On Monday, January 12, the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) hosted an event in downtown Sacramento entitled Managing Drought, which brought together prominent leaders in the scientific, private sector, management, policy, and government arenas to discuss current and future droughts in California. It created an opportunity to reflect on what's happening, what's not happening, and what should happen when it comes to drought management in California today and in the future.

In the first keynote address, California State Climatologist Mike Anderson brought everyone in the room (and the webcast) up to speed on the California drought and climate change implications. Citing recent publications, Anderson emphasized that not only is California's precipitation highly variable from year to year but whether we're wet or dry depends upon just a few storm events.(1,2) With regard to the current drought, Anderson stressed that much is missed in just the basic statistics, reminding the audience that more demands and much warmer temperatures (as a result of climate change) exacerbate drought impacts.

Jane Doolan, a professor at the University of Canberra and a member of the National Water Commission in Australia, delivered the second keynote on Australia's millennium drought. She provided insights from a policy perspective on what did and did not work. The policy response to the drought, Doolan explained, was approached with the perspective that the changes were for long term viability, not simply a response to crisis – an issue that was echoed throughout the day. Australia employed several principles: policies should

• work under drier futures,
• improve efficiency and conservation,
• allow water right holders to mitigate risk,
• support water markets, and
• offer multi-benefit solutions.

Some key changes included adding to the water grid which made it easier to move water around and the establishment of an environmental water management portfolio with “clear and unambiguous water for the environment.” Doolan cautioned that with recent floods, people are now saying that many of the changes aren't needed, illustrating the importance of building policies for the long term.

To address legislative priorities, the first panel was moderated by water law expert Buzz Thompson of Stanford University and consisted of four legislators: Jean Fuller, Marc Levine, Anthony Rendon, and Lois Wolk. With regard to funding related to the 2014 Proposition 1 (water bond) and California Sustainable Groundwater Act, remarks centered on the importance of using the money strategically, treating it as a “down payment,” and using it to build infrastructure. Top oversight priorities for the legislators were water storage, tools for local entities, emerging technologies, and guidance on goals for local resilience under climate change. Given the focus on local communities, concern was raised over local entities being unable to raise rates (Proposition 218 requires a two thirds vote). The importance of getting allocated money out the door to local entities for groundwater studies and plans was emphasized multiple times. When asked the question of what one area the legislators would focus on for drought resilience, Levine discussed learning from countries such as Australia, Rendon stressed government and structure issues, Wolk spoke of the need for better science to determine targets, and Fuller discussed finding the reality of what was possible. Questions from the audience followed. One in particular rung true to which no one had a clear answer: How do we create a new vision on water in California like Australia seems to have done?

The next panel addressed urban and agricultural water scarcity, which was introduced by Jay Lund, a professor and director of the UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences. His take-homes included a need for more tightly managed water given its scarcity, encouragement of water markets, reformed urban pricing structure, and a need for drills or “dry runs.” Representing a wholesaler water district, Susan Milligan of Calleguas Municipal Water District expressed the need for the state to help address issues they couldn't regulate alone. Joe Macllvaine of Paramount Farms explained that while most agree groundwater management needs to happen, it will cause economic upheaval that needs to be thought about carefully. One of several issues raised by Martha Guzman-Aceves of the Office of the Governor is that there are many sub-questions to be addressed when it comes to implementing water markets. Andrew Fahlund of the California Water Foundation emphasized goal setting and a willingness to test, try, fail, and try again.

This was followed by a panel on managing ecosystems during drought, which was introduced by Jeff Mount of PPIC and Professor Emeritus at UC Davis. Mount's three main points were: 1) investing in ecosystems when times are good, 2) creating a reliable funding source for the environment, and 3) drought planning. Highlights of this panel included an eloquent discussion of the incredible difficulty making choices during times of scarcity and their human toll by Chuck Bonhom, director of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Sandi Matsumoto of The Nature Conservancy encouraged us to think about the when, where and how of providing habitat. Peter Moyle, Professor at UC Davis, urged the development of “clear and unambiguous rights for the environment” similar to those established in Australia. Tim Quinn, Executive Director of the Association of California Water Agencies, suggested we need to move to a system that is more flexible and includes multi-purpose strategies.

The last panel on allocating water through the state's water rights system was introduced by Brian Gray of the University of California, Hastings College of Law. He noted that the requirement that we tightly manage water in drought is hampered by a lack of detailed information. We need, he argued, to be more specific about how water is being used so that can be taken into account when curtailments need to happen. A number of key points were made by the panel. Felicia Marcus, Chair of the State Water Resources Control Board, followed on the issue of data needs by pointing out that it's not just availability for researchers and managers but also availability and transparency for everyone. She also stressed that many issues could be solved by better implementing the water rights priority already in place. Other key points included Davis Guy of the Northern California Water Association stressing the issue of protecting storage releases in times of drought, Jill Duerig of Alameda County Zone 7 Water Agency suggesting we improve how we allocate depending on water year, and Bill Croyle of the California Department of Water Resources stated that the emergency created by the drought opened the door to dialog and transparency.

I appreciated this opportunity to hear from a leader on water governance in Australia, California legislators, and other prominent figures in the California water world. Discussions addressed specific topics, but also got to upper level issues including the question of how to sustain momentum to produce lasting change. Though this question is not resolved, it seems to me that discussions such as these are central to promoting its resolution.

More information about the event and videos of the talks and panels can be found on the PPIC website.

Panel on allocating water during drought, with moderator Ellen Hanak from the PPIC. Public Policy Institute of California.

Notes:

1 Dettinger, M.D., Ralph, F.M., Das, T., Neiman, P.J., Cayan, D.R., 2011. Atmospheric Rivers, Floods and the Water Resources of California. Water, 3(2): 445-478.

2 Dettinger, M., Cayan, D.R., 2014. Drought and the California Delta—A Matter of Extremes. San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, 12(2).