chapter: Throughout much of the Great Plains and Northeast through Midwest aggregated hydrologic regions, low precipitation totals in water years 2011 and 2012 resulted in low streamflow, evapotranspiration, and soil moisture, associated with one of the most substantial droughts since the 1930s. The highest interannual variability in precipitation was in the California–Nevada, Texas, Southern High Plains, and Southwest Desert hydrologic regions, whereas the lowest interannual variability was in the Florida, Tennessee–Missouri, and Northeast hydrologic regions. Among the Western aggregated hydrologic region, where snow is critical for water availability, the California–Nevada hydrologic region had the highest interannual variability in maximum snow accumulation with a coefficient of variation (CV) of 0.60, whereas the Columbia–Snake, Pacific Northwest, and Central Rockies hydrologic regions all had a CV of less than 0.36. Six of 29 unconfined and 6 of 23 confined principal and regional aquifer systems had current water-level percentiles (median 2010–20) of less than 30 percent of historical water levels (that is, median 2000–20 water levels) including the California Coastal Basin aquifers, the Colorado Plateaus aquifers, and the Central and Southern regions of the High Plains aquifer. Hydrologic regions with low precipitation and little storage coincide with aquifer systems that have shown a decline in groundwater levels during water years 2010–20, including the Southern High Plains, Central High Plains, and Texas hydrologic regions. Companion chapters: U.S. Geological Survey Integrated Water Availability Assessment—2010–20, Chapter A Status of Water-Quality Conditions in the United States, 2010–20, Chapter C  Water Use Across the Conterminous United States, Water Years 2010–20, Chapter D  Climate Change and Future Water Availability in the United States, Chapter E  Integrated Water Availability in the Conterminous United States, 2010–20, Chapter F 

Water Year 2017: What a Difference a Year Makes

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | October 3rd, 2022

The very wet conditions of 2017 gave many parts of the state access to excess surface waters for both planned and impromptu groundwater recharge, and fall 2017 groundwate

The very wet conditions of 2017 gave many parts of the state access to excess surface waters for both planned and impromptu groundwater recharge, and fall 2017 groundwater level data (not available until the end of the calendar year) should show the effects of the substantial recharge water available

Water-Level and land-subsidence studies in the Mojave River and Morongo groundwater basins; 2007

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) | June 25th, 2007

Since 1992, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Mojave Water Agency (MWA), has constructed a series of regional water-table maps for intermittent y

Since 1992, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Mojave Water Agency (MWA), has constructed a series of regional water-table maps for intermittent years in a continuing effort to monitor groundwater conditions in the Mojave River and Morongo groundwater basins. The previously published data, which were used to construct these maps, can be accessed on the interactive map. The associated reports describing the groundwater conditions for the Mojave River groundwater basin for 1992 (Stamos and Predmore, 1995), the Morongo groundwater basin for 1994 (Trayler and Koczot, 1995), and for both groundwater basins for 1996 (Mendez and Christensen, 1997); for 1998 (Smith and Pimentel, 2000), for 2000 (Smith, 2002), for 2002 (Smith and others, 2004), for 2004 (Stamos and others, 2004), and for 2006 (Stamos and others, 2007) can be accessed using this web site.