Last summer, as California was struggling through its most severe year of the recent drought, two California members of Congress unveiled legislation meant to ease the pain.
Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Republican Rep. David Valadao introduced, separately and respectively, the California Emergency Drought Relief Act of 2015 and the Western Water and American Food Security Act of 2015. Though both are aimed primarily at their home state, the bills’ scope is West-wide.
Both seek more federal money for new water storage and infrastructure projects. Both would expedite environmental review of those projects, and maximize water supply for farms and communities. And both “contain provisions that could alter the implementation of the Endangered Species Act and, in some cases, potentially set a precedent for how federal agencies address endangered and threatened species,” according to the Congressional Research Service. Those precedents include limiting federal agencies’ ability to manage stream flows for endangered fish.
Beyond these similarities, the bills take wildly different paths.Feinstein’s bill (preferred by environmentalists) focuses on water recycling and desalination; Valadao’s focuses on squeezing more from rivers. Still, as summer stretched into fall with little relief for sun-blasted California, there was hope the two could find common ground. More than 100 farm groups and water authoritiessigned a letterin October asking Congress to compromise. Environmental groups—despite their opposition to the endangered species implications—agreedsomethingneeded to be done.
Yet the year ended without any progress.
Not only were Feinstein and Valadao’s bills caught up inpolitical bickering; Congress also failed to pass any of the six or so other drought relief bills introduced by Western lawmakers. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, chair of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, never introduced the comprehensive drought package at which she’d hinted.
On Jan. 11, the U.S. Senate reconvened. Despite El Niño’s recent snow and rain, the drought will march on. Lawmakers in 2016 will be faced with the same challenges they failed to address in 2015: securing water for agriculture and communities. Planning for a drier, more-populous future. Protecting water-dependent fish and wildlife. Will they do any better?
Jimmy Hague, director of the Center for Water Resources with the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, is skeptical. If Congress wasn’t able to reach a compromise in 2015, why would 2016 be any different?
“It is really difficult to get consensus on water legislation,” Hague says. “All the controversy between those two bills still exists, and now we’ve added a presidential election year on top of it.”
Nonetheless, Hague thinks that Western water woes will get a helping hand from the feds in 2016. That’s because there are at least 20 measures that agencies can implement without congressional action. Many were detailed in alist of recommendationsthat the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, Trout Unlimited and The Nature Conservancy submitted to the White House last summer—around the same time Feinstein and Valadao were unveiling their bills.
Compared to the controversial congressional legislation, the list didn’t exactly grab headlines. While legislation calls for desalination plants and dam-building, the conservation groups’ ideas include things like allowing the Internal Revenue Service to include “water donations” as a tax write-off, and encouraging the Bureau of Reclamation to fill and draw down reservoirs based on actual conditions rather than set-in-stone calendar dates.
Still, while Congress’ plans have stalled, these smaller administrative solutions may be gaining traction. Several were implemented in 2015, including an expansion of the Bureau of Reclamation’s “WaterSMART” program. Among other things, WaterSMART grants have been used to reduce leakage in aging irrigation canals. That keeps more water in rivers for fish and wildlife. A project on Montana’sSun Riversaved 10,000 acre-feet of water annually.
Hague believes that the Obama administration will keep quietly plugging away at similar drought resilience projectsin 2016 — stuff that doesn’t get much attention, but could have big impacts. And lawmakers, for their part, say they’re committed to doing better. Nine Western senators, both Democrat and Republican,wrote a letterasking Murkowski (who chairs the committee though which all drought bills must pass) not to give up on drought negotiations. Murkowski’s spokesman, Michael Tadeo, wrote that the senator has no plans to do so: Drought is among her top priorities for the year.
Yet in a Congress wheresnowballsare held up to disprove global warming, there are fears that this winter’s rain and snow might derail progress on drought negotiations.
“There’s been this pattern,” Hague says. “There’s a drought, and people freak out about it and work on solutions, and then it rains, and they forget about it. And then the cycle repeats itself.”
Krista Langlois is a correspondent atHigh Country News, where this story first appeared.