Developing regulations for the Delta, the beating heart of California’s water supply system, demands not just scientific research but also the ability to balance a variety of stakeholders with competing interests — agriculture, cities, fisheries and ecosystems.

Last week’s ruling comes as vindication for the agency as it continues a years long process of updating an overarching plan for the Delta. The 2018 San Joaquin plan was only one part one of the Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan, which in itself was the product of 9 years of research and stakeholder input — the plan has not seen a substantial update since 1995.

“It’s a real validation,” said Felicia Marcus, who oversaw the 2018 plan’s adoption as then-chair of the water board. “We have over-diverted from our rivers, for good things like agricultural and urban development, but diverted so much that we’ve shorted the environment. We were re-balancing the system.”

The agency is currently considering two different options for the Bay-Delta plan. Traditional regulations would set a minimum flow standard for rivers, such as the one adopted for the San Joaquin and supported in court. But over the last year, the Newsom administration has promoted another approach.

Called “voluntary agreements,” his plan would let water agencies pledge to forgo certain amounts of water while funding wetland habitat improvement projects. The governor has framed the plan as a rejection of “old binaries” in favor of new solutions.

But leading water experts, including Marcus, argue that voluntary agreements would only be successful if used to supplement strong regulation. A recent Stanford University report she co-authored concluded that the current proposal is “a perilous strategy.”

“It can’t be either or,” she said. “A voluntary agreement is only good if it’s good and this isn’t good enough yet. There’s got to be a more concerted effort and you’re not going to get it unless you move forward with regulations.”

Some environmentalists are less optimistic about voluntary agreements, arguing that they lack accountability to meaningfully improve river flows. Under the agreements, science director at Baykeeper Jon Rosenfield said the path toward native fish extinction would only accelerate.

“In the abstract, this ruling should mean full steam ahead for the water board updating its water quality standards,” Rosenfield said. “In the real world, we have a governor actively resisting new standards because he favors a voluntary approach negotiated with water users in a back room, and is forcing the water board to consider if not adopt it.”

Managers of water districts such as Westlands in the western San Joaquin Valley, one of the litigants against the 2018 plan, continue to prefer a voluntary approach. Strict flow regulations in the Sacramento River would mean less water for the agricultural powerhouse.

“We’re reviewing and evaluating next steps,” said Westlands Water District spokesperson Elizabeth Jonasson of the court ruling. “We’re fully engaged in the voluntary agreements process... we believe in a comprehensive strategy achieved by working together.”

A public workshop on voluntary agreements is expected to take place this spring at the water board but has not yet been scheduled.

____

©2024 The Sacramento Bee. Visit at sacbee.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.