The administration of Governor Newsom is currently revising a controversial set of proposed regulations that have been in the making for several years. These new rules are expected to change the methods through which agriculture and urban areas acquire water from the Delta and its rivers in the Central Valley. With the backing of over $1 billion in state funding, these regulations, if enacted, would require that water users also contribute to the restoration of river systems and support the dwindling Chinook salmon populations.
The administration presents these rules as a foundational step toward a long-term strategy aimed at increasing the Central Valley’s Chinook salmon population to levels not witnessed in the last 75 years. However, environmental advocates are largely opposed, claiming that the proposed benefits are unrealistic and endanger California’s iconic salmon species and other aquatic life.
“There’s no feasible way the assets put forth, whether water or habitat, will fulfill the doubling target — it’s simply not achievable,” remarked a representative from San Francisco Baykeeper.
Referred to as Healthy Rivers and Landscapes, but commonly known as “the voluntary agreements,” this proposal is part of two potential approaches for state officials as they revise an essential regulatory document known as the Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan, which hasn’t been updated since 1995.
Given the current crisis facing the Bay-Delta ecosystem, these proposed regulations play a crucial role in dictating the flow of water through the Delta for salmon and other species, while also determining water availability for agricultural and urban needs in the Central Valley and Southern California.
Chinook salmon, once integral to indigenous communities and the coastal ecosystem, have seen their populations decline significantly due to dam operations, water diversions, warming temperatures, and disruptions to marine food chains. The spawning numbers have dropped drastically, resulting in a ban on commercial and recreational salmon fishing for two consecutive years, and this year’s initial data does not indicate any recovery.
State officials from various agencies have praised the Healthy Rivers initiative, asserting that it would regulate water flows for fish and mandate the restoration of floodplains and other river features. This option has gained significant support from California’s major water districts, which serve millions of residents and much of the Central Valley’s agricultural area, highlighting its prominence in public forums since November.
Officials from the Newsom administration have been engaged in discussions for years with major agricultural water providers such as the Westlands Water District and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, presenting these rules as a “new and enhanced approach” to safeguarding both ecological integrity and water supply stability.
“This initiative aims to strike a balance between the diverse needs of Californians and foster ecological recovery in a manner that benefits all communities,” said the State’s Resources Secretary. Despite the optimism, striking this balance has historically proven challenging for state leaders.
Chuck Bonham, director of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, reflected on the necessity of such progress during a water board workshop: “Considering the duration of this issue, it is indeed time for action.”
In a commitment made in 2020, Governor Newsom expressed his aim to achieve a doubling of the state’s salmon population by the year 2050, describing the voluntary agreements as essential to this goal.
Nina Hawk, a representative from the Metropolitan Water District, indicated that the proposed changes would provide a fair pathway to meet both human needs and environmental demands for water.
However, environmentalists remain skeptical about the plan. Some even refuse to acknowledge its official title, arguing it misrepresents the potential outcomes for river health. They warn that excessive water extraction by urban areas and agriculture could jeopardize salmon populations further, claiming the proposed regulations do not supply fish with their necessary water resources to support sustainable populations.
“If over half of a river’s flow is diverted, you are ensuring a decline in salmon population,” cautioned a program director from Friends of the River.
Critics have expressed concern that the proposed flow regulations could enable farmers to deplete certain rivers entirely during severe drought conditions, which might align with the Bay-Delta Plan provisions.
The State Water Resources Control Board, which possesses the authority to approve these rules, is set to conduct a public hearing and vote potentially in 2025.
The alternative proposal from the water board would enforce strict minimum river flows, which water users argue would severely impact agricultural practices and community development, including housing projects. Environmentalists and tribal representatives, however, advocate for this alternative due to its more protective nature for fish populations, which includes establishing a minimum average of 55% of the watershed’s total water availability in rivers.
While there is growing enthusiasm for the Healthy Rivers initiative, the water board is still weighing its options. It remains a possibility that both plans could be implemented, with the unimpaired flow strategy acting as a regulatory safeguard if the voluntary agreements fall short, or concurrently enforced for those who opt out of the agreements.
Longstanding mandates compel fishery and water managers to double the natural Chinook salmon population in the Central Valley to levels recorded between 1967 and 1991. This would require an average of 990,000 spawning Chinook annually, a tenfold increase from recent figures.
State officials believe the Healthy Rivers plan could contribute to this target, anticipating that by the eighth year, they might achieve roughly 25% of the doubling goal, according to the lead scientist from the Department of Water Resources.
Officials from the National Marine Fisheries Service voiced concerns in a January letter regarding the reception of the eight-year timeline, especially given the precarious state of native fish in the region.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency expressed apprehensions about the adequacy of total water allowances during critically dry seasons, arguing that the proposed alternatives do not sufficiently serve aquatic ecosystems.
This goal of doubling Chinook populations is not a recent concept; it was established back in the early 1990s with an initial deadline set for 2002. Now, the state’s new regulations propose pushing this deadline to 2050, which advocates for the fish population find alarmingly distant, especially for a species under significant threat as well as for a diminishing fishing industry.
“Salmon runs risk extinction by then with the flow commitments being proposed,” stated a water policy advisor from Defenders of Wildlife.
Tribal representatives, historically reliant on Chinook as a food source, have articulated feelings of exclusion from the planning process.
“The discussions surrounding the voluntary agreements have predominantly involved water agencies and private businesses, leaving out tribes and communities that have suffered injustices,” remarked a government liaison for the Winnemem Wintu Tribe.
However, the rules preferred by environmental advocates and tribes would cut significantly into urban and agricultural water allocation, leading to substantial effects on water exports, reservoir storage, and hydropower output, said the general manager of the State Water Contractors.
Farmers could face serious economic harm, leading to decreased crop production. Many growers in the San Joaquin Valley would see their water supplies reduced by over a quarter in dry years, with significant percentages even in normal years, according to preliminary regulations.
Representatives of Sacramento Valley rice farmers conveyed dire warnings, claiming that the favoured unimpaired flow strategy could lead them to be deprived of nearly all summer water supplies, greatly exacerbating their existing water shortages.
Such measures would also substantially affect residential water provisions. The Placer County Water Agency, responsible for a quarter-million residents near Sacramento, could see almost half its supply diminish, risking future growth, as stated by their general manager.
Southern California may also suffer substantial reductions to its municipal water, which would disrupt available supplies for households and businesses alike.
The program outlines ambitious objectives of restoring 45,000 acres of vital habitat—such as floodplains and tidal marshes—within the next eight years. While some progress has already been made, activists argue that the remaining 30,000 acres planned for restoration may not yield the anticipated ecological benefits.
Financial backing is crucial for accomplishing these initiatives, with $2.4 billion already allocated for water flow measures and habitat restoration, although additional funding of about $500 million might be required.
The proposed rules would enable the annual allocation of between 100,000 and 700,000 acre-feet of water to the Sacramento River, based on precipitation levels, but environmentalists argue this is insufficient. They fear that potential regulatory loopholes could facilitate additional water diversion from future projects, undermining protections intended for the Delta flow.
“The persistent failure to resolve these fundamental issues should not come as a surprise,” remarked an analyst from the Golden State Salmon Association, linking the voluntary agreements with various water projects as part of a larger scheme.
Despite the challenges, some conservationists maintain a level of optimism regarding the state’s proposal, seeing it as a potential first step towards a more collaborative and responsive approach to salmon restoration.
Fish biologists highlight that achieving the goal of doubling salmon populations is feasible through the administration’s proposal as long as authorities remain flexible in their implementation.
However, a water rights advocate representing tribal interests contended that the notion of administrative balance ignores the urgent needs of those facing fish population declines.
“We’ve compromised to such an extent that we’re confronting an extinction crisis; tribes are losing culturally significant fish,” she told the board.
“Ensuring water access for urban areas is vital, but agriculture must also conserve water resources,” she emphasized. “The water board’s responsibility is to prioritize ecological health and clean water, and failing to protect salmon populations would bear long-term consequences.”