Precedent-setting groundwater regs get pushback in northern CA

Grassroots alliance calls regs ‘unfair’ and ‘dangerous’

(Originally published in Western Livestock Journal April 29, 2022)

In the midst of water turmoil West-wide, one small mountain valley in far northern California is sounding the alarm about state-mandated groundwater curtailments that could set a precedent for the whole state. 

Farmers and ranchers in Scott Valley, situated in western Siskiyou County, are facing the potential loss of 100 percent of their irrigation water this summer—including both groundwater and surface water—if the State Water Resources Control Board’s (SWRCB) new “emergency” flow levels are not met in the Scott River. 

In addition to the curtailments, the emergency regulations prohibit “inefficient livestock watering” (which includes using earthen ditches) during certain periods, considering it “unreasonable use.” All ditches in Scott Valley are earthen ditches.

Protecting coho salmon, a species listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, is the alleged reason for the regulations, according to an August 2021 press release from the SWRCB. At that time, the SWRCB issued curtailments on water rights holders in the Scott and Shasta valleys. These are neighboring basins whose rivers are tributaries to the mid-Klamath River. Those regulations are still in place, and the SWRCB announced on April 25 that it’s in the process of readopting them for August 2022 through August 2023.

Scott and Shasta producers are not being offered any compensation for the loss of their surface and groundwater rights.

“These are the only basins in the state where the SWRCB is turning off unadjudicated groundwater pumping, as far as we know,” said Theodora Johnson, a Scott Valley rancher and spokesperson for a new grassroots communication group, Scott Valley Agriculture Water Alliance.

“Ironically, unlike many other basins in the state, both valleys have stable aquifers. And even more puzzling, Scott Valley got the harshest curtailment orders—yet our river has healthy and growing populations of coho salmon, according to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.”

Indeed, coho populations in the Scott today are similar to historic estimates from the 1960s. This spring, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife has documented record numbers of coho juveniles out-migrating from the Scott River and above-average Chinook salmon numbers. In Shasta Valley, both coho and Chinook out-migrating numbers are average.

“Our record-breaking number of out-migrating coho are from a brood year that was supposedly going to be devastated by the dry year in 2020,” Johnson said. “But those young salmon stayed safely in the cool, upper tributaries to the Scott River last summer. The fish don’t need water in the main stem of the Scott River in the middle of the summer, which is what these regulations are demanding. In an extreme drought year, there’s no way that turning off our pumps will come close to reconnecting the river. We’re being set up for failure.”

Indeed, according to U.S. Geological Survey data, the Scott River hasn’t met the SWRCB’s mandated levels in nine out of the past 11 summers.

“The SWRCB’s demands are unreasonable and unfair, as well as unachievable in a drought year like this,” Johnson said. “Our aquifer is entirely snow-melt fed, and there are no state or federal reservoirs to draw from. Low precipitation snowpack means low river flow.”

Precedent-setting actions

Siskiyou County Farm Bureau President Ryan Walker said the SWRCB’s actions in the Scott and Shasta valleys are unprecedented.

“The SWRCB is definitely trying to leverage its way into regulating percolating groundwater here in the Scott and Shasta valleys, where their jurisdiction is really over surface water and interconnected groundwater,” Walker said. “This could spell trouble for groundwater users across the state.” 

Walker, who is a rancher and an attorney, pointed to a “bright spot” in Shasta Valley, where a recent court challenge brought by the Big Springs Irrigation District resulted in a temporary restraining order against the SWRCB. 

“The judge decided the onus is on the state to prove the groundwater is connected to the surface water in the river, and the state has not yet done that here,” Walker said.

Unfortunately, though, this small victory has not been enough to save several century-old ranches in Shasta Valley, which have already gone out of business due to lack of water.

In Scott Valley, Johnson said she worries watershed-wide curtailments could happen as early as May, at which point farmers and ranchers will have to turn off all stream diversions, livestock watering ditches and their pumps—or face fines of $1,000 per violation, per day.

“The SWRCB has offered an option that will allow our irrigators to avoid a 100 percent shut-off, if they agree to reduce their water use by 30 percent and get that reduction plan approved by the SWRCB,” Johnson acknowledged. “That will save a lot of us for this year. But not many of us can withstand operating at 70 percent two years in a row, and the SWRCB is already looking at readopting these regs for next year. If that happens, we will see many multi-generational farms and ranches going under.”

The Scott Valley Agriculture Water Alliance plans to participate in a Zoom call on May 4, where the SWRCB will take public comments regarding readoption of the “emergency” regulations.

“The Alliance plans to communicate to the SWRCB that changes are needed in order to prevent the unnecessary loss of farming and ranching in Scott Valley, which could set a dangerous precedent for the state,” Johnson said. “If agriculture can’t survive here in Scott Valley, where fish numbers are strong and our aquifer is stable, then how can it survive anywhere in California?”