Monthly Archive for November, 2009
To All,
Say for instance we had a practical realistic state water budget, would it be prudent to plug in a reasonable metric or estimate of what illegal water users are using in order to get a handle on water usage and projected uses? For instance if a well capitalized business drills 2 separate but close 24 inch bores 600 feet deep within a declining aquifer in a “race to the bottom” and pumps 200 GPM each for commercial use, this adds up to about 2.3 billion gallons a year. You can’t even begin to figure this problem out in light of other miss-reported or illegal uses with-in the same complex basin. Since the aquifer is misunderstood and comprised of complex sub-alluvial fan deposits it is unlikely that the true damage of the abusive extraction will ever be quantified or modeled properly. (I am talking about the Rohnert Park Graton Rancheria Casino appendix – Y : water well construction description). So what’s a understaffed regulatory agency to do? I know that the USGS in Palo Alto wishes it got more love. It seems like the problem needs a lot of positive solutions from a lot of different angles.
Lloyd
STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
PUBLIC WORKSHOP AGENDA
UPDATING THE WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (WQMP)
FOR NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM LANDS IN CALIFORNIA
Monday, November 30, 2009
1:00 to 5:00 p.m.
Cal/EPA Building, Coastal Hearing Room
1001 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814
1. Welcome and Introductions (1:00 – 1:15 p.m.) – Gita Kapahi, Director of Public
Relations, State Water Resources Control Board.
2. WQMP Update and Workshop, (Background, Purpose, Proposed WQMP
Contents, and Proposed Update Process) (1:15 – 1:45 p.m.) – Water Board
and U.S. Forest Service (USFS) staff
3. Nominate Stakeholder Group Representatives (1:45 – 3:15 p.m.) –
Facilitator(s)
4. Public Comment Solicitation (3:15 – 4:45 p.m.) – Facilitator(s)
5. Report-Out / Wrap-Up (4:45 – 5:00 p.m.) – Facilitator
6. Adjourn (5:00 p.m.)
Save the Date – Dutch Bill Creek Dam Removal & Restoration Celebration
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 10:48:11 -0800
Please join the Camp Meeker Recreation and Park District and the Gold
Ridge Resource Conservation District in a Celebration of Phase I of
the Dutch Bill Creek Dam Removal and Restoration Project. Please
see the attached before and after shots of the bridge.
Date: Saturday, November 21, 2009
Time: 11:00 am – 12:30 pm
Place: Meet at Camp Meeker VFD
v Update on efforts to revitalize the Camp Meeker Beach
v Bridge Dedication
v Refreshment and Merriment to be Provided
Please join us to celebrate this exciting community project. If you
have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Lisa Hulette
Say for instance we had a practical realistic state water budget, would it be prudent to plug in a reasonable metric or estimate of what illegal water users are using in order to get a handle on water usage and projected uses?
For instance if a well capitalized business drills 2 separate but close 24 inch bores 600 feet deep within a declining aquifer in a “race to the bottom” and pumps 200 GPM each for commercial use, this adds up to about 2.3 billion gallons a year.
You can’t even begin to figure this problem out in light of other miss-reported or illegal uses with-in the same complex basin. Since the aquifer is misunderstood and comprised of complex sub-alluvial fan deposits it is unlikely that the true damage of the abusive extraction will ever be quantified or modeled properly. (I am talking about the Rohnert Park Graton Rancheria Casino appendix – Y : water well construction description).
So what’s a understaffed regulatory agency to do? I know that the USGS in Palo Alto wishes it got more love. It seems like the problem needs a lot of positive solutions from a lot of different angles.
Lloyd
Sending this reminder notice – hope some folks attend – this is a big deal – CAG comments – below:
The State Water Resources Control Board will hold a Public Workshop to Consider Recommendations for Actions regarding Water Diversions for Purposes of Frost Protection in Mendocino and Sonoma Counties.
The Public Workshop will commence on Wednesday, November 18, 2009 at 1:00 p.m. in the Coastal Hearing Room Joe Serna, Jr./Cal-EPA Building 1001 I Street, Second Floor Sacramento, CA
Is anyone attending the Wednesday, November 18 workshop in Sacramento on Water Diversions for Purposes of Frost Protection in Mendocino and Sonoma Counties?
Zen
Yup ! I am I hope I am not the only one.
Alan
This will be a very important workshop on Frost Protection water use protocols, rules, monitoring and enforcement:
11/18, 1pm, Sacramento SWRCB
David Keller
by: Rick Cabral, t r u t h o u t | Report,
Thursday 05 November 2009
The California legislature has passed a comprehensive and complex package of water legislation with twin goals of protecting the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta while providing adequate water supplies in California. While some environmental groups supported the measure, others are already planning a future impediment to implementation.

The historic package, spearheaded by Sen. Darrell Steinberg, president pro tem, includes an overarching policy bill as well as a $11 billion bond measure that will fund new reservoirs, water supply programs and ecological restoration measures for the Delta. The bond measure will require voter approval in the November 2010 election.
“This comprehensive water package is an historic achievement,” said Governor Schwarzenegger, who appointed the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force in 2006 to address the statewide water issues. The task force’s recommendations formed the cornerstone of this legislative package.
“What some people are calling a ‘watershed moment’ is really a band-aid when what the Delta really needs is a heart transplant,” argues Jim Metropulos of Sierra Club California.
A hallmark of the package is the creation of a seven-member Delta Stewardship Council, an independent state agency that would develop, adopt and commence implementation of the “Delta Plan” by January 1, 2012, to promote statewide water conservation, water use efficiency and sustainable use of water. The policy bill authorizes the governor to appoint a majority of the members.
Other key components in the package include: establishing a statewide groundwater-monitoring program, increasing penalties for illegal water diversions and a significant reduction in water usage.
The legislative package would not have been approved without the support of a fragile coalition of water districts, farm interests and other conservation groups, including the Nature Conservancy, National Resource Defense Council and Environmental Defense Fund.
Ann Hayden, senior water resources analyst at the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) in San Francisco, says the EDF supports the legislative package because of the additional oversight provided by the Delta Council and the role it would play in “ensuring the Bay Delta planning process meets, not only the water supply and liability goals, but also the ecosystem restoration and recovery goals. That is an additional piece of oversight that we see is hugely beneficial.”
Other groups, such as Sierra Club California, see it differently. “We have a governor with only one year left on his term, yet his appointees, who basically must have no qualifications in experience, stakeholder or geographic representation, are going to affect water policy for the next six years,” says Metropulos.
The governor is on record as being in favor of a peripheral canal, which would divert fresh water from the Sacramento River, bypassing the Delta, into a southbound aqueduct headed for Central Valley and Southern California.
The Delta Council would have the crucial responsibility of ensuring that a peripheral canal would not adversely impact the Delta. Hayden insists that any plan for such a conveyance facility should provide for necessary safeguards to protect key species, such as salmon.
“Unfortunately, the governor has already said he wants to build the largest peripheral canal he can, tomorrow,” said Evans of Friends of the River. “We think it’s a de facto decision for a very large peripheral canal that can de-water the Delta.”
Leo Winternitz, Delta program director of the Nature Conservancy, admits the Delta water legislation is not perfect. “We feel it offers the best path forward for the Delta and California as a whole.”
Pointing to the decline in species, such as the endangered smelt, Winternitz noted that restoration is crucial to saving the Delta.
“We’ve got to start moving to recovery of species and not just mitigate for impacts, but actually start doing enhancements and improvements that lead toward recovery. Without restoration it’s unlikely we’ll be able to recover the list of species and without a path to recovery we’re not going to get water supply reliability.”
Another of the legislation’s touted benefits is water conservation, with a goal of reducing water usage 20 percent statewide by 2020. The Sierra Club has argued that the bill unfairly exempts some water districts and all agricultural water users from the requirement. Agriculture consumes about 41 percent of the state’s water in a normal year, while 48 percent is dedicated to environmental uses, according to the state’s Department of Water Resources.
If approved by voters, the debt service on the $11 billion bond would present an additional $700 million drain on the state’s general fund each year,” notes Metropulos. “Most of these projects should be paid for by user fees and revenue bonds.”
Groups such as Sierra Club California, Friends of the River, other environment groups, Delta farmers and Delta communities are already considering organizing a “No on Water Bond” committee, says Evans. “Things aren’t over.”
Which means the north-south debate over water usage and its impact on the Delta should be a prime election year issue in 2010.
Peter Gleick, Pacific Institute, November 4, 2009
We must stop pretending that water is free and unlimited, available to anyone who can put a siphon in a river or drill another groundwater well.
What do I mean by stealing water? I mean people extract water from our rivers and streams without a right to do so. Legal water rights are managed by the State Board. Water rights permit and license holders are required by the California Code of Regulations to file reports with the State Water Board on their water diversion and use amounts. Fewer than 70 percent of permit holders actually submit these reports. There is no penalty for failure to file a report and, worse, no verification of the numbers reported. Further, information is not available to compare face value of water rights to actual use. Some, perhaps many, rights holders are likely taking more than their right allows.
Moreover, the State Board does not have authority over the earliest water rights claims — so-called Pre-1914 rights — and the Board estimates that there are approximately 1,600 unreported Pre-1914 and riparian diversions in the Delta. How much water are these diverters taking? No one knows, or looks, or measures. The story is even worse for groundwater. Percolating groundwater is not subject to the State Water Board’s permitting system (as though it was magically different from surface water. It isn’t.) and, in most of the state is not regulated by any other public agency. How can we sustainably manage what we don’t even measure? Where is our groundwater going? What is the effect of this groundwater use on surface flows? Who knows?
As bad as things are for understanding existing rights and use, there are thousands of water users extracting water with no rights at all. Or so we think. Why don’t we know?
Water Number: Eight. There are only eight people statewide with responsibility for policing water theft and rights violations at the State Water Resources Control Board, and even they have other demands on their time. Republicans (and some Democrats), in the recent debate over water legislation, opposed increasing that number to around 30, and also opposed more stringent requirements that water uses be measured and reported.
Why? Because a small number of powerful people, though not most of us, and certainly not the environment, benefit from our ignorance on this issue. If actual water uses were limited to those allowed by water rights, some of us suspect that there would be a lot more water left in the rivers or available to junior water rights holders. Maybe a part of the problem with water in California, and part of the problem with the health of the Delta fisheries, is water theft, not just over-allocation and inefficient use. Wouldn’t it be nice to know?
But this would require — gasp! — actually measuring and monitoring all water use, from surface sources to groundwater. And it would require enforcing water rights. What radical concepts. It is time for Californians to demand that we stop pretending that water is free and unlimited, available to anyone who can put a siphon in a river or drill another groundwater well. When these things are left unregulated, or as badly regulated as they are now, we rob current and future generations.
Dr. Peter Gleick is president of the Pacific Institute, an internationally recognized water expert and a MacArthur Fellow.
This is a very contentious issue in the Mark West Creek watershed, an important fisheries being negatively impacted by piece-mealing construction for a winery.
The applicant, Dumol Winery, is trying to get approval in the sensitive upper Mark West Creek watershed with its significant steelhead habitat. The creek already has significant impacts from the winery and vineyards activities including dewatering and silt runoff.
This area is prone to landslides as well as being a water scarce area. The owner is associated with Goldman-Sachs, bailed out with multi-million tax dollars, now used to create an elite winery to produce high-end wine most people can not afford to buy.
Date: Thursday, November 12, 2009
Time: 1:30 PM
Where: PRMD Hearing Room, 2550 Ventura Ave, Santa Rosa
