U.S. Environmental Policy
2 March 2011
A Legislative History of the Development of Water for Agriculture in the Central
Valley of California: H.R.200.IH
Overview
California’s very existence is premised on the massive quantities of water
diverted from the North, damned into reservoirs, or pumped out from under the ground.
Almost all of the water in the state is put to some use before being allowed to return to
the sea. The majority of this water—80%—is used for irrigation. Pumping of
groundwater now exceeds rates of natural replenishment by billions of gallons per year
with little or no regulation. Other water projects have cost the state billions, are still often
unable to meet the states growing needs, and are negatively affecting the state’s ecology.
Farmers and businesses depend on the state to cheaply supply them water and
paint conservation measures as anti-business and anti-farmer. Any act to place limits to
better the environment and public health interest are blocked or vehemently contested by
agricultural lobbyists. In the past, attempts to simply survey lands have been blocked by
lobbyists claiming that it is a waste of money and government resources. In reality, these
lobbyists simply do not want scientific data proving that current practices are
unsustainable, harming the environment, or are in one way or another illegal. Current
legislation before the 112th Congress would require the Secretary of the Interior to
complete a survey of the Rialto-Colton Basin to examine groundwater resource depletion,
possible aquifer contamination and other environmental impacts.
Major Legislation
57th Congress
P.L. 57-161: “Reclamation Act/Newlands Act of 1902.” Under this act the Secretary of
the Interior created the United States Reclamation Service (later known as the United
States Bureau of Reclamation) and made it responsible for funding irrigation projects in
thirteen western states, including California. The act set aside a percentage of the
proceeds of the sales of public land for the examination, construction, and maintenance of
irrigation works into a reclamation fund. It also set certain requirements for the use of
water including residency and annual charges.
73rd Congress
P.L.73-601: “Central Valley Project Act.” This act authorized the sale of revenue bonds
to construct irrigation projects. However, such sales were unsuccessful, and the federal
government was authorized to assume control of the project and start production. Funds
were authorized under the Emergency Relief Appropriations Act of 1935. The project
became subject to Reclamation law under the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1935.
Originally, the project involved creating and regulating dams, power plants, and canals to
regulate rivers, provide water for irrigation, and generate power. The plans did not
include any built in environmental protections and disregarded sustainability.
97th Congress P.L. 97-293 “Reclamation Reform Act of 1982.” This act, spearheaded by a powerful
agricultural lobby representing large farm interests, increased the acreage limitation from
160 (the size of the original Homestead) to 960 acres and overturned the requirement that
landowners lived on or near their land.
102nd Congress
P.L. 102-575: “Central Valley Project Improvement Act.” This act mandated change in
the management of the Central Valley Project. It aimed to help protect the ecosystem of
the Central Valley by dedicating 800,000 acre-feet of water to fish and wildlife, creating
a habitat restoration fund financed by Central Valley water and power users, and stopping
contract renewals until a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement was completed.
However, the passage of this act continues to create intense debate as farmers and
businesses complained that the government is unfairly restricting their ability to make a
living. The eruption of protest after the passage of this bill demonstrates the potential
backlash toward any new progressive water environmental laws in the Central Valley.
112th Congress
H.R. 200: “Inland Empire Perchlorate Ground Water Plume Assessment Act.” This bill
would require the Secretary of the Interior to complete a study of water resources in the
Rialto-Colton Basin. The survey would analyze the quality of water in the aquifers, the
salinity of ground water resources, and the potential of the ground water resources to
recharge. It would also identify and characterize the recent surge in perchlorate
concentrations and the susceptibility of the aquifers to contamination. If passed, this bill
would generate a report to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and
the House Committee on Natural Resources that would hopefully force state and federal
representatives to confront the environmental impact and unsustainability of current
practices. This would be a significant first step toward creating new and
(environmentally) better policies.
Works Cited
U.S. House of Representatives. 57th Congress. 1st Session (1902). “P.L. 57-161
Reclamation Act/Newlands Act of 1902.” Online:
.
U.S. House of Representatives. 73rd Congress. 1st session (1933). “P.L 73-601: “Central
Valley Project Act.” Online: < http://www.fws.gov/laws/lawsdigest/central.html>.
U.S. House of Representatives. 97th Congress. 1st Session (1982). “P.L. 97-293
Reclamation Reform Act of 1982.” Online:
.
U.S. House of Representatives. 102nd Congress. 1st Session (1992). “P.L. 102-575 Central
Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA).” Online:
. U.S. House of Representatives. 112th Congress. 1st Session (2011). “H.R. 200 I.H. Inland
Empire Perchlorate Ground Water Plume Assessment Act.” Online:
.
“Reclamation: Managing Water in the West, Mid-Pacific Region.” U.S. Department of
Interior: Bureau of Reclamation. Accessed 27 February 2011
.
Reisner, Marc. Cadillac Desert: The American West and its Disappearing Water. New
York: Viking Penguin, 1986. Print.
“Perchlorate.” California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Accessed 26
February 2011 .