Evaluating the hydrologic effects of the 2021–2022 Scott and Shasta irrigation curtailments using remote sensing and streamflow gages

Klamath Tribal Water Quality Consortium | September 11th, 2023

Key Points • Satellite remote sensing data indicated that curtailment orders in 2022 reduced consumptive water use (evapotranspiration, ETa) on agricultural lands i

Key Points • Satellite remote sensing data indicated that curtailment orders in 2022 reduced consumptive water use (evapotranspiration, ETa) on agricultural lands in Shasta Valley, but not Scott Valley. • Streamflow gage data indicate that flows in the Shasta River and some Scott River tributaries (Shackleford and French creeks) were substantially higher in summer 2022 than 2020 or 2021, but similar increases did not occur in the mainstem Scott River. • A likely major reason for the lack of Scott River flow increases was that groundwater use was allowed to continue under Local Cooperative Solutions (LCS) agreements in which water users agreed to reduce pumping by 30% from a prior year baseline. Despite abundant worldwide evidence that reducing consumptive use (i.e., evapotranspiration) is key to increasing environmental water, all LCS cropping and irrigation practices were given equal weight toward the 30% reduction, regardless of the effects on consumptive use. Pumping was not measured and compliance was primarily self-reported, with limited independent verification.

Exploring the Potential for Water-Limited Agriculture in the San Joaquin Valley

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | July 21st, 2022

The rollout of California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) is altering the state’s agricultural landscape. As groundwater sustainability measures are

The rollout of California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) is altering the state’s agricultural landscape. As groundwater sustainability measures are implemented and water scarcity increases, at least half a million acres are projected to come out of irrigated production in the San Joaquin Valley, the state’s agricultural heartland. Rather than widespread land idling—which comes with unintended consequences such as dust, weeds, pests, and soil degradation — a switch from summer irrigated crops to winter crops produced with limited water (including winter cereals and forage crops, among others) might keep some of this land in production. Although water-limited agriculture faces large hurdles, some promising aspects warrant further exploration.

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

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

Funding Opportunity for Voluntary Participation in the Lower Colorado Conservation and Efficiency Program

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | October 12th, 2022

Future land-use related water demand in California

Environmental Research Letters (IOP) | May 18th, 2019

Water shortages in California are a growing concern amidst ongoing drought, earlier spring snowmelt, projected future climate warming, and currently mandated water use r

Water shortages in California are a growing concern amidst ongoing drought, earlier spring snowmelt, projected future climate warming, and currently mandated water use restrictions. Increases in population and land use in coming decades will place additional pressure on already limited available water supplies. We used a state-and-transition simulation model to project future changes in developed (municipal and industrial) and agricultural land use to estimate associated water use demand from 2012 to 2062. Under current efficiency rates, total water use was projected to increase 1.8 billion cubic meters (+4.1%) driven primarily by urbanization and shifts to more water intensive crops. Only if currently mandated 25% reductions in municipal water use are continuously implemented would water demand in 2062 balance to water use levels in 2012. This is the first modeling effort of its kind to examine regional land-use related water demand incorporating historical trends of both developed and agricultural land uses.

Guidebook to Assist Agricultural Water Suppliers to Prepare a 2015 Agricultural Water Management Plan

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | July 20th, 2015

The document titled “A Guidebook to Assist Agricultural Water Suppliers to Prepare a 2015 Agricultural Water Management Plan” (Guidebook) was prepared by the Californ

The document titled “A Guidebook to Assist Agricultural Water Suppliers to Prepare a 2015 Agricultural Water Management Plan” (Guidebook) was prepared by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) to assist agricultural water suppliers in understanding and complying with the requirements of the SB X7-7- Water Conservation Act (Steinberg Statute of 2009), (Section I, Part 2.55, Division 6 of the California Water Code), the associated Agricultural Water Management Planning Act (Section I, Part 2.8, Division 6 of the Water Code), the Agricultural Water Measurement Regulation (Title 23 California Code of Regulations), and Executive Order B-29-15. It is meant to help agricultural water suppliers better understand the Water Code Agricultural Water Management Plan (AWMP) requirements and assist them in developing an AWMP. This Guidebook also describes how water conservation plans submitted to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) can be supplemented to satisfy the Water Code and Agricultural Water Measurement Regulation requirements.

Impacts of California’s Ongoing Drought: Agriculture

Pacific Institute | August 26th, 2015

California’s agriculture sector has exceeded expectations during the most severe drought in recorded history at the cost of massive but unsustainable groundwater pumpin

California’s agriculture sector has exceeded expectations during the most severe drought in recorded history at the cost of massive but unsustainable groundwater pumping. Continued groundwater overdraft, while reducing the economic impacts of the drought for the agricultural sector now, has shifted the burden to others, including current and future generations forced to dig deeper wells, find alternative drinking water sources, and repair infrastructure damaged by subsidence. That is the conclusion of the new study, Impacts of California’s Ongoing Drought: Agriculture, released today by the Pacific Institute, an independent global water think tank. This new study is the first comprehensive analysis of the actual impacts of the drought on California agricultural revenue and employment through 2014 – the last year for which data are available. The study, drawing on data from the USDA National Agricultural Statistics Survey and the California Employment Development Department, analyzes acreage, revenue, and employment figures from 2000-2014. Production costs, impacts on animal or nursery products, or regional impacts are not examined because these data are not yet available. The study’s results provide critical insight into how the state can maintain a healthy agriculture sector in a future likely to see less water, more extreme weather, and greater uncertainty. California remains the largest agricultural producer in the U.S. in total output and in exports. During the drought, California’s agriculture sector has experienced record-high crop revenue and employment. Last year farmers harvested 640,000 fewer acres, which was 9 percent below pre-drought levels, yet crop revenue remained strong. Indeed, crop revenue peaked in 2013 at $34 billion – the highest level in California history. In 2014, crop revenue declined by $480 million, representing a 1.4 percent reduction from 2013 levels. All economic estimates have been corrected for inflation. Statewide agriculture-related jobs also reached a record-high of 417,000 people in 2014, highlighting the sector’s ability to withstand the reduction of available water.

Implementation of the Agricultural Water Management Planning Act: A Review of Agricultural Water Management Plans

Pacific Institute | August 29th, 2013

Twenty-four of California’s agricultural water districts have submitted agricultural water management plans, leaving 55 districts out of compliance with the requirement

Twenty-four of California’s agricultural water districts have submitted agricultural water management plans, leaving 55 districts out of compliance with the requirement of the Water Conservation Act of 2009, according to a new joint analysis issued today by the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Pacific Institute. This represents a 30% compliance rate, meaning there is much work to be done to ensure sustainable water management for the state. “California is a dry state, expected to only get drier, yet we’re also the leading agricultural state in the nation,” said Claire O’Connor, agricultural water specialist for NRDC. “It’s critical that agricultural water suppliers lead the way in planning for a drier future and encourage customers to be smarter about their water use.” Implementation of the Agricultural Water Management Planning Act: A Review of Agricultural Water Management Plans offers recommendations for those 55 water districts to participate in and comply with future legally required planning cycles, including: 1) California’s Department of Water Resources (DWR) should offer peer-to-peer workshops to assist districts with the planning process; 2) DWR should create an online clearinghouse of plans and draft plans to facilitate public comment; and 3) DWR should hold non-compliant districts accountable, and, per the Act’s mandate, refuse to consider grant and loan requests until districts submit a plan. “When water suppliers prepare plans, the public and other stakeholders can participate in important decisions, like how water efficiency measures should be implemented,” said Juliet Christian-Smith, senior research associate at the Pacific Institute. “Fortunately, we do have some good actors who are leading the way – they are setting the standard for other water districts to follow.”

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.

Investing In Clean Agriculture: How California Can Strengthen Agriculture, Reduce Pollution And Save Money

Pacific Institute | February 8th, 2005

Global competition, suburban encroachment, tighter regulations, and rising input costs are making farming in California more difficult and, in some cases, less profitable

Global competition, suburban encroachment, tighter regulations, and rising input costs are making farming in California more difficult and, in some cases, less profitable. At the same time, pesticide pollution from farming is causing significant harm to California’s surface and groundwater, air quality, and human health. But there is a way to reduce pesticide use, protect the environment, and help farmers stay competitive according to a new report, Investing In Clean Agriculture: How California Can Strengthen Agriculture, Reduce Pollution And Save Money, published today by the Pacific Institute. “Business as usual isn’t working for our state,” declared Dr. Gary H. Wolff, author of the report and Principal Economist and Engineer with the Pacific Institute of Oakland, California. “Our plan will reduce pesticide use, protect public health, preserve the environment, and help California’s farmers stay competitive in a rapidly changing economy. We think this will be a win for consumers, a win for taxpayers, and a win for agriculture.” A US Geological Survey study of groundwater wells in the San Joaquin-Tulare Basin found at least one pesticide in 59 of 100 samples. But current efforts to reduce pesticide pollution are caught up in the courts. The rebate approach creates a voluntary incentive to reduce pesticide use while leaving it up to farmers to figure out the best way forward. “The Pacific Institute’s innovative proposal will reward farmers who are willing to learn about farming practices that protect water quality,” noted Leland Swenson of the Community Alliance With Family Farmers. “It is a voluntary and incentive-based way for farmers to respond to water quality regulations and keep pesticides out of drinking water.” The report describes how farmers can be rewarded for learning voluntarily about sustainable agricultural practices. A modest increase in the statewide “mill” fee, now levied on pesticides, is returned to farmers who take a short course on sustainable agriculture techniques and storm runoff management. This helps farmers stay competitive while reducing pesticide use – which will protect human health, preserve the environment, and eventually save taxpayers money by reducing medical costs. “Everybody wins if we can reduce our dependence on pesticides,” said Jonathan Kaplan of NRDC. “As the head of California’s Department of Pesticide Regulation just stated, ‘Integrated Pest Management is good for our economy as well as our environment’.” Investing In Clean Agriculture: How California Can Strengthen Agriculture, Reduce Pollution And Save Money estimates that the voluntary program and fee increase could bring $60 million per year into the agricultural sector while also bringing the most cutting edge research on sustainable farming techniques to those in the field.