Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBC Water and Resource Conservation - Pros and Cons for Basin Boundary Modifications Menchaca, Clarissa From: BCWater Sent: Friday,June 22, 2018 2:04 PM To: BCWater Cc: Gossefin, Paul; Buck, Christina; Peterson, Kelly Subject: Basin Boundary Modification Pros and Cons Attachments: Proposed Butte Subbasin.pdf Contacts: Greg Sohnrey - Sohnrey and Son Family Farms; Les Heringer- M&T Ranch; Susan Strachan; Gary Cole - Cole Farms; Darren Rice;John Schooling; Dave Daley;Jon Lavy- Lavy Brothers Farming;Ashley Snyder- Butte County; Clarissa Menchaca - Butte County Admin;Joe Mendes - Llano Seco Good Afternoon GPAC Members, As requested, here are the pros and cons from Sean Earley. Thank you, 'X, Butte-ounty Water and Resource Conservation. Administrative Analyst,Associate 308 Nelson Ave.,Croville,CA 95965 Office:530.552.3594,Fax:530.538.3807 "COUNTY OF BUTTE E-MAIL DISCLAIMER: This e-mail and any attachment thereto may contain private,confidential,and privileged moterial for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, copying,or distribution of this e-mail(or any attachments thereto)by other than the County of Butte or the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you ore NOT the intended recipient,please contact the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copies of this e-mail and any attachments thereto. Proposed Butte Subbasin Advantages: 1. Reduces Cost a. From 4 to 3 subbasins in Butte County b. Corresponding reduction in staff time and meetings for GSAs and interested stakeholders c. Allows grant funds to be spread over 3 subbasins, rather than 4 d. New subbasin better aligns existing planning documents paid for by taxpayers and ratepayers that will be used in GSP development i. AB 3030 groundwater management plans ii. Ag water management plans iii. Existing groundwater monitoring efforts 2. Reduces complexity a. Governance L Currently,there maybe 3 or 4 different governance approaches,e.g.,joint powers agreement, memorandum of understanding,standing committee,etc. ii. Proposed Butte Subbasin allows for better uniformity of governance approach across all Butte County subbasins b. Groundwater Sustainability Plans (GSPs) L Currently, Butte County,GSAs,stakeholders and public must prepare at least one GSP for each of the 4 subbasins (at least 4 GSPs). 1. Potential for multiple GSPs in one Subbasin that must then be coordinated through a"coordination agreement" ii. Proposed Butte Subbasin reduces number of GSPs to 3 and reduces likelihood of multiple GSPs in any one subbasin 3. Promotes sustainable groundwater management and local control of groundwater resources a. Better aligns existing land use practices and water management efforts with subbasin boundaries b. Allows surface water districts to align in one subbasin;surface water supports direct and in lieu groundwater recharge and promotes conservation of groundwater resources c. GSAs in Butte Subbasin in better position to assist with sustainable groundwater management in adjacent subbasins,Vina and Wyandotte d. Helps keep Butte County water in Butte County e. Enhances local control—Butte Basin proposal is consistent(with one exception, discussed below)with modification proposals submitted by Tehama County, Butte County,Colusa County,Yuba County and Sutter County and supported by dozens of GSAs Disadvantages: 1. Butte Basin proposal is late in the process—DWR deadline recently extended to July 31,2018 2. May affect ongoing governance discussions in the currently configured Vina Subbasin 3. Minor modification to proposal put forth by Butte County in that it moves County's proposed southerly Vina Subbasin line further south The Butte Subbasin Proposal does not.... 1. Exempt the GSAs and groundwater users within the Butte Subbasin from the requirements of SGMA. a. The Butte Subbasin will be subject to and must comply with SGMA's mandates. 2. Implicate, interfere with,or undermine Butte County's Groundwater Ordinance, known as Measure G, located at Chapter 33 of the Butte County Code. a. The Butte County portions of the Butte Subbasin will continue to be subject to Chapter 33, including the limitations on out-of-County groundwater substitution water transfers. b. The portions of the Butte Subbasin in Glenn and Colusa Counties will continue to be subject to those counties' rules regarding groundwater substitution water transfers. 3. Result in splitting off from joint efforts with the County on groundwater planning. a. GSAs in the Butte Subbasin include water districts, reclamation districts, counties and cities. These parties will jointly comply with and implement SGMA with input from interested stakeholders and the public. 4. Result instate intervention into groundwater matters by the California Department of Water Resources or the State Water Resources Control Board. a. The Butte Subbasin enhances local control of groundwater resources and helps avoid intervention by the State of California S. Impactor diminish existing rights to groundwater. a. The Butte Subbasin will not alter, diminish or affect existing rights to groundwater, including rights for irrigation of agriculture and domestic wells.