Long Term Irrigated Lands Program in Development DPR Moving On
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
WINTER/SUMMER 2009 RECAP Long Term Irrigated Lands Program In Development roundwater and farm nutrients received AB1938 or AB3030 plans as the basis; the most attention in public meetings held Relying on a third-party entity (watershed this past winter and spring between the coalition, commodity group, etc.) to develop GRegional Water Board, agriculture coalitions and groundwater quality management plans for public interest groups. With the existing Irrigated areas where problems have been identified. Lands Regulatory Program (ILRP) set to expire in Farmers in those areas would need to adopt 2011, the Regional Board is asking for input from practices should crop inputs be the source stakeholders on how the next program should (fertilizer or pesticides). look. Multiple meetings have been held since Feb- ruary 2009 as well as the Regional Water Board In such an approach, third parties would start • Regional News requesting that all interested stakeholders submit out by evaluating available groundwater data their approaches to regulating ground and sur- then identifying areas and constituents of con- face waters. cern, then prioritize areas to address first. Also identified would be agricultural practices that • In the News If early comments and meeting discussions are may be causing or contributing to problems and any indication, the future surface water program management practices that growers could use will likely look similar to the existing ILRP. How to address the constituents of concern. To be in • Coalition Contacts groundwater will be regulated is far less certain. compliance, growers would complete acknowl- The Regional Water Board in July released a draft edgement forms, agreeing to implement identified of five alternative approaches to regulate ground- management practices to the maximum extent water. One of those approaches, or a combina- practicable. tion of several, will ultimately be adopted by the Board in 2011. In the approach supported by public interest groups such as Clean Water Action, California In an October 2008 stakeholder meeting, the Rural Legal Assistance Foundation and Commu- Regional Water Board laid out an aggressive time- nity Water Center, agriculture would be required table for developing a draft long term program, to develop watershed or regional plans that asking for a near complete outline by October include identification of high risk areas, reporting 2009. The draft Environmental Impact Report of nutrient and pesticide application on a farm by is due Spring 2010 with a final certification by farm basis, adoption of BMPs and monitoring of Regional Water Board expected by Winter 2010. shallow groundwater. In comments sent to the Regional Water Board Whichever program is ultimately adopted, in mid-2009, watershed coalitions and other agri- ample opportunity still exists for public input. cultural interests suggested using a multifaceted The “alternative approaches” for the new program approach to regulate groundwater the Central are to be evaluated in an Environmental Impact Valley. The basic principles include: Report (EIR) not expected to be finalized until Fall Reliance on local agencies (irrigation districts, 2010. The alternatives to be examined by the EIR, county agencies, etc.) to be responsible for which the Water Board is anticipated to combine determining the need for groundwater qual- into a single approach, were finalized in August ity protection requirements, using Integrated 2009. The final program goes to the Water Board Regional Groundwater Management Plans, for a vote in Summer 2011. Published by Coalition for Urban/Rural Environmental Stewardship DPR Moving On Irrigation Runoff Regs www.curesworks.org raft regulations targeting pesticides in bicides frequently detected by watershed coali- with support from irrigation runoff began the lengthy public tion sampling. Growers will need to follow Best Almond Board of California review process in April. In an unusual Management Practices should specific pesticides Dstep, the California Department of Pesticide be applied before irrigating fields that drain into www.almondboard.com Regulation (DPR) sent the draft rules first to the waterways. Editor: Water Board for comment. County agricultural As with the dormant spray regulations, commissioners also were also given the chance Parry Klassen [email protected] growers will have a menu of management to review the draft regulations. By mid-summer, practice options to choose from. Such practices agricultural organizations had not seen a copy of would target the pathway for all types of farm the new rules. inputs entering waterways. DPR expects a lengthy DPR said in 2008 that the rules would be pat- public review process and adoption no sooner terned after the dormant spray regulations for than 2010. orchards and will focus on insecticides and her- Regional Coalition News North Valley Regional Board Files ACL Complaint for Non- compliance Sac Valley Management Plan Moves Forward ecent action by the Regional Water management plan for the as the lowest priority. A management Board is a reminder of the impor- Sacramento Valley Water Quality plan is implemented using sequential tance of responding to requests for Rinformation about participation in the Coalition’s (SVWQC) was steps including: source identification to Aapproved by the Regional Board in early determine if agriculture is the contributing Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program. In 2009. The management plan describes cause; mitigation actions, including June, an Administrative Civil Liability the approach to be taken throughout implementation of management practices; Complaint was issued to a Sacramento the coalition region for monitoring and determining the effectiveness of grower County grower for failure to respond to implementation of management practices. outreach; and reporting annually the results a California Water Code section 13267 The plan describes site-specific activities of the coalition’s efforts. Order. While the Regional Board could and implementation schedules for each collect $1000 a day for the 277 days since Seven of the ten subwatersheds in the the Board issued the initial request for a water body and parameter in the coalition Sacramento Valley have management plan region. Management plans are required of response from the landowner, the com- obligations in 2009 with the remaining plaint proposes that the landowner pay a all Central Valley coalitions when water three beginning in 2010. Implementation or sediment monitoring finds two or more $3,000 administrative civil liability (ACL) of management plans is a collaborative fine. exceedances of state water standards or effort between SVWQC and subwatershed toxicity to test organisms. coordinators, county agricultural Using a ranking from high to low, the commissioners and land owner/operators. management plan describes actions for Current efforts are focused on reviewing Lands Owned by State addressing problems with the highest pesticide application records and evaluating Enrolled in Coalitions priority given to registered pesticides and coalition monitoring data. Work begins toxicity to test organisms. Medium priority in the Fall 2009 on source evaluation he California Department of Water includes legacy pesticides and trace metals and completing surveys of management Resources (DWR) enrolled in the followed by pH, dissolved oxygen (DO), practices. Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program pathogen indicators (bacteria) and salinity Tthousands of irrigated acres owned by the agency in the Delta and surrounding regions. In May 2009, Pamela Creedon, Tours Showcase Farm Management Practices Executive Officer for the Regional Water eeing is believing” and that is management practice surveys performed on Board, notified DWR of approval of their what the Sacramento Valley Walker Creek under a Water Board funded application to join a coalition group, Water Quality Coalition grant. In El Dorado county, Water Board enrolling lands in Sacramento, Yolo, Sutter, “S(SVWQC) is helped make happen in staff saw first hand the Integrated Pest Contra Costa, San Joaquin and Solano summer 2009 as it shuttled Water Board Management and erosion control techniques Counties. staff on valley-wide tours of farms, water used by Madrone Vineyards. They also supply infrastructure and coalition water heard about irrigation management services sampling sites. Key to the tours, which provided by the El Dorado Irrigation District Houdesheldt New Lead covered the 10 subwatersheds in the which allow growers to correlate irrigations for Sacramento Valley region, was showcasing the stewardship with weather conditions, moisture content Water Quality Coalition and management practices being used by of soil and the crop’s irrigation requirements growers across the Sacramento Valley. In through the use of neutron probes. SVWQC ruce Houdesheldt is the new Pit River, Water Board staff saw efforts plans to continue offering tours, prompted coalition manager for Sacramento to eliminate bank erosion and keep by a request from Water Board senior Valley Water Quality Coalition, cattle out of creeks. In the Glenn Colusa Breplacing Tina Lunt. Houdesheldt assumes management to “show us your success subwatershed, Butte and Glenn county stories.” coalition responsibilities as director of agricultural commissioners showcased the regulatory affairs for Northern California Water Association, whose staff handles organizational affairs for the coalition. Lands Owned by State Enrolled in Coalitions Houdesheldt