Seven things you need to know about Scott Valley’s
current water crisis.
1. What’s the crisis?
On July 14, 2022 the State Water Resources Control Board halted all irrigation in Scott Valley based on emergency drought regulations that were first adopted in August of 2021. Only farms and ranches that have submitted plans to reduce their water use by 30% are still allowed to irrigate. The curtailment was issued because the Scott River’s flow dipped below the Board’s minimum requirement for July.
While other California farmers are also facing cutbacks on water deliveries from reservoirs, those farmers are still able to resort to groundwater pumping. But Scott Valley (as well as neighboring Shasta Valley) is being told to halt groundwater pumping—even though their aquifer is stable. The Scott River has not met the Board’s new flow requirements in 10 out of the past 12 summers, yet the fish populations, which the Board claims to be protecting, have remained relatively stable over those years. In fact, coho salmon populations have increased.
2. Is this a precedent-setting action by the State Water Board?
Yes. The Scott Valley and its neighbor, Shasta Valley, appear to be the first and only place where the Board turned off irrigation wells—and our basins are not in critical overdraft, unlike some other basins in the state. The new regulations are precedent-setting because the Board, which has legal authority to regulate surface water, appears to be attempting a new expansion of its legal authority to groundwater.
3. Can producers avoid a 100% shut-off?
The State Water Board has offered an option for producers to reduce their groundwater use by 30% for the whole season to avoid the 100% curtailment, an option known as “Local Cooperative Solutions.” Individual ranches must submit plans, and those plans must be approved by the Water Board. If they are, landowners must agree to allow a third party come on their property to verify they are abiding by the agreement. (Surface water diversions require a different kind of LCS; none has been approved in Scott Valley as of July 2022. Thus, surface water irrigation is now 100% curtailed.)
The 30% groundwater cutback is not sustainable, since most of our farmers and ranchers operate at a very narrow margin. There is some uncertainty surrounding the 30% agreements as well, since they can be nullified at any time if the Board determines a plan isn’t “providing the benefits to … fish outlined in the [plan].” The plans are posted publicly and anyone is allowed to object to them, which also could result in the Board nullifying a plan.
Many Scott Valley farmers and ranchers are pursuing the 30% option as the only hope for saving our livelihoods and homes. But as one local rancher points out, the Local Cooperative Solution is a paradox: it penalizes those who have already made voluntary cuts in their water use. “We’re asked to cut 30% just like everyone else, when we’ve already taken measures to be as efficient as we can. Some of us have already made big sacrifices, voluntarily,” he says. “And now we’re being punished for that.”
Those who want to submit plans can contact Adam Weinberg with State Water Board at adam.weinberg@waterboards.ca.gov.
4. What about livestock watering?
The regulations prohibit “inefficient” watering of livestock when river flows are below the new mandated levels. This regulation is particularly troubling for Scott Valley ranchers because “inefficient watering” is defined as watering in earthen ditches—which is the only kind of ditch used by ranchers in Scott Valley. During curtailments, cattle are allowed no more than 15 gallons per day (with exceptions), and producers are to certify, under penalty of perjury, that they are limiting intake to that amount. The regulations add that, between September and the end of March, “inefficient livestock watering” is prohibited regardless of river levels and whether water rights are being curtailed.
5. Why the new regulations?
The State Water Board points toward a “fragile” coho salmon population in the Scott, despite the fact that the river’s coho population has been on the upswing for two decades. In fact, the Scott contributes more coho than any other tributary to the Klamath River, and has one of the largest natural runs of coho in the state. Click here to read our white-paper regarding the coho’s status in the Scott River. But instead of getting accolades for their part in helping coho thrive in the Scott River, farmers and ranchers are facing the loss of their businesses and their homes if the state’s unrealistic flow standards remain as they are now.
The Water Board also points to steelhead trout and fall-run Chinook salmon as needing protection in Scott Valley. But there are problems: steelhead populations are not well monitored in the Scott River watershed, making it impossible to know whether they need help or not. And Chinook, a commercially fished salmon, are struggling across the whole Klamath River watershed due to multiple factors. On the Scott, their populations have decreased in the last five years due to late fall rains. But curtailing irrigation for all farmers in the middle of the growing season will not bring the fall rain needed for fall-run Chinook.
6. What happens if farmers and ranchers don’t comply?
Anyone who does not comply with curtailment orders, purposely or not, could face “fines, a cease and desist order, or prosecution in court,” according to letters sent to Scott Valley farmers and ranchers by the State Water Board. “Fines may be up to $1,000 per day of violation.” Those who fail to log in to the State Water Board’s portal and report all water usage could be fined $500 per day.
7. Is this action in keeping with the State Water Board’s mission and existing water policy?
No. The Water Board’s vision statement is “A sustainable California made possible by clean water and water availability for both human uses and environmental resource protection.” These new regulations do not honor this vision, nor the “balanced” and “reasonable” philosophy that is the cornerstone of California’s water rights policy. Even the Public Trust Doctrine is about balancing the value and cost of instream needs against the benefits and costs of diversion. But the Water Board’s emergency drought requirements threaten to eliminate several beneficial uses of water in Scott Valley—agriculture and the wildlife that depends on it—in favor of one beneficial use: the anadromous fishery.