Draining the TuscanBy Robin Huffman, BEC Advocacy Coordinator The memory of the local drop in groundwater caused by the 1994 DWB remains vivid for many residents and farmers who depend on their wells. The cone of depression from greedy water sellers using groundwater substitutions caused many wells to suck air. Taps went dry, and the municipal water in Durham failed. One 4th generation farmer lost their farm because they couldn’t water their crop because the neighboring water district, for a huge profit, had taken the groundwater out from under them without regard. Another result of the drawdown was that contaminants were drawn up in 2 of the 3 Durham municipal wells. Groundwater substitution transfers wreak havoc on communities, both human and environmental. Despite the disruptions of the 1994 DWB, government officials still do not recognize that there is no such thing as surplus groundwater. There is no funding in sight for the appropriate groundwater studies that will be needed to adequately consider whether or not future DWBs are a good idea. Droughts come in two kinds: regulatory such as Governor Schwarzenegger has declared, and hydrologic, or natural. Clearly there is less water in the San Joaquin than the farmers there would like to have, and politicians are scrambling to get the farmers more water. Senator Diane Feinstein is planning to introduce legislation to the Senate before Thanksgiving, the Water Transfer Facilitation Act of 2009 (S.1759, HR 3750 in the House), that has the potential for unintended consequences, most notably the significant lowering of groundwater levels in the North State. The stated intent is to permanently facilitate water transfers. BEC, the Endangered Species Coalition and other California and national groups have come together to comment on this pending bill. Recommendations include wildlife refuge-to-refuge transfers and placing limits on transfers for agricultural use only and not for water speculation or selling on the secondary market. Additionally, groundwater substitutions should not be allowed, the United States Geological Survey should be funded to study the Tuscan aquifer, and a comprehensive environmental review to assess the potential impacts on endangered species such as the Chinook Salmon and other aquatic, riparian, and wetland dependent species in the Delta and Central Valley Watersheds is essential. Recent estimates attributed to the Bureau of Reclamation that there are 300,000 acre feet of “excess” water to transfer even as the Governor has declared a drought is counterintuitive at best. The May 2009 Department of Water Resources Groundwater Level Comparison Report shows that groundwater levels in the Sacramento Valley and Redding Groundwater Basins have lowered from Spring 2006 to Spring 2009. “On average, groundwater levels were down by about 7.5 feet (-7.5 ft) in the northern Sacramento Valley and the Redding Basins in March 2009 compared to March 2006. The greatest decrease in groundwater elevation was on the west side of the Sacramento Valley in Glenn County in one deep observation well that had a decline of 34.1 feet (-34.1 ft) in March 2009 compared to March 2006.” The report further states that groundwater levels were down, on average, in all well types and for all well depths. Butte County was down the average of 7.5 feet while Glenn County was down 9.6 feet. Glenn County supervisors are beginning to take note as well as the farmers. Much more notice of the state and federal legislative activities should be taken by local government officials whom many citizens are trusting to control the situation. According to Assistant Director Vickie Newlin, the Butte County Water and Resource Conservation (BC WRC) department does not have the authority to officially comment on proposed water legislation, state or federal. Butte County’s Water Resource District is one in the Four County Memorandum of Understanding in which the counties of Butte, Colusa, Glenn, and Tehama agree to “voluntary joint efforts toward regional coordination, collaboration, and communication” about our common water resources, both surface and groundwater. While the Four County MOU and other measures such as Butte County’s Chapter 33 Ordinance and the new Water Resources Element in the draft Butte County General Plan 2030 are steps toward better managing increasingly tight water supplies, the question remains as to whether or not the North State is moving fast enough to shore up our surface and groundwater supplies before the state and federal government permanently facilitate mega groundwater transfers to the arid part of the State, south of the Delta. From the Fall 2009 issue of the Environmental News. |
Even as BEC awaits court decisions on our legal challenge of Governor Schwarzenegger’s declaration of a drought that allowed the 2009 Drought Water Bank (DWB) to proceed without environmental review, the Department of Water Resources could facilitate water transfers between individual buyers and sellers in 2010, and the Federal government may pass a bill which would institutionalize water transfers.