ARTICLE
There is deep concern about the State of California’s water supply as we head into the winter months where current drought conditions are highlighted in a recent article in CalMatters by Dan Walters: https://calmatters.org/commentary/2021/11/groundwater-management-drought-california-agriculture/. The two articles suggest a call to action to address our water storage in the coming months and years. Alexander noted: “Scientists and water managers say that at some point California’s snowpack could simply disappear. This would leave the state without the crucial spring and summer melt-off that fills rivers and streams, nourishes plants and animals, and provides a huge chunk of the water supply. It would also be devastating for the ski industry.” This snowless future, according to a new study led by researchers at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, could arrive in California’s Sierra Nevada in as soon as 25 years. The study is among many to detail the decline in snow, but it’s unique in synthesizing decades of research to nail down exactly when the snow might be gone. And it offers a timeline that is alarmingly short.” The reality of the new study projects that by the late 2040s, half of the area historically covered by snow in the Sierra will likely be “low or no” for five straight years, given current warming trends. A major concern about snow loss is it depletes our water supply. Much of the infrastructure that collects and delivers water in the state is conditioned upon having snow on mountaintops well into summer. Hundreds of reservoirs, including the largest in the state -- Shasta Lake and Lake Oroville -- rely not only on storms for water during the wet winter months, but melting snow to provide another boost once the weather dries out in spring. Without this spring and summer bump, as much as 30% of the state’s water supply could be lost. Dan Walters’ article focuses on how the prolonged drought impacts California’s agricultural history. California farmers, the backbone of our national and global food supply are reacting to water supply shortages in three related ways: suspending cultivation on fields, or removing orchards for lack of water, drilling new wells into aquifers, and buying water from those whose practice has been more lucrative for farmers with adequate supply than actually producing a dwindling crop. All three have major economic impacts. They are driving some farmers, particularly small family operations, out of business; accelerating the shift to large-scale agribusiness corporations with the financial resources to cope; changing the kinds of crops that can be profitably grown; and supercharging the market for buying and selling water. To complicate matters, in 2014, the State Department of Water Resources began aggressively enforcing the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act for unacceptable underground water management plans. The agency rejected the plan of four San Joaquin Valley agencies, the first to feel the pressure of not meeting the state’s underground sustainable water policies. In Santa Cruz County we are fortunate that our Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency (SMGWA)’s Board of Directors adopted the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) during its Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2021 Board meeting and will submit the GSP to the state Department of Water Resources for their review and approval. A key responsibility of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency is to develop, adopt and submit a GSP for the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin (Basin), as required by California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. According to Chris Perri, the Board Chair of SMGWA, she is quoted in the agency’s news release: “All the hard work, long meetings and late nights paid off with a great plan for water sustainability,” “But the real win was bringing together all these different communities, cooperating with good hearts and minds for the greater good!” The plan provides the basis for ongoing management of the Basin by SMGWA to achieve sustainability in a 20-year planning horizon and maintain sustainability over a 50-year implementation horizon, as specified by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. So what is the short- and long-term water strategy for California? State water managers are looking at a variety of options such as building new reservoirs, but these projects intend to be very costly and face environmental challenges to protect fish and wildlife. The immediate option is investing in storing more winter rain in underground aquifers — noted as “groundwater recharge.” The need to project the rainfall with more accurate information and manage the runoff seems to be the key option. In September, Governor Newsom directed several billion dollars to drought resilience and potential expansion of water supplies. As always, the devil is in the details of how and where those funds will be spent. I noted in our report about the federal Infrastructure and Investment Act that money is assigned to water projects across America. Also in the mix is a state initiative that is in the process of gathering signatures to qualify for the ballot next year: 1908. (21-0014A1) - DIRECTS TWO PERCENT OF GENERAL FUND TO WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS; LIMITS ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR ELIGIBLE PROJECTS. If the initiative qualifies and voters approve of the idea, it would transfer two percent of the State’s General Fund revenues to the Water Supply Infrastructure Account. This will be a decisive option as language in the initiative is directed at increasing annual water supply by 5,000,000 acre-feet. In addition, it: prioritizes funding projects that are approved or ready to start; authorizes issuance of general obligation bonds for water projects to be repaid with revenues in the Trust Account; limits environmental review of eligible projects through expedited California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process; limits the Coastal Commission review of specified projects; authorizes the California Natural Resources Agency to override Coastal Commission decisions; and limits constitutional challenges to approved projects. It is certain that there will be heavy opposition from environmental groups and others that say this initiative goes too far. Water or lack of water is now top of mind again as it has immediate and long-lasting impacts on our state. Let’s hope that our legislative leaders can move quickly and with a sense of urgency to address our water supply needs.
There is deep concern about the State of California’s water supply as we head into the winter months where current drought conditions are highlighted in a recent article in CalMatters by Dan Walters: https://calmatters.org/commentary/2021/11/groundwater-management-drought-california-agriculture/.
The two articles suggest a call to action to address our water storage in the coming months and years. Alexander noted: “Scientists and water managers say that at some point California’s snowpack could simply disappear. This would leave the state without the crucial spring and summer melt-off that fills rivers and streams, nourishes plants and animals, and provides a huge chunk of the water supply. It would also be devastating for the ski industry.”
This snowless future, according to a new study led by researchers at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, could arrive in California’s Sierra Nevada in as soon as 25 years. The study is among many to detail the decline in snow, but it’s unique in synthesizing decades of research to nail down exactly when the snow might be gone. And it offers a timeline that is alarmingly short.”
The reality of the new study projects that by the late 2040s, half of the area historically covered by snow in the Sierra will likely be “low or no” for five straight years, given current warming trends.
A major concern about snow loss is it depletes our water supply. Much of the infrastructure that collects and delivers water in the state is conditioned upon having snow on mountaintops well into summer. Hundreds of reservoirs, including the largest in the state -- Shasta Lake and Lake Oroville -- rely not only on storms for water during the wet winter months, but melting snow to provide another boost once the weather dries out in spring. Without this spring and summer bump, as much as 30% of the state’s water supply could be lost.
Dan Walters’ article focuses on how the prolonged drought impacts California’s agricultural history. California farmers, the backbone of our national and global food supply are reacting to water supply shortages in three related ways: suspending cultivation on fields, or removing orchards for lack of water, drilling new wells into aquifers, and buying water from those whose practice has been more lucrative for farmers with adequate supply than actually producing a dwindling crop.
All three have major economic impacts. They are driving some farmers, particularly small family operations, out of business; accelerating the shift to large-scale agribusiness corporations with the financial resources to cope; changing the kinds of crops that can be profitably grown; and supercharging the market for buying and selling water.
To complicate matters, in 2014, the State Department of Water Resources began aggressively enforcing the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act for unacceptable underground water management plans. The agency rejected the plan of four San Joaquin Valley agencies, the first to feel the pressure of not meeting the state’s underground sustainable water policies.
In Santa Cruz County we are fortunate that our Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency (SMGWA)’s Board of Directors adopted the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) during its Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2021 Board meeting and will submit the GSP to the state Department of Water Resources for their review and approval. A key responsibility of the Santa Margarita Groundwater Agency is to develop, adopt and submit a GSP for the Santa Margarita Groundwater Basin (Basin), as required by California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. According to Chris Perri, the Board Chair of SMGWA, she is quoted in the agency’s news release: “All the hard work, long meetings and late nights paid off with a great plan for water sustainability,” “But the real win was bringing together all these different communities, cooperating with good hearts and minds for the greater good!”
The plan provides the basis for ongoing management of the Basin by SMGWA to achieve sustainability in a 20-year planning horizon and maintain sustainability over a 50-year implementation horizon, as specified by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.
So what is the short- and long-term water strategy for California? State water managers are looking at a variety of options such as building new reservoirs, but these projects intend to be very costly and face environmental challenges to protect fish and wildlife. The immediate option is investing in storing more winter rain in underground aquifers — noted as “groundwater recharge.” The need to project the rainfall with more accurate information and manage the runoff seems to be the key option. In September, Governor Newsom directed several billion dollars to drought resilience and potential expansion of water supplies. As always, the devil is in the details of how and where those funds will be spent. I noted in our report about the federal Infrastructure and Investment Act that money is assigned to water projects across America.
Also in the mix is a state initiative that is in the process of gathering signatures to qualify for the ballot next year: 1908. (21-0014A1) - DIRECTS TWO PERCENT OF GENERAL FUND TO WATER SUPPLY PROJECTS; LIMITS ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR ELIGIBLE PROJECTS.
If the initiative qualifies and voters approve of the idea, it would transfer two percent of the State’s General Fund revenues to the Water Supply Infrastructure Account. This will be a decisive option as language in the initiative is directed at increasing annual water supply by 5,000,000 acre-feet. In addition, it: prioritizes funding projects that are approved or ready to start; authorizes issuance of general obligation bonds for water projects to be repaid with revenues in the Trust Account; limits environmental review of eligible projects through expedited California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process; limits the Coastal Commission review of specified projects; authorizes the California Natural Resources Agency to override Coastal Commission decisions; and limits constitutional challenges to approved projects. It is certain that there will be heavy opposition from environmental groups and others that say this initiative goes too far.
Water or lack of water is now top of mind again as it has immediate and long-lasting impacts on our state. Let’s hope that our legislative leaders can move quickly and with a sense of urgency to address our water supply needs.