Guest commentary by Jonathan Rosenfield, PhD, SF Baykeeper Science Director; and Eric Buescher, SF Baykeeper Managing Attorney
This year, as California’s extreme drought gives way to floods, the need for a science-based plan for sustainable water management has never been more clear. Such a plan would align human demands and environmental needs with the supply of water that nature provides each year. Call it balancing our water budget.
Instead, Governor Newsom has released a torrent of executive orders and budget trailer bills that would move California away from a sustainable water future. Cumulatively, the Governor’s proposals encourage excessive extraction of water from the state’s overtapped rivers and aquifers to the further detriment of the environment and public health. California’s state senate initially pumped the brakes on the governor’s bills, but they’re not dead and have resurfaced at the center of last minute negotiations over the state’s budget.
Newsom’s proposals perpetuate the state’s broken approach to water management in order to appease corporate agriculture and powerful urban water brokers. The consequences for San Francisco Bay, its tributary rivers, and the people already suffering from the inequities in the system will be disastrous.
California’s water management system suffers from at least two systematic flaws. First, it is inequitable. Our current legal regime is the result of a 19th century “war of extermination” on California’s indigenous peoples, and the exclusion of people of color from owning water rights. Disenfranchised communities continue to suffer the consequences of these inequities today. For example, as a result of reduced river flows, communities in the Delta suffer from toxic algae that prevents safe access to waterways during summer months.
Second, California’s water system is unsustainable. In a typical year, California diverts more than half of the water that would flow to San Francisco Bay and sends it to water districts that serve industrial agriculture and big cities. As a result, six fish species that rely on that water are endangered. This also threatens the orca whales that live off our coast, which are starving in the face of dwindling Chinook salmon populations. This year, California closed its salmon fishery for only the third time in state history because the state has mismanaged the rivers in which these remarkable fish spawn and grow.
Many of the budget “trailer bills” Governor Newsom attached to his 2024 budget will exacerbate the structural problems in California water management and they have little to do with the state budget. One of these trailer bills encourages the same agricultural water districts that profit from draining the state’s aquifers to “recharge” them by diverting river flows during undefined “flood” conditions, without environmental review or regulatory oversight. The bill provides no assurance that these water districts won’t drain our aquifers again when dry times return – it is just a handout. Absent necessary safeguards, the bill would permit contaminated lands to be inundated, leaching toxins such as selenium into those aquifers. With thorough legislative debate and appropriate environmental review and oversight, these harms could be easily avoided.
Newsom also proposes fast-tracking environmental and judicial review of major new water infrastructure projects, including a new major dam (Sites Reservoir) and a giant tunnel to divert water from the Delta (the latest iteration of Delta Tunnel proposals). Another budget trailer bill that has nothing to do with the state budget would exclude internal agency communications from the evidence courts can review to determine whether state agencies followed the law. And yet another would eliminate protections for several imperiled species. Combined, these trailer bills deliberately ignore the environmental and social consequences of water management projects and then hide those consequences away from public and court review. So much for government transparency.
This abuse of the budget process is a continuation of the ways Newsom has approached water management throughout his administration. Since taking office, Newsom has blocked necessary updates to water quality requirements while he negotiated voluntary deals with water districts in secret discussions that excluded Delta communities, tribes, fishing groups, and conservationists. Newsom’s agencies weakened safeguards for the Bay’s endangered fishes so that agricultural corporations could take more water, even though California sued the Trump administration over nearly identical federal rules. And during this year’s record-breaking rains, the Governor issued an executive order encouraging his agencies to deliver more water to industrial agriculture in the San Joaquin River valley by ignoring water quality protections for San Francisco Bay – the third consecutive year those protections were waived.
By removing protections for San Francisco Bay and its tributary rivers, the governor claims that he is taking action. But California will not solve its water woes by scrapping environmental review and oversight of new dams, diversions, and tunnels. Nature gives us a water budget, and the state’s mismanagement of that budget over decades has resulted in a series of escalating crises. Governor Newsom’s frantic efforts to increase water supply, in the absence of a strategic, science-based plan to manage water demand are not a solution. The longer we put off making hard decisions, the more painful it will be for us to reconcile our water budget.
Reforming California’s water management and delivery infrastructure for the 21st century requires balancing human demands and environmental needs for water within the unreliable supply Mother Nature already provides. Unfortunately, Newsom’s ad hoc water decisions are not a viable plan. The new proposals push forward ill-conceived water infrastructure projects, with little or no oversight or review. The legislature should reject the Governor’s approach and instead engage in a full and vigorous debate to ensure we build a sustainable water future for California.
NOTE: Guest commentaries express the views of the author only, and should not be attributed to Maven’s Notebook.
GUEST COMMENTARY: California Needs a Plan for Water Sustainability — Newsom’s Budget Trailer Bills Aren’t It
Guest commentary by Jonathan Rosenfield, PhD, SF Baykeeper Science Director; and Eric Buescher, SF Baykeeper Managing Attorney
This year, as California’s extreme drought gives way to floods, the need for a science-based plan for sustainable water management has never been more clear. Such a plan would align human demands and environmental needs with the supply of water that nature provides each year. Call it balancing our water budget.
Instead, Governor Newsom has released a torrent of executive orders and budget trailer bills that would move California away from a sustainable water future. Cumulatively, the Governor’s proposals encourage excessive extraction of water from the state’s overtapped rivers and aquifers to the further detriment of the environment and public health. California’s state senate initially pumped the brakes on the governor’s bills, but they’re not dead and have resurfaced at the center of last minute negotiations over the state’s budget.
Newsom’s proposals perpetuate the state’s broken approach to water management in order to appease corporate agriculture and powerful urban water brokers. The consequences for San Francisco Bay, its tributary rivers, and the people already suffering from the inequities in the system will be disastrous.
California’s water management system suffers from at least two systematic flaws. First, it is inequitable. Our current legal regime is the result of a 19th century “war of extermination” on California’s indigenous peoples, and the exclusion of people of color from owning water rights. Disenfranchised communities continue to suffer the consequences of these inequities today. For example, as a result of reduced river flows, communities in the Delta suffer from toxic algae that prevents safe access to waterways during summer months.
Second, California’s water system is unsustainable. In a typical year, California diverts more than half of the water that would flow to San Francisco Bay and sends it to water districts that serve industrial agriculture and big cities. As a result, six fish species that rely on that water are endangered. This also threatens the orca whales that live off our coast, which are starving in the face of dwindling Chinook salmon populations. This year, California closed its salmon fishery for only the third time in state history because the state has mismanaged the rivers in which these remarkable fish spawn and grow.
Many of the budget “trailer bills” Governor Newsom attached to his 2024 budget will exacerbate the structural problems in California water management and they have little to do with the state budget. One of these trailer bills encourages the same agricultural water districts that profit from draining the state’s aquifers to “recharge” them by diverting river flows during undefined “flood” conditions, without environmental review or regulatory oversight. The bill provides no assurance that these water districts won’t drain our aquifers again when dry times return – it is just a handout. Absent necessary safeguards, the bill would permit contaminated lands to be inundated, leaching toxins such as selenium into those aquifers. With thorough legislative debate and appropriate environmental review and oversight, these harms could be easily avoided.
Newsom also proposes fast-tracking environmental and judicial review of major new water infrastructure projects, including a new major dam (Sites Reservoir) and a giant tunnel to divert water from the Delta (the latest iteration of Delta Tunnel proposals). Another budget trailer bill that has nothing to do with the state budget would exclude internal agency communications from the evidence courts can review to determine whether state agencies followed the law. And yet another would eliminate protections for several imperiled species. Combined, these trailer bills deliberately ignore the environmental and social consequences of water management projects and then hide those consequences away from public and court review. So much for government transparency.
This abuse of the budget process is a continuation of the ways Newsom has approached water management throughout his administration. Since taking office, Newsom has blocked necessary updates to water quality requirements while he negotiated voluntary deals with water districts in secret discussions that excluded Delta communities, tribes, fishing groups, and conservationists. Newsom’s agencies weakened safeguards for the Bay’s endangered fishes so that agricultural corporations could take more water, even though California sued the Trump administration over nearly identical federal rules. And during this year’s record-breaking rains, the Governor issued an executive order encouraging his agencies to deliver more water to industrial agriculture in the San Joaquin River valley by ignoring water quality protections for San Francisco Bay – the third consecutive year those protections were waived.
By removing protections for San Francisco Bay and its tributary rivers, the governor claims that he is taking action. But California will not solve its water woes by scrapping environmental review and oversight of new dams, diversions, and tunnels. Nature gives us a water budget, and the state’s mismanagement of that budget over decades has resulted in a series of escalating crises. Governor Newsom’s frantic efforts to increase water supply, in the absence of a strategic, science-based plan to manage water demand are not a solution. The longer we put off making hard decisions, the more painful it will be for us to reconcile our water budget.
Reforming California’s water management and delivery infrastructure for the 21st century requires balancing human demands and environmental needs for water within the unreliable supply Mother Nature already provides. Unfortunately, Newsom’s ad hoc water decisions are not a viable plan. The new proposals push forward ill-conceived water infrastructure projects, with little or no oversight or review. The legislature should reject the Governor’s approach and instead engage in a full and vigorous debate to ensure we build a sustainable water future for California.
NOTE: Guest commentaries express the views of the author only, and should not be attributed to Maven’s Notebook.