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 »

Spreck Rosekrans is an Economic Analyst at EDF.

The $77 million proposal to sell 14,000 acre-feet of the Central Valley’s agricultural water to suburban San Bernardino County puts a new twist on the debate over water use in California.

Throughout 2009, the third consecutive dry year in California, there has been unprecedented media focus on the effects that legal rulings to protect endangered fish in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta have had on water exports to farming communities with junior water rights on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. The debate has been loud. Read more »

Spreck Rosekrans is an Economic Analyst at EDF.

The urban Bay Area’s historically derived “patchwork water supply”, reported in today's San Francisco Chronicle, is one example of many in California demonstrating how our antiquated water system is so often imbalanced and unfair. Another significant example lies in the agricultural sector in the San Joaquin Valley. As is often reported, agriculture uses upwards of 80 percent of California’s developed water supply, so attention to water use in that sector is crucial to finding a solution to the State’s water woes.

During this recent drought some farms with plentiful supplies (and senior water rights) pay as little at $8 per acre-foot for water while neighboring farms with more junior water rights and thus more limited supplies must pay up to $600 per acre-foot to keep orchards alive. The results of this inequity are many: (1) farms with cheap supplies have insufficient incentives to adopt modern state-of-the art irrigation technologies, (2) farms where water is not cheap and abundant must often fallow their fields, putting people out of work and providing less food for our kitchen tables, and (3) water shortages put additional pressure to extract unsustainable supplies from the natural environment, where extinction of some fish species is a real possibility.

As we struggle to protect our rivers and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, it is essential that we manage our developed water efficiently. All business people respond to price signals. Allowing and indeed encouraging those farmers with superior water rights to market a larger portion of their supplies will provide incentives to irrigate as efficiently as possible, producing more food and reducing the conflict with our rivers and streams.

Kathryn Phillips is Director, California Transportation and Air Initiative.

Four years ago, when the economy was strong and building was booming, the Congressional Research Service (PDF) confirmed what a quick drive on rural roads suggested: there’s too much poverty in the San Joaquin Valley. At that point, the report noted, by nearly every typical measure—per capita income, unemployment rates, household income, poverty rates—socioeconomic conditions in the Valley fell “significantly below national and California averages.”

Today things are even worse for a lot of reasons: housing construction jobs are gone; farm labor demand has not grown, and in some places has fallen as farmers respond to drought; and the cost of transportation to jobs has become prohibitive. The nation’s down economy is even downer in the Valley.

People in power have been responding to this emergency with valuable help in the last few weeks. And so we send kudos to:

• Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, who have weighed in with the Obama Administration to request assistance for Fresno County, where some of the worst poverty is located. Their letter to President Obama is notable for its laser-like focus on drought impacts, long-term solutions, and the need for immediate assistance to those most in need.
• Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger for sending $4 million of emergency assistance to the worst-hit parts of the Valley, and also for requesting more emergency aide from the Obama Administration.
• Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar and the Obama Administration for unleashing hundreds of millions in recovery funds to California, including $40 million for water conservation (most of which will be directed to the Valley).

This help reaches beyond the high-pitched rhetoric of California’s ages-long water debate in the Valley. It focuses on getting food and jobs to communities that have long suffered.

Spreck Rosekrans is an Economic Analyst at EDF.

As California is experiencing a third consecutive dry year, in 2009 less water will be available for our cities, farms and natural environment. Due to our “first in time, first in right” water laws, however, some areas of the state will have plentiful supplies while others will suffer severe shortages.

The latest water supply update from the Bureau of Reclamation illustrates the wide range of reliability in water supply that exists in California. The Bureau’s Central Valley Project expects to deliver 100% of contractual supply to its "water rights" contractors along the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers, 85% to its Friant Division contractors, but zero to its south-of-Delta “Contract Agriculture” customers, including Westlands Water District.

For more than three decades, Environmental Defense Fund has advocated for the use of transfers Read more »

Spreck Rosekrans is an Economic Analyst at EDF.

More than 2 centuries ago, Ben Franklin told us that we will learn the worth of water when the well runs dry. As reported yesterday, by The Voice of San Diego, the Irvine Ranch Water District has taken Franklin’s words to heart by soaking “wasteful” households with hefty rate increases. The Voice is impressed, noting that per capita water use in Irvine is only 90 gallons per day, far less than the 162 gallons per day consumed in San Diego.

Irvine’s innovative approach is well known to California’s urban water wonks. Each homeowner receives an allocation that is based on Read more »

Spreck Rosekrans is an Economic Analyst at EDF.

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s recent support of building a $1 billion water recycling project is only his most recent effort to pursue sustainable water policies for California’s largest city. Earlier this year, he took a historic canoe trip as Los Angeles rewatered a dry portion of the Owens River in Inyo County after agreeing it could take the water further downstream. And in August, he doubled fines for those who violated the city’s ban on daytime lawn watering.

The Mayor clearly understands that reform is needed if we are to ensure reliable supplies for California’s growing cities and world-class farms without devastating the environment. We appreciate his bold leadership and urge other elected leaders to take similar actions.

Spreck Rosekrans is an Economic Analyst at EDF.

(Link to posts in this series: Part 1)

The short answer is that Adam Smith would do what Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has done – charge more. In this case, the Mayor's action is triggered by a second consecutive dry year coupled with endangered species concerns in the Bay-Delta, which provides urban southern California with 30% of its water supply.

Many of our largest cities, including Los Angeles, San Diego, Oakland and San Francisco, charge about $1000 for an acre-foot (enough for two single family homes). Some cities, however, such as Sacramento, Fresno and Modesto, still do not even meter water use. Not surprisingly, water use in those communites is more than twice the statewide average. They are telling their customers that meters are "on the way". In our view, metering (and charging) for all use statewide cannot happen soon enough. Read more »

Spreck Rosekrans is an Economic Analyst at EDF.

We at the Environmental Defense Fund believe that sound economics is a cornerstone of good environmental policy. To be smart about how we manage any natural resource, it is important to "internalize the externalities", i.e. make sure the costs of pollution and environmental degradation are fully included in decision-making.

Under such a system, the famous "invisible hand" of economist Adam Smith would encourage rational use of limited resources without excessive environmental destruction. Water management in California and the west is the result, however, of a "first in time, first in right" policy that has little to do with economic efficiency.

As a result of California history and our water rights priority system, the price of water in our cities is between 10 and 100 times that in many rural areas. This differential is huge, even after accounting for the additional cost of moving and treating the water for urban consumption, and provides disincentives to efficient use. We'll provide some examples in future blog posts.

But today's LA Times, featuring a bipartisan editorial opinion crafted by Governor Schwarzenegger and Senator Feinstein that encourages the legislature to put a $9 Billion "water infrastructure investment" bond on the November ballot, reminds us of our old battle cry "policy before plumbing" (are we wonks or what?). Does it really make sense to make a massive investment in infrastructure without making sure we are using our existing facilities as well as we could? Especially with a record deficit in the State budget?

As the legislature considers solutions for water management and restoration of our beleaguered fisheries, we urge them to bear in mind that it is critically important that we all have the incentive to manage water supplies prudently. Let's ask ourselves – "What would Adam Smith do?"