A recent attempt to weaken the state’s authority to impose groundwater regulation and enforcement has lost in Fresno’s 5th District Court of Appeal. In a closely watched case, the Kings County Farm Bureau and two local landowners sued when the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) imposed sanctions and penalties on growers who failed to comply with elements of California’s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA).
Only a decade old, SGMA was enacted only after mining groundwater throughout the San Joaquin Valley had depleted aquifers, caused billions of dollars damage to infrastructure, and ruined productive wells for hundreds of Valley property owners, including many small farmers.
The lawsuit against the State Water Board argued that by requiring metering of groundwater use and imposing penalties for failure to comply with SGMA, the Board had exceeded its authority. On October 29, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeal sided with the Water Board.
Wednesday’s ruling is part of a larger suit that will test Board authority to demand Valley farmers achieve groundwater sustainability by 2040. Many observers thought the 2040 deadline far too distant when it was imposed, but the Water Board’s insistence that local agencies devise and implement plans well before the deadline indicates firm resolve.
The ruling will hit very close to home in places like eastern Stanislaus County, where growers and farm developers planted thousands of acres of groundwater-dependent almonds on what once had been grazing land for cattle. Many of those groundwater-dependent trees will now very likely be pulled out when new pumping limits kick in by 2027. Some insiders are predicting the new restrictions will limit ground water usage to less than two acre-feet per year, well below the three to four acre-feet almond orchards need to be productive.
California was the last state in the nation to regulate groundwater. While the consequences have been known among insiders for years, the general public is only recently waking up to the widespread damage and exorbitant costs the “race to the bottom” of local aquifers has inflicted throughout the Valley.
The late Vance Kennedy tried to warn Stanislaus County authorities over ten years ago that permitting planting of thousands of acres of almonds over one of the last viable aquifers in the Valley would be an environmental catastrophe. In addition to depleting what Dr. Kennedy called our “savings bank,” draining the aquifer has had devastating effects on local streams, creeks, vernal pools and wildlife.
The thousands of acres of trees have also reduced foraging habitat for wildlife and raptors, especially the wintering raptors for which those eastern foothills have been critically important. In just one obvious case of damage to the public trust, orchards around Modesto Reservoir have relied on seepage from the reservoir for irrigation water. That seepage belongs to ratepayers in the Modesto Irrigation District and amounts to over 20,000 acre-feet.
Going forward, the real question will be, “Who pays?” Who will pay for the environmental destruction unregulated pumping has wrought throughout the Valley?
Let’s hope it’s not the ratepayers and small farmers who get stuck with the bill. So far, they’ve been the ones bearing all the burden.
You should put this in the Bee, etc. I’m willing to share the cost I’m assuming the cost is reasonable. Maybe a reduced rate because it’s a public service. Mike
I drove out Keyes road on Sunday – 60,000 acres of almonds my friend informed me. Incredible.
Totally irresponsible to plant trees when there was not a sustainable water source. Studies show most farmers care about and want to protect the environment they farm in. The people (can’t call them farmers) that planted all those trees on the eastside were willing to destroy the water aquifer/environment for personal profit and to hell with everything else.