California is finally stepping clear of the severe drought that has plagued portions of the state for three years. In turn, the Newsom administration allowed the last of its emergency drought regulations to expire this month—after months of farmers, ranchers and local politicians pleading for an end to the strict curtailment rules.
But agriculture has not escaped the regulatory spotlight of Sacramento policymakers, who are placing even more scrutiny on water use along the Scott and Shasta river watersheds.
Last year Siskiyou County ranchers near the Oregon border gained statewide notoriety following reports of them circumventing curtailment orders and drawing water to sustain cattle herds. That fueled a series of bills across two legislative cycles that have sought to reform aspects of California’s water rights system. It also propelled state water officials to ask budget committees for more money to ramp up enforcement activities.
The latest action is a petition from the Karuk Tribe to set a minimum flow standard for the Scott River to maintain the native salmon population in the watershed, essentially making permanent the most aggressive component of the drought regulation. The petition is riding a wave of concern at the State Water Resources Control Board, as staff noticed the streamflow for the nearby Shasta River dropping to less than half of the requirement maintained under the regulation. The Scott River flow dipped as well, stranding and killing some fish along the upper branches of the river.
A board hearing on the petition brought farmers down to Sacramento last week to defend their operations and to detail the many actions locals have taken to conserve water use following two extreme droughts in the last decade.
The routine 12-hour routine board meeting spanned multiple topics and challenged the five water board members with making critical decisions on some of the biggest climate issues in the California water policy world. Dozens of environmental justice advocates filled the CalEPA hearing room to oppose the board’s controversial decision to extend the life of three natural gas power plants. The Newsom administration has set aggressive goals for decarbonizing the energy sector but at the same time is grappling with an energy shortfall due to extreme heat waves made worse by climate change.
Following the board vote, the room cleared and conservation, sportfishing and tribal advocates replaced the environmental justice activists. The board dove into a technical discussion over the state’s largest water sources—a debate that similarly pitted the administration’s environmental goals against emergency measures in reaction to an extreme climate event. This time, the goals involved voluntary agreements for restoring fish habitat.
Ryan Walker, Siskiyou County Farm BureauThe arguments shifted from global scale climate emissions to hyperlocal conflicts, with stakeholders sparing over different interpretations of granular data on stream flows and evolving scientific models that tracks the interaction between the region’s aquifers and rivers.
“Our fish have been starving and dying for the last 30 years,” said Troy Hockaday, councilmember for the Karuk Tribe, in opening the discussion. “I understand that farmers have to survive, just like we all have to survive. But at the same time, how long are we going to keep killing our fish?”
Nathaniel Kane, executive director of the Environmental Law Foundation, charged that state intervention is “absolutely necessary” to maintain the survival of Coho and Chinook salmon. In more than 25 years, he argued, the river has not met the minimum flow standard recommended by biologists at the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.
CDFW biologist Michael Harris explained to the board that a cohort of salmon lost 90% of its population during the 2012-16 drought. The department studied the problem and issued a report in 2021 identifying the ideal minimal flows to maintain that cohort’s survival, a document that informed the governor’s subsequent emergency drought declarations. Harris cautioned that the emergency drought recommendations “should not be construed to provide the same protective flow conditions for salmonids over extended period of times.” Yet CDFW urged the board to adopt the minimum flow standard while agencies perform a long-term study on the watershed needs.
In contrast, CDFW is supportive of local cooperative solutions based on voluntary conservation actions for landowners and has set aside $29 million for salmon restoration projects along the two rivers.
Following Harris’ presentation, board chair Joaquin Esquivel felt an urgency to take immediate action to maintain the regulatory momentum and “not spend tons more years trying to figure things out.”
The debate over minimum flow standards has long pitted agricultural groups against conservation and tribal interests, especially for rivers running into the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. UC Davis hydrologist Thomas Harter demonstrated why the flows-only approach overlooks larger dynamics at play in the Scott River watershed.
Don't miss a beat! Sign up for a FREE month of Agri-Pulse news! For the latest on what’s happening in agriculture in Washington, D.C. and around the country, click here.
Harter modeled various curtailment scenarios and found that even dedicating 100% of the surface and groundwater flows to fish protections during the irrigation season would not lead to CDFW’s proposed minimum flow in drier years. The low flow conditions that have stranded fish would likely occur “under some of the most drastically different landscape management conditions conceivable,” he concluded.
Sari Sommarstrom, a retired watershed consultant who was worked on Scott River issues since 1988, advised against adopting CDFW’s “hypothetical” flow standard that failed to include local fish data. She worried the regulatory proposal would block aquifer recharge projects as an unintended consequence.
“There's some of us water and fish nerds that really would like to get into the data, and not just throw numbers up there and see what numbers stick to the wall,” she said.
Ryan Walker, president of the Siskiyou County Farm Bureau, noted that “there's been a bit of a combat science scenario” in the Scott Valley.
“We want to end that,” he said. “Our neighbors up and down the river want to end that.”
Gary Black, a conservation and restoration consultant who farms alfalfa and grain along the river, said the top-down regulatory approach is not the appropriate way to achieve results. He knew the petitioners well and called for sitting down to collaboratively work through solutions.
“We're working with a wide and diverse group of collaborators to implement projects, to implement new concepts and to implement interim measures,” he said, as he detailed a lengthy list of efforts to reduce irrigation during migration periods, build habitat and boost salmon recovery.
Scott Valley rancher Theodora Johnson explained how the local community stepped up during the drought to establish an agriculture water alliance to improve the local communication and coordination with water conservation and to share best practices. The alliance was able to get nearly every eligible acre of agricultural land enrolled in a cooperative agreement to reduce groundwater pumping by 30%, though the effort did not lead to a large increase in flows or an improved environment for fish, she explained.
“We made some real sacrifices under the emergency regulation,” said Johnson. “But going forward, we're really hoping to craft a regulation that is more targeted to meaningful places at meaningful times for the fish.”
Alexandra Biering, a water policy advocate for the California Farm Bureau, pointed to multiple settlement agreements throughout the state, when the water board has endorsed more holistic and collaborative actions and departed from the traditional regulatory path of a flow-only requirement.
“The board and staff have recognized that as a superior approach,” said Biering, adding that setting a minimum flow standard would shut down those opportunities. “Folks are moving forward with something. Those very real relationships that are burgeoning and helpful could be potentially undermined.”
For more news, go to Agri-Pulse.com.
