Nothing is sexier than groundwater.
Actually, wait, that’s not right: Everything is sexier than groundwater, but because California’s in a drought, groundwater’s suddenly a hot, sexy topic.
Since April, legislation has oozed its way around the state capital in an attempt by some to push monitoring California’s groundwater into a reality. Lawmakers have until Aug. 31 to get the legislation passed. Those bills—one in the Assembly and one in the Senate—would put what state Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara) calls a “statutory framework” into place. Or at least that’s what she thinks the bills should do.
“Right now we have nothing, and we’re in a mess,” Jackson said. “Being the only state in the country without a statewide groundwater monitoring program is, frankly, inexcusable. We needed to do this yesterday.”
The urgency Jackson expressed is not a sense that’s necessarily shared by everyone. Claire Wineman of the Grower-Shipper Association of San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties agrees with Jackson; groundwater supplies are precious and could become even more precious in the future, especially if the dry trend of the last three years continues. But Wineman said that passing regulations isn’t necessarily the best way to address a problem.
“We’re concerned that because of the drought, there are regulations that are being pushed through that are inappropriate,” Wineman said, explaining that it doesn’t make sense to put something into place that treats the whole state, or even the county, as one entity when it comes to groundwater.
“Managing [water] basins is so basin specific,” she added.
Comparing North Santa Barbara County’s three gigantic water basins to South County’s smaller, more numerous ones is hard to do. Fray Crease with the Santa Barbara County Water Agency said characterizing the state of the county’s groundwater supplies depends on which basin you look at. The water agency attempts to keep track of groundwater in the county’s 16 or 17 major water basins through survey work completed in conjunction with the United States Geological Survey (USGS).
The reports that result from those studies are dense, hard to read, and even harder to comprehend, but what’s contained in them tells us about our habits and how much water’s left below us. County groundwater reports are completed every three years; the latest one, released in 2012, covers calendar years 2009 through 2011. Keep in mind, 2011 was a good water year in California: It was the last time Cachuma Reservoir spilled over Bradbury Dam.
In that report, North County water basins were in overdraft states—more water was pumped out than could be recharged every year—while South County basins were described as being in equilibrium or surplus.
This year, though, the picture of the county’s water basins could be significantly different. South County water districts that were dependent on a mix of State Water Project water and reservoir water are currently relying on groundwater supplies because California’s only allocating 5 percent of water project deliveries, and Lake Cachuma users have agreed to take 55 percent less water than they have in years past.
So what’s going on underground?
“The effects of the drought are apparent in many of the [basin] systems, but that is complicated,” said Matt Naftaly with the county’s water agency.
He said each basin recharges differently and has its own unique geological components. To get a better idea of how exactly the drought has affected the overall supply, Santa Barbara County supervisors requested an interim update of the county’s groundwater, because the next three-year study won’t be released until 2015. Supes will be hearing from the water agency in October.
Since the last study, the water agency has zeroed in on the Cuyama Valley and Los Alamos regions. USGS and Santa Barbara recently completed a study in Cuyama, and are about to begin one in Los Alamos. Both areas are wholly dependent on groundwater supplies and do not receive any state or dam water. Agricultural activities are a big, unmonitored draw on water basins in both areas.
The Cuyama Groundwater Basin sticks out on the last three-year study as being the basin with the biggest overdraft problem. Water users pumped approximately 28,000 acre-feet more out of the basin annually than was recharged back into it—and that was when the county wasn’t in drought mode.
“It’s not sustainable,” Naftaly said.
The USGS and the county water agency planned to discuss the results of the region’s groundwater study with stakeholders on Aug. 14. What happens after that depends on the area’s stakeholders. Naftaly said the valley’s water users could decide to get together and come up with a basin management plan, or someone could sue to get the basin adjudicated and managed through the state.
U.S. Wilson, general manager of the Cuyama Valley Community Services District, said the basin’s water levels have been steadily decreasing for the last four decades. Water wells were once drilled 500 feet or less below ground in the valley. Wilson said now, he’s hearing they’re drilling down to 2,000 feet.
The service district has roughly 230 connections, and Wilson said his customers have cut down from what they’ve used in the past. At this time last year, the district was pumping between 350,000 and 400,000 gallons a day out of the basin. This year, it’s more like 200,000 to 250,000 gallons a day.
That’s mostly from residential customers. As far as the big commercial farms that line the valley go—i.e. Bolthouse and Grimway farms—who knows? What they pump out of the ground is not officially monitored. Wilson wishes it was.
“I’m from the old school,” he said. “I think everything you do, you should know what’s going on. … If everybody’s doing that, it would be to everyone’s benefit.”
Contact Managing Editor Camillia Lanham clanham@santamariasun.com.
This article appears in Aug 14-21, 2014.
