California approves sweeping Bay-Delta water plan as environmentalists push back

Under the changes, water agencies can commit to voluntary agreements governing water usage that some argue undermine the health of the Bay-Delta system.SACRAMENTO, Calif. (CN) — California’s water board late Thursday approved major changes to a massive water plan that drew strong emotions, and at times sharp rebukes, from hundreds of stakeholders including water agencies, conservationists and tribes.The plan sets water quality goals for the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, a massive watershed that provides drinking and municipal water to some 30 million people, along with irrigation water for 4 million acres. The process of updating the plan for the Bay-Delta has taken years.The board voted 4-1 to approve the updated plan after two days of public comment.The plan diverges from current practices, which require all water agencies to limit pumping to maintain minimum water levels in rivers and the estuary.Under the updates, agencies can follow a voluntary agreement path that offers more flexibility in required water diversions and requires them to fund projects that improve flows and restore floodplains and fish habitat.The approach, called the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes program, was endorsed by Governor Gavin Newsom with support from water agencies serving agricultural areas and cities, along with business groups.Several of those agencies heralded the updates to the Bay-Delta water quality control plan at the meeting, telling the State Water Resources Control Board they plan to use voluntary agreements.If agencies don’t sign on, the second regulatory path would require a minimum level of unimpaired flows year-round, subject to water conditions.A series of speakers opposed to the updates, including many tribal members, lambasted the changes.Jon Rosenfield, with the San Francisco Baykeeper, argued the voluntary agreements wouldn’t reverse fish population declines.Many of the voluntary agreement opponents pushed instead for a required minimum of 55% unimpaired flows.“Flow levels will simply be inadequate and temperatures harmful,” said Christie Ralston, an attorney with the Baykeeper.Joe Jerry told the board his tribe relies on the watershed. He said the rivers and fish are more than resources — they’re central to cultural survival.Jerry said algae blooms have stopped his tribe from performing water ceremonies and hampered it from using waterways for sustenance. He accused the board of making backroom deals excluding tribal voices.Jerry joined others urging the board to reject the voluntary agreements.Georgiana Gensaw said tribes believe the entirety of the water basin is connected. A decision about a plan focused on the Bay-Delta would also affect the Trinity River, though it’s not in the watershed.“There’s so much more than the science and the numbers,” Gensaw said. “The Trinity is sick.”The board later tweaked the updated plan to include an information gathering process focused on the Trinity River.Speaking after several tribal members commented, Board chair E. Joaquin Esquivel said the state continues to wrestle with the “dark past” tribes have experienced.“We need to continue to be better,” he said, adding: “There’s a lot of mistrust, certainly of ourselves and our government. We have more work to do.”On the second day of the meeting, Esquivel said he wanted to do some “myth-busting” and correct inaccuracies.“There is a lack of obvious agreement,” Esquivel said, adding that the board had asked people to find methods of working better together. “That has obviously not happened.”Diane Riddle, assistant deputy director at the water board, said some opponents to the plan claimed it didn’t rely on sound science.“That is not the case,” she added, noting both paths are based on two scientific reports with independent peer review.She said the reports show fish and wildlife need proper water flows and habitat to thrive, and both pathways provide that. Additionally, regular reviews will let agencies change course if needed, Riddle said.Esquivel stressed the board had taken time to listen and respond to concerns. He touted the plan’s accountability and enforceability components, which some opponents questioned.Board member Jared Blumenfeld said, “It’s incredibly enforceable. There’s backstop upon backstop.”Board member Nichole Morgan, a civil engineer, was the sole “no” vote.Sean Maguire, another board member, said: “It’s been a real journey to see the development of this program." He added, “That said, it’s not a perfect plan. It’s our best effort at this time.”Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads