San Francisco Chronicle - (Sunday)
State steps into underground water fight
Central Valley farmers, regulators differ on the oversight of aquifers
A stretch of California that’s considered one of the fastest-sinking areas in the nation, where farms have pumped so much water from the ground that the land has slowly collapsed, is on the verge of state intervention.
In a first-ever move, California regulators are looking to step in and monitor groundwater pumping in the Tulare Lake subbasin, an 837square-mile hydrological region flush with cotton, hay and almonds between Fresno and Bakersfield. Because of heavy pumping, some places in the area are sinking a foot a year, causing roads to buckle and canals to crack.
Growers and government officials in this farm belt, who don’t always take kindly to policies in Sacramento, are urging the state to stay out for fear of losing control of their water, the region’s lifeblood. But state regulators say local leadership has failed to act to protect groundwater and that oversight may be what’s needed to shore up over-drafted aquifers, keep wells from going dry and halt land subsidence. Subsidence occurs because water helps prop up the land, and when so much water is gone, so is the support. The looming confrontation between the state and water agencies marks the latest, and one of the most significant, developments with California’s decade-old groundwater legislation, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, or SGMA.
The 2014 measure was enacted to begin regulating groundwater for the first time. While taking water from rivers and streams has long been subject to restrictions in California, pumping water from the ground has been largely a free-for-all. During periods of drought, groundwater accounts for as much as 60% of the state’s total water supply.
“We’re concerned about groundwater levels continuing to decline,” said Natalie Stork, SGMA program manager for the State Water Resources Control Board. “People may be concerned about the SGMA process and how that might affect their livelihoods and business. But what happens if there
wasn’t SGMA? It would come down to who has the longest straw to get whatever last water is left behind.”
The state water board is scheduled to decide Tuesday whether to put the Tulare Lake subbasin in “probation.” Although the 2014 groundwater act gives communities 25 years to begin sustainably managing their aquifers and calls for local water agencies to take the lead, regulators say water managers in the Tulare Lake subbasin haven’t made sufficient headway. Specifically, regulators say, they have failed to submit an acceptable plan for how they’ll eventually restore groundwater levels.
Should the state water board put the subbasin in probation, which the agency’s staff is recommending, regulators would have the authority to require large landowners to install meters on their pumps, report how much groundwater they draw and pay fees for pumping.
If regulators don’t see progress after a year, the state board could take the additional step of imposing terms for pumping, meaning groundwater restrictions.
The Tulare Lake subbasin is the first region to face the threat of probation under the groundwater act. More than 90 areas where over-pumping is an issue in California have been or soon will be required to submit plans for sustainable groundwater management. Five other subbasins, also in the San Joaquin Valley, haven’t produced adequate plans and are being scheduled for future probation hearings.
In the Tulare Lake area, where about 150,000 people live amid the farms and dairies, many residents say the proposed intervention is neither warranted nor workable. They want more time and flexibility from regulators.
“If the state comes in and puts our area in probation and does the huge cuts they’re talking about, there’s going to be a huge impact on the economy,” said Joe Neves, a supervisor in Kings County. “It will be catastrophic for cities
and industries.”
Agriculture is foundational for the region. Kings County ranks among the state’s top 10 in farm output, with more than $2.5 billion of annual crops and other products, such as milk.
One of the most immediate concerns is the affordability of pumping fees the state would levy if the subbasin is put in probation. The fees are meant to recover the state’s oversight costs, but local leaders have estimated the charges, as initially proposed, would amount to at least $20 million a year, likely far greater than the state’s expenses.
Amid the criticism, the state recently halved its proposed per-unit pumping fee to $20 per acre-foot of water.
Others in the region are expressing a more fundamental concern. They worry the state won’t back off until so much groundwater is put off-limits that farming will no longer be possible. In recent years, many growers in the area have transitioned to more lucrative permanent crops, such as nuts and grapes, which require much more water to farm.
The biggest landowner in the region, agricultural giant J.G. Boswell Co., submitted a letter to the state water board protesting the proposed probation. The company alleges several legal problems with the facts and reasoning that state regulators use to justify the intervention and suggests groundwater should remain under local control.
While the amount of water use in the area remains opaque, the Boswell Co. is believed to be perhaps the largest consumer of groundwater, and it commands huge sway over how water in the subbasin is managed. The company has not returned calls from the Chronicle, and the El Rico Groundwater Sustainability Agency, which is chaired by a company vice president, declined to discuss the matter.
El Rico is the largest of five agencies established in the subbasin to come up with a state-approved groundwater plan. The agencies, which represent different communities and interests, have often tangled on how to move forward, an additional reason for the lack of progress.
Deanna Jackson, executive director of the TriCounty Water Authority, another agency involved in drafting the plan, says the subbasin is actively revising its last submission to the state, hoping to win approval.
“It takes time,” she said. “It’s very different from anything agriculture has seen before.”
Jackson also has asked the state to exclude her agency from probation because it doesn’t pump much water from the subbasin. It gets most of its supply from neighboring aquifers.
State regulators insist that they want to keep groundwater management in local hands, and don’t want to be punitive. But they note that they’re legally bound to make sure California’s aquifers are on a path to recovery. The Tulare Lake subbasin’s plan, according to a March state report, falls short on several fronts.
Among the flaws cited: The plan allows groundwater levels to continue dropping, in many areas to well beneath historic lows; hundreds of domestic wells, many in disadvantaged farmworker communities, would likely go dry under the plan; and threats to infrastructure from land subsidence are not clearly identified.
The problem with ignoring the groundwater issues, and namely subsidence, was on display prominently last year. With the historically wet weather, the Kings County city of Corcoran and its two state prison facilities were threatened by flooding with the re-emergence of an ancient lake, Tulare Lake, partly because the area sits so low due to subsidence. The city has sunk nearly five feet over the past decade.
Caitrin Chappelle, associate director of the Nature Conservancy’s water program in California, said what regulators decide to do with the Tulare Lake subbasin is being watched by water managers across the state for insight into future implementation of the 2014 legislation.
“This is a moment where we’re going to see the state’s direction,” she said. “The places where we’re seeing the state (look to) intervene right now are places where the plans aren’t doing enough to address the impact on domestic wells, for drinking, for bathing. To me, this is a really important place to start.”