Laura Harnish is the California Regional Director.
Spreck Rosekrans is an Economic Analyst at EDF.

Environmental Defense Fund is delighted that the package of water policy reform bills has passed both houses of California’s legislature and will be sent to Governor Schwarzenegger for his signature. We believe this package provides a foundation that will guide environmental protection and sustainable water supply management for many years to come. And we expect that as a result, California’s farms and cities, as well as fisheries in the Bay Delta and Central Valley watershed, will be better off.

Most obviously the legislation establishes a framework for managing the Delta and the rivers that supply it with freshwater. It formally recognizes the importance of the Delta as an ecosystem while acknowledging its role in moving water from north to south. It empowers our Water Board to determine the inflows that are necessary to meet public trust requirements under California law. And the legislation establishes important oversight roles for both the legislature and a newly created Delta Stewardship Council to ensure that any changes to water infrastructure accommodate protection of the Delta and its fisheries.

It is important to realize that the legislation does not authorize a peripheral canal. It does assure, however, that a canal will only be built if important habitats are restored, water exports from the Delta are biologically sustainable, and the beneficiaries of those exports pay the full cost of construction, including environmental mitigation.

The legislation also takes important steps toward achieving our stated goal of reducing per capita water conservation in our cities 20% by 2020, thereby reducing the pressure to withdraw increasing amounts of water from the natural environment.

We are also pleased that the legislation includes provisions to identify and prevent illegal diversions of water, though we regret that the initial language was “watered down”. Similarly, we are pleased that the legislature has finally made progress in moving toward statewide management of groundwater (the source of up to 40% of our overall supply in the driest years), though there is still much work to be done in this area.

Our largest concern is that the legislature passed an 11 billion dollar bond measure along with the policy reform bills. It is important to note that the bond measure does not become effective but will be on the ballot as an initiative in 2010. At that time California’s voters will have the opportunity to decide if we can afford it given our fiscal problems and other competing needs. Moreover, California’s electorate will be asked whether it is good public policy to make these investments as a State or if at least some of the investment decisions should be made with local funds. If approved by the voters, the funds would be used to pay for a variety of environmental, water quality and water supply programs, potentially including controversial dams in the Central Valley. In its place we would have preferred a beneficiary pays fee structure to fund the Council and needed ecosystem restoration efforts in the Delta and left the big dams and water projects to be funded directly by the users.

It would be nice to celebrate – get a six-pack, stroll down the river bank and watch restoration magically take place. But of course the ultimate outcome of this far-reaching legislation will not be known for many years and will depend considerably on how well its provisions are implemented. All stakeholders, including those who opposed the legislation, will need to work together to ensure as it is adopted that our public resources will indeed be protected as intended. The environment that Californians care so deeply about and the legacy we want to leave for our children depend on it.

Cynthia Koehler is Senior Consulting Attorney for EDF.

The California Legislature is on the cusp of voting for an historic water deal. The Senate could vote within the next few days. And as the famous saying goes, there are two things that you don’t want to watch: sausage making and the legislative process. The latest attempted additive to the sausage: an amendment that would jeopardize the long-standing and foundational water law premise that requires that all water use in California be “reasonable” and not wasteful.

For the better part of a century, California–like most of the Western U.S.– has followed the law of “reasonable use,” that requires all water use in the state must be “reasonable” and not wasteful. Conservation of water is at the very heart of any reasonableness determination: “[W]hat is a reasonable use of water depends on the circumstance of each case, [and] such an inquiry cannot be resolved in vacuo isolated from statewide considerations of transcendent importance. Paramount among these we see the ever increasing need for the conservation of water in this state, an inescapable reality of life quite apart from its express recognition in [Art. 10, Sec. 2].” Joslin v MMWD, 67 Cal. 2d 132, 140 (1967).

The water bill under consideration in the California Legislature establishes water conservation targets for urban areas and provides a number of pathways to get there. The Republican alternative bill would provide that the failure to meet those targets could not be used as evidence of waste or unreasonable use of water–forever. In other words, “here’s a conservation target, but don’t worry too much about meeting it, we won’t use it against you…”

Do we truly want to set California on a course for smarter water use, efficiency and conservation or just give it lip service?

Why are some lawmakers trying to prevent the new conservation standards from applying to the long-standing reasonable use and anti-waste rules? The claim is that the conservation targets could lead to a “floodgate of litigation.” But this is not compelling. Water agencies are already required to use water reasonably and to conserve. The State Water Resources Control Board has confirmed that cases challenging water use are extremely rare. Nothing in the proposed bill establishes a new cause of action for lawsuits.

Professors Joe Sax and John Leshy, among the country’s most prominent water law professors have weighed in (PDF) on the waste and reasonable use language. In their view: “Properly, nothing in the bill before you suggests that the mere failure to meet the targets is per se evidence of waste. Similarly nothing should mandate that such failure is per se reasonable”

We hope the Legislature takes heed. There is nothing to gain, and much to lose, from tampering with California’s entirely appropriate reasonable use laws. This amendment is one tainted ingredient in the sausage that we can do without. For more on the unreasonable use and water conservation issue, please read Bettina Boxall’s recent article in the Los Angeles Times.

Spreck Rosekrans is an Economic Analyst at EDF.

Groundwater is one of the more contentious aspects of the water reform legislation currently under consideration in Sacramento. Some legislators have indicated that they would not sign the bill if it contains even modest language requiring that groundwater levels be monitored.

This makes no sense to us. Reasonable people may differ on how much groundwater should be pumped in any particular region under certain conditions. But to have no limits at all assures a “race to the bottom”, akin to two hungry kids, each with a straw, sharing a single milkshake. Moreover, where is the incentive for a landowner to replenish groundwater supplies in wet years, if neighbors can extract it with impunity?

As Legislative Analyst Catherine Freeman pointed out at yesterday’s hearing, California is the only state that does not monitor groundwater. The other 49 states understand that good water policy demands some public involvement in groundwater. Given the need to stretch limited supplies among California’s farms, families and fish, and that as much as 40% of statewide supply comes from groundwater in drought years, it is embarrassing that we have no statewide policy for managing groundwater. (Click here for a copy of the LAO’s 2008 report on groundwater.)

In much of the State, the groundwater situation is not so dire. Urban districts throughout the State currently “bank” water underground with the Semitropic Water Storage District in Kern County. And landowners and local agencies throughout much of the urban southland have cleaned up groundwater supplies and are working together to manage aquifers sustainably.

But in some areas, groundwater is often described as the “wild west” – i.e. lawless.

The proposed legislation takes only baby steps. It does not regulate groundwater. It seeks only to monitor its use to enable better management and decision-making. To ensure realiable water supply in California, the groundwater element of the legislative package must be retained.

Spreck Rosekrans is an Economic Analyst at EDF.

Our water system isn’t working for anyone – not for cities, not for farms, and certainly not for fish. For the first time in over a decade, the California legislature has a chance to address our outdated water system and our broken Bay-Delta ecosystem. At the end of the last legislative session, a water policy package was put forward that proposed critical steps needed to provide a resilient water supply for all Californians and badly needed environmental protections as well.

Like others in the environmental community, EDF stretched to come to agreement in Senate Bill 68 as introduced, as it already includes a substantial set of compromises that would not be our first policy choice.

We, nevertheless, supported the package as introduced on September 11th because we believe strongly that its provisions have the potential to break the cycle of conflict and environmental damage that have plagued California’s water management system for decades.

We are pleased to see that the Governor has called for a special legislative session dedicated to passing strong water policy. Our support for a final package is dependent on retention of the following critical elements:

1. Getting enough water into the Bay-Delta – Sets a clear course of action to determine and provide critical water flows for the health and long-term sustainability of the Delta ecosystem.

2. Reducing reliance on the Bay-Delta – A landmark change in policy that shifts from an emphasis on Delta water supply to improving conservation, recycling, and other local sources of water.

3. Tools for halting illegal diversions – Expands the State Water Resources Control Board’s authority to halt illegal diversions ensuring fair, smart water use throughout the state

4. Moving the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to environmental success – Details a framework for the BDCP that will help result in stronger protections for the Bay-Delta ecosystem in a timely manner.

5. Ensuring smart groundwater use – Substantially expands groundwater management and monitoring efforts to ensure long-term sustainability.

Spreck Rosekrans is an Economic Analyst at EDF.

The 2009 water year ended this week amidst a plethora of activity, conflict and entertainment.

On Tuesday, as NASA rocket scientists were talking water in Pasadena, Comedy Central’s Jon Stewart responded to Fox News’ Sean Hannity on the Daily Show.

On Wednesday, PacifiCorp agreed to terms for removing four controversial dams on the Klamath River.

On Thursday, after years of litigation and negotiation spearheaded by our colleagues at NRDC, releases from Friant Dam to the San Joaquin River were made–rewetting a riverbed that is often dry as a result of over-extraction of surface and groundwater supplies.

For followers of the Bay-Delta, the stage shifted to the Department of Interior’s hearing in Washington DC. There was plenty of conflict over the Endangered Species Act, despite letters of support for the law by the California’s Department of Water Resources and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. And both the Obama Administration and Senator Feinstein, as well as we at the Environmental Defense Fund, issues statements in support of review of the ESA’s Biological Opinions by the National Academy of Sciences.

Meanwhile the Obama Administration also recommended that the California Legislature enter into a special session to move forward with reform of water policy in California.

We at EDF hope to make progress on legislation in this new water year as well, and are committed to working with all stakeholders to better manage California’s limited water supplies for our cities, farms and natural environment

And we are hoping “wild and wooly” in 2010 will apply to wet weather and not to policy reform.

Ann Hayden is a Senior Water Resource Analyst at EDF.

After another week of attempts  to weaken the Endangered Species Act, EDF couldn’t be happier to see Lester Snow, Director of the State’s Department of Water Resources, put his support of the ESA in writing. See his letter to Senator Feinstein, Secretaries Salazar and Locke  here (PDF).  We’re hoping to hear the same commitment from Secretary Salazar at the public hearing tomorrow.

Ann Hayden is a Senior Water Resource Analyst at EDF.

The Bay-Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) may become the law of the land (and water) as early as 2011. If it does, how well will it protect endangered species? And how much water will be determined to be safely exported to the farms and cities that depend on Delta supplies before any major possible changes to habitat or infrastructure are implemented? Read more »

Spreck Rosekrans is an Economic Analyst at EDF.

The coverage of California water by Fox News Host Sean Hannity last night was disappointing. It was simplistic, one-sided, misleading and, in some cases, flat wrong. And perhaps most egregiously, the famously “small government” host delivered his message on behalf of wealthy farmers who owe their very existence to the federal handouts and are still deep in debt to United States taxpayers.

Let’s be fair. Mr. Hannity got some things right. He is correct that unemployment is particularly high in many towns in the San Joaquin Valley. The food lines and human suffering are real. In 2009, water deliveries to farming communities on the west side of the Valley have been significantly reduced. And part of that reduction is due to the Endangered Species Act protections designed to protect Delta smelt from extinction.

But Mr. Hannity does not tell the whole story. Read more »

Cynthia Koehler is Senior Consulting Attorney for EDF.

The demise of a package of five water policy bills in the state legislature late Friday night, while predictable given end-of-session deadlines, had this sliver of surprise buried in it: the 5 policy bills taken together were pretty good. By “pretty good,” I mean good in the sense of “an important and meaningful advance over the water policy status quo for the environment” as opposed to “guaranteeing the water policy outcomes that would be ideal” from an environmental perspective.

How can the policy package possibly be construed as good, when it was linked to a water bond that included billions for construction of new dams under a poorly-defined assumption that they would provide public benefits?

Let’s stipulate that the longstanding practice in California of holding solid water policy reform hostage to a massive public spending commitment is of questionable wisdom at best. Read more »

Spreck Rosekrans is an Economic Analyst at EDF.

The Wall Street Journal’s editorial “California’s Man-Made Drought” (Sept. 2), buys into the false choice of fish versus jobs. It is disappointing that the Journal, given its financial focus, fails to address or even acknowledge opportunities for market-based solutions to improve water use efficiency. The editorial also ignores many salient aspects of water management in California.

The WSJ seems to believe that the “pumps” are off (pumps which convey water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to cities and farms to the south). The pumps were never “off” but pumping rates were reduced during spring months to protect endangered fish. While the legal rulings are in place due to concern over Delta smelt, it is only one of several species whose populations have plummeted in recent years as diversions of freshwater have reached record levels. The pumps are now at full capacity. Lester Snow, Director of California’s Department of Resources, estimated that protecting fish in the Delta reduced overall pumping only about 5% for the year. The largest reason for reduced deliveries is that California is in its third year of drought. Read more »