After having secured a forum for my in-person presentation last week, I narrowed my focus on research this week. As I posted before, clear-cut opposition to the mandatory water restrictions probably exists, but the trouble is, aside from individual residents no stakeholder (group/agency/business) is public pronouncing that they oppose the entirety of the EO B-29-15. Not wanting to infer the opinions of stakeholders, I began reading over 200 public comments addressed to the California State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) regarding the proposal achieve 25% urban conservation. These comments were submitted prior April 13, 2015 and were considered during the drafting of the emergency regulations that announced the new restrictions and prohibitions for water use in the state. (State Board, 2015)
I found these comments to be extremely helpful in deciphering those that had contentions with the water restrictions. For example, the agricultural industry as a whole thanked the State Board for recognizing the need for restrictions given the severity of the drought, but asked them to consider conservation efforts already undertaken, and pleaded the board to exempt them from further cuts. The water agencies, those that supply water to consumers and are subject to any fines from not meeting their allocated percentage of water cuts, also mentioned past efforts in conservation be considered and also suggested that using 2013 as a baseline for determining how much water should be further conserved was unfair to those communities that have made substantial progress in prior water conservation. These agencies also felt that Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR), such as recycled water for irrigation should be considered in calculating the restrictions. Environmentalists push further conservation, so long as the delta smelt and salmon are protected – through pumping curtailments of fresh water to the central and southern portions of the state.
In general, I have found that stakeholders are in favor of the mandatory water restrictions as long as they are implemented fairly. The big question is – What is fair? I’m finding that many stakeholders want the cuts to come from anyone but themselves. They also want to be given credit for cuts they have already made. I intend to show how all of these stakeholders are aligned in regards to what they are and are not in favor of with respect to water restrictions. With a major battle spot being the delta system in Northern California; how can the state satisfy the environmentalists, the farmers, and the state’s residents/businesses at the same time? This is probably the biggest headache for policymakers in regards to managing water resources during the drought.
Works Cited:
1. “State Water Board Drought Year Water Actions.” State Water Resources Control Board. California State Water Resources Control Board, 24 Apr. 2015. Web. 28 June 2015.