Watering the Emerald Triangle: Irrigation sources used by cannabis cultivators in Northern California

Water use by cannabis cultivators represents an emerging threat to surface flows in Northern California's sensitive watersheds. To date, however, no data has been available to formally assess where cannabis sites source their water. This study analyzed data from annual reports, covering the year 2017, submitted by 901 cannabis cultivators enrolled in the Cannabis Waste Discharge Regulatory Program administered by the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. The analysis identified cannabis cultivators' most common sources for water extraction, monthly patterns for each water source and differences between sites compliant and not compliant with the cannabis program. The most commonly reported source of water was wells (58% of sites), with most extraction from wells occurring during the growing season (April through October). Surface water diversions (22% of sites) and spring diversions (16% of sites) were the most common sources after wells, with extractions from these sources distributed much more evenly across the year. Although nearly one-third of noncompliant sites (33%) used wells, this source was more than twice as frequently reported among compliant sites (68%), indicating that wells may become increasingly common as more sites become part of the regulated cannabis industry

Growers say cannabis legalization excludes small growers, supports illicit markets, undermines local economies

H. Bodwitch is Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Natural Resource Sciences, McGill University, Quebec, Canada; J. Carah is Senior Freshwater Ecologist, The Nature Conservancy, San Francisco; K.M. Daane is UC Cooperative Extension Specialist, Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, UC Berkeley; C. Getz is Associate Cooperative Extension Specialist, Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, UC Berkeley; T.E. Grantham is Assistant Cooperative Extension Specialist and Adjunct Professor, Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, UC Berkeley; G.M. Hickey is Associate Professor, Department of Natural Resource Sciences, McGill University, Quebec, Canada; H. Wilson is Assistant Cooperative Extension Specialist, Department of Entomology, UC Riverside

Restoring Rivers and Floodplains for Habitat and Flood Risk Reduction: Experiences in Multi-Benefit Floodplain Management From California and Germany

Conventional flood control has emphasized structural measures such as levees, reservoirs, and engineered channels—measures that typically simplify river channels and cut them off from their floodplain, both with adverse environmental consequences. Structural measures tend to be rigid and not easily adapted to increased flooding regimes resulting from environmental change. Such actions also limit the natural hydrologic benefits of floodplains such as storing floodwaters, improving water quality, providing habitat for invertebrates and fish during periods of inundation, and supporting a multitude of cultural services. As these benefits are more widely recognized, policies are being adopted to encourage projects that reduce flood risks and restore floodplain ecosystems, while acknowledging the social-ecological context. The number of such projects, however, remains small. We assessed four multi-benefit floodplain projects (two in California, United States, and two in Germany) and characterized their drivers, history, and measures implemented. In both United States cases, the dominant driver behind the project was flood risk reduction, and ecosystem restoration followed, in one case inadvertently, in the other as a requirement to receive a subsidy for a flood risk reduction project. One German case was motivated by ecosystem restoration, but it was more widely accepted because it also offered flood management benefits. The fourth case was conceived in terms of balanced goals of flood risk reduction, ecosystem restoration, and recreation. We conclude that projects that both reduce flood risk and restore ecosystems are clearly possible and often cost-effective, and that they could be more widely implemented. The principal barriers are often institutional and regulatory, rather than technical

Financing Direct Democracy: Revisiting the Research on Campaign Spending and Citizen Initiatives

The conventional view in the direct democracy literature is that spending against a measure is more effective than spending in favor of a measure, but the empirical results underlying this conclusion have been questioned by recent research. We argue that the conventional finding is driven by the endogenous nature of campaign spending: initiative proponents spend more when their ballot measure is likely to fail. We address this endogeneity by using an instrumental variables approach to analyze a comprehensive dataset of ballot propositions in California from 1976 to 2004. We find that both support and opposition spending on citizen initiatives have strong, statistically significant, and countervailing effects. We confirm this finding by looking at time series data from early polling on a subset of these measures. Both analyses show that spending in favor of citizen initiatives substantially increases their chances of passage, just as opposition spending decreases this likelihood

100 years of California’s water rights system: patterns, trends and uncertainty

For 100 years, California’s State Water Resources Control Board and its predecessors have been responsible for allocating available water supplies to beneficial uses, but inaccurate and incomplete accounting of water rights has made the state ill-equipped to satisfy growing societal demands for water supply reliability and healthy ecosystems. Here, we present the first comprehensive evaluation of appropriative water rights to identify where, and to what extent, water has been dedicated to human uses relative to natural supplies. The results show that water right allocations total 400 billion cubic meters, approximately five times the state’s mean annual runoff. In the state’s major river basins, water rights account for up to 1000% of natural surface water supplies, with the greatest degree of appropriation observed in tributaries to the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and in coastal streams in southern California. Comparisons with water supplies and estimates of actual use indicate substantial uncertainty in how water rights are exercised. In arid regions such as California, over-allocation of surface water coupled with trends of decreasing supply suggest that new water demands will be met by re-allocation from existing uses. Without improvements to the water rights system, growing human and environmental demands portend an intensification of regional water scarcity and social conflict. California’s legal framework for managing its water resources is largely compatible with needed reforms, but additional public investment is required to enhance the capacity of the state’s water management institutions to effectively track and regulate water rights

Watering the Emerald Triangle: Irrigation sources used by cannabis cultivators in Northern California

Water use by cannabis cultivators represents an emerging threat to surface flows in Northern California's sensitive watersheds. To date, however, no data has been available to formally assess where cannabis sites source their water. This study analyzed data from annual reports, covering the year 2017, submitted by 901 cannabis cultivators enrolled in the Cannabis Waste Discharge Regulatory Program administered by the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. The analysis identified cannabis cultivators' most common sources for water extraction, monthly patterns for each water source and differences between sites compliant and not compliant with the cannabis program. The most commonly reported source of water was wells (58% of sites), with most extraction from wells occurring during the growing season (April through October). Surface water diversions (22% of sites) and spring diversions (16% of sites) were the most common sources after wells, with extractions from these sources distributed much more evenly across the year. Although nearly one-third of noncompliant sites (33%) used wells, this source was more than twice as frequently reported among compliant sites (68%), indicating that wells may become increasingly common as more sites become part of the regulated cannabis industry

Water demands of permitted and unpermitted cannabis cultivation in Northern California

Illicit water use for irrigated agriculture can have substantial impacts on the environment and complicates water management decision-making. Water demand for illicit cannabis farming in California has long been considered a threat to watershed health, yet an accounting of cannabis irrigation has remained elusive, thereby impeding effective water policy for the state’s nascent legal cannabis industry. Using data obtained from both permitted and unpermitted cultivation operations, the current study applies novel water-use models to cannabis farms in Northern California to estimate their cumulative and relative water footprints. Our results indicated substantial variation in total water extraction volumes for cannabis farming between watersheds and that most cannabis water use was concentrated in a subset of watersheds, rather than evenly spread across the landscape. Water extraction volumes for unpermitted cannabis were consistently greater than permitted cannabis in the dry season, when streams are most vulnerable to impacts from water diversions. Results from scenario modeling exercises indicated that if all existing unpermitted farms were to become permitted and comply with regulations that prohibit surface water diversions in the dry season, nearly one third (34 of 115) of the study watersheds would experience a 50% reduction in dry season water extraction. In comparison, modest expansion of off-stream storage by all cannabis farms could reduce dry season extraction by 50% or greater in more than three quarters (96 of 115) of study watersheds. Combining diversion limits with enhanced storage could achieve dry season extraction reductions of 50% or greater in 100 of 115 watersheds. Our findings suggest that efforts to address the environmental impacts of unpermitted cultivation should focus on watersheds with greatest water demands and that programs that support expansion of off-stream storage can be helpful for reducing pressures on the environment and facilitating the transition of unpermitted farms to the regulated market

Stream flow modeling tools inform environmental water policy in California

Management of California's vast water distribution network, involving hundreds of dams and diversions from rivers and streams, provides water to 40 million people and supports a globally prominent agricultural sector, but it has come at a price to local freshwater ecosystems. An essential first step in developing policies that effectively balance human and ecosystem needs is understanding natural stream flow patterns and the role stream flow plays in supporting ecosystem health. We have developed a machine-learning modeling technique that predicts natural stream flows in California's rivers and streams. The technique has been used to assess patterns of stream flow modification, evaluate statewide water rights allocations and establish environmental flow thresholds below which water diversions are prohibited. Our work has informed the statewide Cannabis Cultivation Policy and influenced decision-making in more subtle ways, such as by highlighting shortcomings in the state's water accounting system and building support for needed reforms. Tools and techniques that make use of long-term environmental monitoring data and modern computing power — such as the models described here — can help inform policies seeking to protect the environment while satisfying the demands of California's growing population