DOCSLIB.ORG

About Kern County • Background Kern County • Water Use • Water Sources R.I

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Water in Bakersfield and Kern County About Kern County • Background Kern County • Water use • Water sources R.I. Connecticut 1,212 sq. mi. • Entities that control water 5,018 sq. mi. • Groundwater recharge Delaware 2,045 sq. mi. Area 8,170 sq. mi. – Kern County covers 5.21 million Sources: acres, roughly the area of Tom Haslebacher, Kern County Water Agency Connecticut, Delaware and Rhode Jon Parker, Kern Water Bank Authority Island. About Kern County About Kern County Delano Kernville Area Ridgecrest McFarland About one-third of Inyokern Wasco Kern’s area is on Shafter the valley floor, Oildale BAKERSFIELD which is intensively Population Lamont cultivated. Kern County’s Arvin California City Taft There are 860,000 irrigated acres population is Tehachapi 677,400. It is one of on the valley floor, one-third of Maricopa which are permanent crops. the fastest growing counties in the state, Kern consistently ranks 3rd or 4th in growing 19% since the state in value of production. 1995, and about 2% per year. Kern is California’s 14th most populous county. Annual water usage in Kern County: Municipal and industrial - 182,000 acre-feet Agricultural - 2,250,000 acre-feet 1 Gross Water Supplies and Net Water Requirements San Joaquin Valley Portion of Kern County Acre-Feet July 5, 2001 4,500,000 4,000,000 Additions to Kern County water sources: 3,500,000 Groundwater Storage 3,000,000 Kern River - 22% 2,500,000 Withdrawals from 2,000,000 Groundwater Storage State Water Project (California Aqueduct) - 1,500,000 23% 1,000,000 500,000 Federal (Friant-Kern Canal) - 11% - 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 Local CVP SWP Demand Groundwater - 43% (Net Water Requirements) Kern County Water Agency • Created in 1961 by act of the Legislature • Annual entitlement of one million acre-feet of water from State Water Project • Largest agricultural participant on SWP - second largest urban participant • Funded by tax assessments 2 Improvement District 4 Formed by the KCWA to act as a wholesale provider of • Formed by the KCWA to act as a wholesale provider of Kern River Water drinking water for most of the Bakersfield metropolitan area Treatment Plant Henry Garnett Water • Operates Henry C. Garnett Water Purification Plant (Golden Treatment Plant State Avenue and Airport Drive) • Funded by tax assessments • Distributes water to retail water suppliers Groundwater Recharge aka “Water Banking” Infrastructure is Key Delano-Earlimart Rag Gulch WD ID Southern Devils Den WD Lost Hills San Lake WD Kern- Joaquin Isabella MUD Tulare Berrenda Mesa 5 WD WD 4 North 3 Kern Friant Kern Canal Semitropic WSD Cawelo WSD WD Shafter- Belridge WSD Wasco ID Vista BuenaWSD California Aqueduct 5 Kern River 5 Rosedale-Rio4 Bravo 3 WSD Bakersfield Cross Valley Canal KCWA Water recharged into Improvement Water recharged into District No. 4 Arvin- the banking projects Edison Kern Delta WSD can come from the Henry WD can come from the 5 West Kern Miller WD WD 5 Kern River, Friant Wheeler Ridge- Kern Canal, or Maricopa WSD California Aqueduct. 5 4 0 48 Kern County Water Agency Kern County Water Agency California Aqueduct is Key for Recovery Response to Shortages City of Bakersfield 2,800 Acres California Aqueduct Delano-Earlimart ID Rag Gulch WD California Delano-Earlimart Rag Gulch WD Berrenda Mesa Banking Aqueduct ID Devils Den WD Lost Hills WD Southern Southern Devils Den WD Lost Hills Lake San Lake San PioneerKern-Tulare Banking Isabella WD Kern- Joaquin Isabella Joaquin WD MUD Tulare Berrenda Mesa WD Semitropic MUD Berrenda Mesa Semitropic 5 5 WD WSD WD 5 WSD 43 NorthNorth Kern Water Bank 4 North 46 3 465 KernKern Kern 5 33 WSDWSD CaweloCawelo Semitropic WSD Cawelo Semitropic/MWD/et al Banking WSD WD Kern z WDWD Shafter- River Shafter- Belridge WSD Belridge WSD Wasco Friant-Kern Wasco ID Arvin-Edison/MWD Banking ID Buena Vista Vista BuenaWSD Canal 5 5 WSD 55 4 Rosedale-Rio Bravo 5 ID#4/KTRG Banking 3 43 WSD Bakersfield Cross Valley Canal KCWA Rosedale-Rio Bravo Bakersfield Improvement 5 KCWAKCWA Water recovered from 58 WSD Buena Vista Banking Water recovered from District No. 4 ImprovemenImprovement Arvin- 585 tDistrict District No. No. 4 Edison banking projects must 5 Rosedale4 -RioArvin- Bravo Banking 119 Arvin- Kern Delta WSD EdisonEdison 5 WD 5 be pumped into the Henry 119 WSD be pumped into the 5 33 WSD West Kern Miller WD KernKern DeltaDeltaKern WDWD Delta/MWD Banking 5 WD Henry Miller California Aqueduct. West Kern 5 Wheeler WD 99 Ridge- WD 55 Cawelo/Dudley Ridge Banking Maricopa Downstream areas, Wheeler Ridge- 5 WSD Wheeler Ridge- 184 Kern County has made MaricopaMaricopa WSD WSD North Kern/MWD Banking 5 5 primarily MWD, are 166 affected by water major investments since the Wheeler Ridge-Maricopa Banking 55 quality. 1987-92 drought. 4048 3 Kern Fan Projects Historic Recharge/Recovery Operations FACTORS INFLUENCING DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER Hydrograph for well 30S/24E-02C01 (North of Elk Preserve) 40 50 60 70 80 90 00 995 005 1935 19 1945 19 1955 19 1965 19 1975 19 1985 19 1 20 2 - 5,000,000 20 4,500,000 Increased demands after World War II 40 4,000,000 Completion of Lake Isabella Recovery 60 Completion of California Aqueduct Commences on 3,500,000 Completion of Kern River Canal KWB and Pioneer Projects 80 3,000,000 Construction of Cross Valley Canal 100 Kern River Natural Flow at First Point 2,500,000 of Measurement (5 Year Average) Depth to Groundw ater 120 2,000,000 Kern River Flow (acre feet) (acre Flow River Kern Depth to Groundwater (feet) Groundwater to Depth 140 Development of James 1,500,000 Pioneer I.D. 160 1,000,000 180 500,000 Recharge commences on KWB and 200 - Pioneer Projects Kern County Water Agency Kern County Water Agency Groundwater Banking Groundwater Banking Banking projects cannot be duplicated everywhere (politics, geology, geography, infrastructure). They have their limitations (slow rate of reservoir cycling). Access to high-flow or excess supplies is needed. Preservation of open space in areas with sandy soils is needed. 4.
Recommended publications
  • HYDROLOGY and WATER QUALITY 3.8 Hydrology and Water Quality

    HYDROLOGY and WATER QUALITY 3.8 Hydrology and Water Quality

    3.8 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 3.8 Hydrology and Water Quality This section of the Draft EIR addresses the potential for the Merced General Plan to affect or modify the existing hydrology and water quality of the Planning Area. Two comment letters were received on the NOP from the Merced Irrigation District (MID) in which they said that they would “Upon development of new and existing land covered within the scope of the 2030 General Plan, MID will provide a detailed response in regards to the proposed projects and their impacts upon MID facilities.” The second letter received was in response to the NOP regarding hydrology and water quality. The commenter wants the City to prepare a Water Element and “perform an environmental review of the potentially positive environmental effects that could be based upon such additional elements.” 3.8.1 SETTING Environmental Setting CLIMATE The climate of the City of Merced is hot and dry in the summer and cool and humid in the winter. The average daily temperature ranges from 47 to 76 degrees Fahrenheit. Extreme low and high temperatures of 15°F and 111°F are also known to occur. Historical average precipitation is approximately 12” per year, with the rainy season commencing in October and running through April. On average, approximately 80% of the annual precipitation occurs between November and March. The hot and dry weather of the summer months usually results in high water demands for landscape irrigation during those months. REGIONAL TOPOGRAPHY The project area is located in and immediately adjacent to the City of Merced.
  • Fire Codes Used in the Kern River Valley

    Fire Codes Used in the Kern River Valley

    i The Kern River Valley Community Fire Safe Plan Created by HangFire Environmental for the Kern River Fire Safe Council and the citizens they strive to protect. October 2002 The Kern River Valley Community Fire Safe Plan was funded by a grant to the Kern River Valley Fire Safe Council by the United States Department of Agriculture-Forest Service, National Fire Plan-Economic Action Program. In accordance with Federal law and United States Department of Agriculture policy, Kern River Valley Fire Safe Council in cooperation with the Kern River Valley Revitalization Incorporated is prohibited from discriminating on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs). To file a complaint of discrimination, write the United States Department of Agriculture, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 1400 Independence Avenue,. SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202)720-5964 (voice or TDD). The United States Department of Agriculture-Forest Service is an equal opportunity provider and employer. ii Table of Contents Kern River Valley Community Wildfire Protection Plan................................................................i The Kern River Valley Community Fire Safe Plan........................................................................ii Table of Contents...........................................................................................................................iii Introduction.....................................................................................................................................1
  • California's San Joaquin Valley: a Region and Its Children Under Stress

    California's San Joaquin Valley: a Region and Its Children Under Stress

    CALIFORNIA’S SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY: A REGION AND ITS CHILDREN UNDER STRESS January 2017 Commissioned by Study Conducted by California’s San Joaquin Valley: A Region and Its Children Under Stress January 2017 Dear Colleagues, We are pleased to share with you California’s San Joaquin Valley: A Region and its Children Under Stress, commissioned by the San Joaquin Valley Health Fund, with funding from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation and Sierra Health Foundation, and prepared by the UC Davis Center for Regional Change. In preparing this report, researchers met with residents and those working with and on behalf of Valley communities to learn what their priorities are for policy and systems change. As detailed in the report, their quest for a more equitable region is focused on several priorities that include early education, healthy food, healthy living environments and equitable land use planning as the primary issues of concern. While the report documents the many racial, health and other inequities, and the particular effects they have on the lives and life chances of families raising children in the region, it also presents the vision of local leaders and community residents. We know the challenges that lie ahead will be difficult to address. While the San Joaquin Valley includes the top agricultural producing counties in California, almost 400,000 of the region’s children live in poverty and seven of the 10 counties with the highest child poverty rates in the state are in the Valley. One out of every four Valley children experiences food insecurity and they are much more likely to be exposed to pesticides while in school and to go to schools with unsafe drinking water.
  • Appendix A: Description of Contractors and Exchange Partners

    Appendix A: Description of Contractors and Exchange Partners

    Final EA-15-022 Appendix A Description of Contractors and Exchange Partners Summary of Cross Valley Contractors The following description characterizes each Cross Valley Contractor and associated subcontractor: County of Fresno The County of Fresno has a water service contract (Contract No. 14-06-200-8292A-IR15) for up to 3,000 acre-feet per year (AFY) that is provided for municipal and industrial (M&I) uses to specific developments within its CVP service area. The County draws its water directly from Millerton Lake after its Delta supply has been exchanged for Friant supplies with Arvin-Edison Water Storage District (Arvin-Edison). The County’s CVP water supplies have been administered by Arvin-Edison for the last 20 years pursuant to an agreement between the County and Arvin-Edison. County of Tulare The County of Tulare has a water service contract (Contract No. 14-06-200-8293A-IR15) for up to 5,308 AFY of water. The County of Tulare is comprised of 10 subcontractors (both agricultural and M&I) and all are located in the same geographical area as the Friant Division Contractors. Of the 10 subcontractors, only five have routinely taken water deliveries via the County of Tulare’s contract in recent years. The County of Tulare’s CVP contract supply is divided among the 10 subcontractors as shown below: Alpaugh Irrigation District (Alpaugh) – up to 100 AFY (agricultural) Atwell Island Water District (Atwell Island) – up to 50 AFY (agricultural) City of Lindsay – up to 50 AFY (M&I) City of Visalia – up to 300 AFY (M&I) Fransinetto Farms LLC – up to 400 AFY (agricultural) Hills Valley Irrigation District (Hills Valley) – up to 2,913 AFY (agricultural) Saucelito Irrigation District (Saucelito) – up to 100 AFY (agricultural) Stone Corral Irrigation District (Stone Corral) – up to 950 AFY (agricultural) Strathmore Public Utility District (Strathmore) – up to 400 AFY (M&I) Styro-Tek, Inc.
  • San Joaquin Valley, California

    San Joaquin Valley, California

    SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY, CALIFORNIA Largest human alteration of the Earth’s surface CALIFORNIA ining ground water for agriculture has enabled the San Joaquin Valley of California to become one of the world’s most productive agricultural regions, while simulta- S a M c neously contributing to one of the single largest alterations of the r a m C land surface attributed to humankind. Today the San Joaquin Valley e n t o is the backbone of California’s modern and highly technological E R . S N . agricultural industry. California ranks as the largest agricultural R r I e h t producing state in the nation, producing 11 T E a e F R percent of the total U.S. agricultural value. R R A The Central Valley of California, which A L includes the San Joaquin Valley, the Sacra- Delta mento Valley, and the Sacramento-San N E Joaquin Delta, produces about 25 percent S V a n A of the nation’s table food on only 1 percent San Francisco Bay Jo a D q of the country’s farmland (Cone, 1997). u A in V R iver In 1970, when the last comprehensive sur- A Mendota L veys of land subsidence were made, sub- L sidence in excess of 1 foot had affected E more than 5,200 square miles of irrigable Y San Joaquin Valley P land—one-half the entire San Joaquin a c i Valley (Poland and others, 1975). The f i c maximum subsidence, near Mendota, was O c more than 28 feet. e a n 0 80 Miles 0 80 Kilometers Approximate location of maxi- mum subsidence in United States identified by research efforts of Joseph Poland (pic- tured).
  • 4.9 Biological Resources

    4.9 Biological Resources

    METROPOLITAN BAKERSFIELD METROPOLITAN BAKERSFIELD GENERAL PLAN UPDATE EIR 4.9 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The purpose of this Section is to identify existing biological resources within the Metropolitan Bakersfield area. In addition, this Section provides an assessment of biological resources (including sensitive species) impacts that may result from implementation of the General Plan Update references General Plan goals and policies, and, where necessary, recommends mitigation measures to reduce the significance of impacts. This Section describes the biological character of the site in terms of vegetation, flora, wildlife, and wildlife habitats and analyzes the biological significance of the site in view of Federal, State and local laws and policies. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The study area for the Metropolitan Bakersfield General Plan Update encompasses 408 square miles of the southern portion of the San Joaquin Valley, the southernmost basin of the Central Valley of California. Prior to industrial, agricultural and urban development, the San Joaquin Valley comprised a variety of ecological communities. Runoff from the surrounding mountains fostered hardwood and riparian forests, marshes and grassland communities. Away from the influence of the mountain runoff, several distinct dryland communities of grasses and shrubs developed along gradients of rainfall, soil texture and soil alkalinity, providing a mosaic of habitats for the assemblage of endemic plants and animals. Agriculture, urban development and oil/gas extraction have resulted in many changes in the natural environment of the San Joaquin Valley. For example, lakes and wetlands in the delta area have been drained and diverted, native plant and animal species have been lost and a decrease in the acreage of native lands has occurred.
  • San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin Kings Subbasin

    San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin Kings Subbasin

    Tulare Lake Hydrologic Region California’s Groundwater San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin Bulletin 118 San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin Kings Subbasin • Groundwater Subbasin Number: 5-22.08 • County: Fresno, Kings, and Tulare • Surface Area: 976,000 acres (1,530 square miles) Subbasin Boundaries and Hydrology The San Joaquin Valley is surrounded on the west by the Coast Ranges, on the south by the San Emigdio and Tehachapi Mountains, on the east by the Sierra Nevada and on the north by the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Sacramento Valley. The northern portion of the San Joaquin Valley drains toward the Delta by the San Joaquin River and its tributaries, the Fresno, Merced, Tuolumne, and Stanislaus Rivers. The southern portion of the valley is internally drained by the Kings, Kaweah, Tule, and Kern Rivers that flow into the Tulare drainage basin including the beds of the former Tulare, Buena Vista, and Kern Lakes. The Kings Subbasin is bounded on the north by the San Joaquin River. The northwest corner of the subbasin is formed by the intersection of the east line of the Farmers Water District with the San Joaquin River. The west boundary of the Kings Subbasin is the eastern boundaries of the Delta- Mendota and Westside Subbasins. The southern boundary runs easterly along the northern boundary of the Empire West Side Irrigation District, the southern fork of the Kings River, the southern boundary of Laguna Irrigation District, the northern boundary of the Kings County Water District, the southern boundaries of Consolidated and Alta Irrigation Districts, and the western boundary of Stone Corral Irrigation District.
  • Floods of December 1966 in the Kern-Kaweah Area, Kern and Tulare Counties, California

    Floods of December 1966 in the Kern-Kaweah Area, Kern and Tulare Counties, California

    Floods of December 1966 in the Kern-Kaweah Area, Kern and Tulare Counties, California GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1870-C Floods of December 1966 in the Kern-Kaweah Area, Kern and Tulare Counties, California By WILLARD W. DEAN fPith a section on GEOMORPHIC EFFECTS IN THE KERN RIVER BASIN By KEVIN M. SCOTT FLOODS OF 1966 IN THE UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1870-C UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1971 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ROGERS C. B. MORTON, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY W. A. Radlinski, Acting Director Library of Congress catalog-card No. 73-610922 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 45 cents (paper cover) CONTENTS Page Abstract_____________________________________________________ Cl Introduction.____________ _ ________________________________________ 1 Acknowledgments. ________________________________________________ 3 Precipitation__ ____________________________________________________ 5 General description of the floods___________________________________ 9 Kern River basin______________________________________________ 12 Tule River basin______________________________________________ 16 Kaweah River basin____________________________--_-____-_---_- 18 Miscellaneous basins___________________________________________ 22 Storage regulation _________________________________________________ 22 Flood damage.__________________________________________________ 23 Comparison to previous floods___________-_____________--___------_
  • Analysis of San Joaquin County Economic & Social Indicators

    Analysis of San Joaquin County Economic & Social Indicators

    SJC Index San Joaquin County 2020 Analysis of San Joaquin County Economic & Social Indicators Prepared by: Meredith Huang, Jeremy Padge and Thomas E. Pogue 2 Forward This report is being released in fall 2020, a year defined by extreme social and economic change due to the global COVID‐19 pandemic. At this time, very few of the indicators highlighted in this report have any local, San Joaquin County, data available for 2020, and what is available covers only the very initial stages of the pandemic. As a result, we have decided to only present data indicators in this report through the end of 2019. In this sense, we believe it provides a useful snapshot of the current state and progress of San Joaquin County just prior to the onset of the COVID‐19 pandemic. As we review these indicators in the future, some social, economic, and demographic characteristics of the county described in these pages will return to pre‐pandemic trends while others may be fundamentally changed. Thus, this edition of the San Joaquin County Index can serve as a useful benchmark for measuring the effects of COVID‐19, and a picture of the County’s comparative profile without the confounding effects of COVID‐19 that have made many traditional data indicators difficult to interpret. By reviewing data indicators for San Joaquin County and its communities in comparison to the other counties, regions, the state and the nation, the Index fosters a shared understanding about opportunities and challenges. Thus, the Index provides a foundation of reliable information to support actions to advance economic and community development.
  • Central Valley Latino-Led Organizations

    Central Valley Latino-Led Organizations

    CENTRALCENTRAL VALLEYVALLEY LATINO-LEDLATINO-LED ORGANIZATIONSORGANIZATIONS ABOUT LATINO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION (LCF) LCF IS ON A MISSION TO UNLEASH THE POWER OF LATINOS IN CALIFORNIA. LCF fulfills its mission by building a movement of civically engaged philanthropic leaders, investing in Latino- led organizations, and increasing political participation of Latinos in California. LCF connects donors to emerging leaders, community organizations with funding, and advocates with key decision makers. At LCF, our approach is rooted in the very essence of what it means to be Latino, with a fierce tenacity and a focus on community and authentic relationships. LATINO NONPROFITS We believe in our community’s ability to lead change. That is why we invest in Latino-led nonprofits working on the frontlines of social change. Our grantees have the entrepreneurial vision and passion to transform their communities. We stand beside them to get it done. Below you will find a working list of Latino nonprofits in the Central Valley. To see our full database of Latino nonprofits in California, visit latinocf.org/map. THE CENTRAL VALLEY The economic engine and the heart and soul of California—the 6th largest economy in the world. The Central Valley is home to a $35 billion agricultural industry fueled by Latino and immigrant labor. Comprising half the population, Latino families from the Valley are proud, resilient people who believe in the promise of the American dream. Yet, they are battling the reality of poverty, pollution, and violence daily. Fresno, Modesto, and Bakersfield-Delano—cities with the highest revenues from agriculture—are among the top five U.S.
  • Regional Analyst: San Joaquin County Income

    Regional Analyst: San Joaquin County Income

    EBERHARDT SCHOOL OF BUSINESS Business Forecasting Center 12 in partnership with San Joaquin Council of Governments Lodi 99 26 5 4 Stockton Lathrop REGIONAL 120 Escalon Manteca Ripon 205 Tracy analyst MARCH 2011 San Joaquin County Income: Results from the American Community Survey This issue of Regional Analyst are aggregated at the county the Stockton-Lodi area where looks at income in San Joaquin level. The recent ACS release of commuting times and incomes are County using the latest data from 2005-2009 data provides the first lower and more closely resemble the Census Bureau’s American information on small areas such as the rest of the San Joaquin Valley. Community Survey (ACS). census tracts and small towns since The ACS income data is unique the 2000 Census. The data clearly Figure 1 compares median because of its geographic and shows two economic zones in San household income in San Joaquin household detail, whereas other Joaquin County: a higher income County to the United States and income data can be more timely south county that is strongly California. Overall, San Joaquin and detailed in other ways but influenced by the Bay Area, and County fares rather well when compared to the United States; the median San Joaquin County Figure 1. Median Household Income, household has an income about 2005-2009, 2009 Dollars 5% higher than the United States 62,500 60,392 median and about 10% lower than 54,540 the California median. Figure 51,425 50,000 2 shows the median household income of San Joaquin County 37,500 cities and California.
  • Impact of the Drought in the San Joaquin Valley of California

    Impact of the Drought in the San Joaquin Valley of California

    Impact of the Drought in the San Joaquin Valley of California A Study Funded by Wells Fargo Foundation California State University, Fresno July 2015 Overgrown Boat Ramp Lake Success: Sierra Reservoir, Eastern San Joaquin Valley Wildflowers grow where water should be. A recent rain has greened the hillsides and the lakebed but has done little to reverse the dwindling water level. The boat ramp is a full 100 yards shy of the current water level. Geographic Area: Town of Porterville which has run out of water. Photograph: Neil Chowdhury Principal Investigator Dr. Lynnette Zelezny, Provost Co-Principal Investigator, Project Director Dr. Xuanning Fu, Associate Dean of College of Social Sciences Editor Dr. Gillisann Harootunian, Director, University Initiatives Co-Project Director David Drexler, Henry Madden Library Faculty/Staff Researchers Dr. Antonio Avalos, Department of Economics Neil Chowdhury, MFA, Department of Art and Design Dr. Fayzul Pasha, Department of Civil and Geomatics Engineering Dr. Samendra Sherchan, Department of Public Health Jes Therkelsen, MFA, Department of Mass Communication and Journalism Dr. Chih-Hao Wang, Department of Geography and City and Regional Planning Dr. David Zoldoske, California Water Institute Sargeant Green, California Water Institute Photographer Cary Edmondson, University Communications Department EXECUTIVE SUMMARY For the past three years (2012–2014), California has experienced the most severe drought conditions in its recorded history. The rainy season of 2014–15 has resulted in disappointment for the fourth straight year: the drought has deepened. Historically, the state of California has faced many droughts, and several studies have been completed to assess the impacts on different sectors. These studies have considered the entire state, and not focused on the San Joaquin Valley, the center of agriculture in the state.