The Pine Flat Project on Kings River, California

Kings River Water Users Committee | December 1st, 1979

The Struggle for Water Justice in California’s San Joaquin Valley: A Focus on Disadvantaged Unincorporated Communities

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | February 1st, 2018

In California, lack of access to clean, safe, and affordable water is a threat to public health and well-being, and violates the state’s newly codified Human Ri

In California, lack of access to clean, safe, and affordable water is a threat to public health and well-being, and violates the state’s newly codified Human Right to Water (HRTW). In low-income communities located outside city boundaries (otherwise known as disadvantaged unincorporated communities or DUCs), drinking water is often unsafe to drink. In many such localities, drinking water is contaminated by industrial by-products (usually associated with agriculture, oil and gas production, transportation, and manufacturing) and compromised by inadequate wastewater treatment and disposal systems, as well as naturally occurring toxic substances like arsenic and uranium. Many DUC residents in the San Joaquin Valley pay a triple penalty to obtain safe water: they bear the health costs of unsafe drinking water; they purchase that unsafe water at high costs; and they must also purchase “substitute” water—typically expensive bottled water—for drinking and cooking purposes. Lack of access to clean, safe and affordable drinking water has a racial and ethnic component: the vast majority of the valley’s DUC residents are people of color who also face cumulative impacts from environmental contamination brought on by proximity to air pollution, pesticides, toxic facilities and waste disposal. Without city governments to directly represent their interests and provide essential services, residents of these DUCs have been systematically deprived of access to important means of democratic governance (Anderson 2008). California’s San Joaquin Valley is the source of much of the state and the nation’s agricultural wealth. Yet it is also a region where poverty persists amidst prosperity (Taylor and Mar n 1998). Many of the region’s DUC residents hold low-wage and dangerous jobs, and confront severe and cumulative environmental contamination of their air, water, and land (London, Huang, Zagofsky 2011). The well-being of the nearly 350,000 residents living in 450 DUCs throughout San Joaquin Valley is therefore an important environmental health, and social justice issue that demands urgent attention by policy makers, public agencies and advocates. Over the past two decades, community leaders, advocates, and policymakers have pursued a range of strategies to address unsafe drinking water in the valley’s DUCs and elsewhere in California. For example, in 2004, resident advocates won a case against the City of Modesto in 2003 for its systematic exclusion from city services of communities of color living in nearby DUCs (Molina 2014). In 2011, Senate Bill (SB) 244 required cities and counties to address the infrastructure needs of California DUCs in land use and municipal service plans, and in annexation decisions. In 2012, an HRTW policy was passed in response to massive community mobilization. Known as Assembly Bill (AB) 685, and signed by Governor Jerry Brown, it codified that every human being has a right to safe, clean, affordable, and accessible water to meet basic human needs, and required state agencies to consider this right when establishing policies and regulations. A 2013 report by the Community Equity Initiative (led by PolicyLink, California Rural Legal Assistance Inc., and California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation) developed a sophisticated analysis of the conditions of DUCs in the San Joaquin Valley. California Unincorporated: Mapping Disadvantaged Communities in the San Joaquin Valley (Flegal et al. 2013) put DUCs on the map by using a new methodology to identify these communities, and to highlight the need for new policies and funding mechanisms to address the significant challenges they face. This report, and the dedicated work of water justice advocates, have greatly increased public awareness of water inequality in DUCs. This has helped direct new public funding to improve water infrastructure, and encouraged collaborative solutions among interest groups that historically have been in conflict with each other. However, all parties agree that much more needs to be done to understand the complex issues facing DUCs, and to provide their residents with safe and affordable drinking water. Our report analyzes this situation in detail, and offers several recommendations to inform policy and advocacy on how to improve water access to these communities. To do so, we have used maps of DUCs, CWSs, and State Small Water Systems (SSWSs), as well as water quality reports, demographic data, and expert interviews. Together, these sources have helped us highlight gaps in the provision of safe and a ordable drinking water. Our main conclusion is that California’s legislature, regulatory agencies, and water suppliers need to undertake more concerted and well-resourced efforts to ensure that the HRTW is ensured for all of the San Joaquin Valley’s residents.

The Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins Fifth Edition

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

The preparation and adoption of water quality control plans (Basin Plans) is required by the California Water Code (Section 13240) and supported by the Federal Clean Wat

The preparation and adoption of water quality control plans (Basin Plans) is required by the California Water Code (Section 13240) and supported by the Federal Clean Water Act. Section 303 of the Clean Water Act requires states to adopt water quality standards which "consist of the designated uses of the navigable waters involved and the water quality criteria for such waters based upon such uses." According to Section 13050 of the California Water Code, Basin Plans consist of a designation or establishment for the waters within a specified area of beneficial uses to be protected, water quality objectives to protect those uses, and a program of implementation needed for achieving the objectives. State law also requires that Basin Plans conform to the policies set forth in the Water Code beginning with Section 13000 and any state policy for water quality control. Since beneficial uses, together with their corresponding water quality objectives, can be defined per federal regulations as water quality standards, the Basin Plans are regulatory references for meeting the state and federal requirements for water quality control (40 CFR 131.20). 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 thereto, do not become effective until approved by the State Water Resources Control Board (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. Basin Plans complement water quality control plans adopted by the State Water Board, such as the Water Quality Control Plans for Temperature Control and Ocean Waters. It is the intent of the State and Regional Water Boards to maintain the Basin Plans in an updated and readily available edition that reflects the current water quality control program. This Basin Plan covers the entire Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins. A separate Basin Plan covers the Tulare Lake Basin. The Basin Plan was first adopted in 1975. In 1989, a second edition was published. The second edition incorporated all the amendments which were adopted and approved since 1975, updated the Basin Plan to include new state policies and programs, restructured and edited the Basin Plan for clarity, and incorporated the results of triennial reviews conducted in 1984 and 1987. The Third Edition - 1994 incorporated all amendments approved between 1989 and 1994, included new state policies and programs, edited and restructured the Basin Plan to make it consistent with other regional and state plans, and substantively amended sections dealing with beneficial uses, objectives, and implementation programs. The current edition (Fourth Edition - 1998) incorporates two new amendments approved since 1994. One amendment deals with compliance schedules in permits and the other addresses agricultural subsurface drainage discharges. 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. Appendix Updates and amendments  are at the State Water Board "Basin Plan" page

The Well Fixer's Warning

The Atlantic | August 17th, 2021

The well fixer and I were standing at the edge of an almond orchard in the exhausted middle of California. It was late July, and so many wells on the farms of Madera Co

The well fixer and I were standing at the edge of an almond orchard in the exhausted middle of California. It was late July, and so many wells on the farms of Madera County were coming up dry that he was running out of parts to fix them. In this latest round of western drought, desperate voices were calling him at six in the morning and again at midnight. They were puzzled why their pumps were coughing up sand, the water’s flow to their orchards now a trickle.

Third Supplement To State Water Resources Board Bulletin No. 11, San Joaquin County Investigation, Basic Data, Calaveras Unit 1956-57

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | January 21st, 1958

Thousands of domestic and public supply wells face failure despite groundwater sustainability reform in California’s Central Valley

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | September 8th, 2023

Time-varying land subsidence detected by radar altimetry: California, Taiwan and north China

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | June 21st, 2016

Contemporary applications of radar altimetry include sea-level rise, ocean circulation, marine gravity, and icesheet elevation change. Unlike InSAR and GNSS, which are wi

Contemporary applications of radar altimetry include sea-level rise, ocean circulation, marine gravity, and icesheet elevation change. Unlike InSAR and GNSS, which are widely used to map surface deformation, altimetry is neither reliant on highly temporally-correlated ground features nor as limited by the available spatial coverage, and can provide long-term temporal subsidence monitoring capability. Here we use multi-mission radar altimetry with an approximately 23 year data-span to quantify land subsidence in cropland areas. Subsidence rates from TOPEX/POSEIDON, JASON-1, ENVISAT, and JASON-2 during 1992–2015 show time-varying trends with respect to displacement over time in California’s San Joaquin Valley and central Taiwan, possibly related to changes in land use, climatic conditions (drought) and regulatory measures affecting groundwater use. Near Hanford, California, subsidence rates reach 18 cm yr with a cumulative subsidence of 206 cm, which potentially could adversely affect operations of the planned California High-Speed Rail. The maximum subsidence rate in central Taiwan is 8 cm yr. Radar altimetry also reveals time-varying subsidence in the North China Plain consistent with the declines of groundwater storage and existing water infrastructure detected by the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellites, with rates reaching 20 cm yr and cumulative subsidence as much as 155 cm.

To Stop Desert Encroachment

Scientific American | November 1st, 1938

When Spanish vaqueros first entered the interior valley of California they saw only a vast expanse of desert, broken infrequently by patches of green vegetation a

When Spanish vaqueros first entered the interior valley of California they saw only a vast expanse of desert, broken infrequently by patches of green vegetation along the water courses. Little did they dream that in a span of two generations the region would become one of the world's garden spots, the home of thousands of prosperous families, and the source of millions of tons of food products known around the world. They did not envision the romance and adventure that marked the development of this great inland empire-now a two billion dollar agricultural wonderland built by irrigation and wholly dependent upon a single natural resource-water.

Total Water Management Study for the Central Valley Basin, California, Central Valley Project Intermittent Surface Water Supply, Working Document No. 6

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | April 1st, 1975

Toward a Vibrant, Prosperous, and Sustainable Fresno County: Vulnerability and Adaptation in the Midst of Rapid Change

California Energy Commission (CEC) | July 31st, 2012

Fresno County is located centrally within the State of California. The central portion of the county makes up part of the state’s breadbasket, the San Joaquin Valley, k

Fresno County is located centrally within the State of California. The central portion of the county makes up part of the state’s breadbasket, the San Joaquin Valley, known for its vast agricultural productivity, whereas the Sierra Nevada Mountains make up the eastern portion of the county providing water from snowmelt and varied opportunities for recreation.  Fresno County recently began making a significant investment in its economic vitality and the well-being and quality of life of its residents through the San Joaquin Valley Blueprint. Aside the growing pressures and challenges that accompany further population growth and development, external pressures will also impinge on the county. Climate change – one of these important additional pressures – will impact Fresno in a variety of ways, some potentially severe, with direct impacts on its people, its all-important agricultural sector (and related economic activity), its supporting infrastructure and services, as well as the natural environment on which much of the county’s economy, rural character, and quality of life directly depend. This report details current vulnerabilities to weather- and climate-related changes and extreme events in Fresno, and explores how climate change may exacerbate or change them in the decades ahead. The report draws on publicly available reports, plans, and data repositories available from local (municipal and county), state, federal and nongovernmental sources as well as on peer-reviewed research papers. For the social vulnerability assessment, original research was conducted to assess differential vulnerabilities among San Luis Obispo’s population. Other assessments of vulnerability rest on the critical assessment of current conditions as ascertained from the existing information. This report provides a review of the region’s projected climate change and existing demographics and economic industries and infrastructure. Among the most critical additional stresses from climate warming are increased average seasonal temperatures; longer, more intense heat waves; changes in rainfall patterns and water availability (via Sierra snowmelt); and increases in wildfires. The changes could translate into major damage in terms of public and environmental health, and Fresno’s economy, e.g., the production of nut and fruit crops. From the social vulnerability analysis conducted, a clear picture of differential social and economic vulnerabilities emerges characterized above all by the enormous dependence of the county’s economy and population on the highly climate-sensitive agricultural sector. These growing issues, while challenging, can be surmounted with timely and adequate planning and preparation. City and county governments, as well as private and civic sector actors, can integrate adaptation into their ongoing efforts to implement already existing plans, such as the Valley Blueprint, Fresno Green and other local and regional measures. Many of these social, economic, institutional, educational, and infrastructure measures can be implemented on regular maintenance, upgrading, planning, and budgeting cycles, and bring benefits to the county’s residents, particularly its disadvantaged groups, its quality of life and environment, its fiscal situation and its economy overall. Thus, developing adaptation plans and implement agreed-upon measures is directly in support of Fresno County achieving its vision of a vibrant, prosperous and sustainable future.