<html><head></head><body><div class="ydpa5553dfdyahoo-style-wrap" style="font-family:garamond, new york, times, serif;font-size:16px;"><div><div class="ydpa5553dfdsignature" dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/judge-oks-plan-for-california-water-projects-pending-review-of-trump-era-policies/" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://www.courthousenews.com/judge-oks-plan-for-california-water-projects-pending-review-of-trump-era-policies/</a></div><div class="ydpa5553dfdsignature"><div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><div><div class="ydp5305684earticle-container">
<div class="ydp5305684earticle-header">
<h1>Judge OKs plan for California water projects pending review of Trump-era policies</h1>
<div class="ydp5305684eexcerpt">
<p>Rejecting objections by environmental and farming
industry groups, a federal judge green-lighted a revised,
government-endorsed plan to manage water projects in California with
extra protections for endangered fish.</p>
</div>
<div class="ydp5305684eauthor-date-share">
<div class="ydp5305684eauthor-date">
<a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/author/nick-iovino/" title="Posts by Nicholas Iovino" class="ydp5305684eauthor ydp5305684eurl ydp5305684efn" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Nicholas Iovino</a><span> / March 15, 2022</span> </div>
<div class="ydp5305684eshare">
</div>
</div>
</div>
<img src="https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/ShastaDam-1880x1410.jpg" data-src="https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/ShastaDam-1880x1410.jpg" data-inlineimagemanipulating="true" class="" style="width: 100%; max-width: 800px;">
The Shasta Dam across the Sacramento River in California.
<div class="ydp5305684earticle-content">
<p>FRESNO, Calif. (CN) — In a long-running dispute over water rights
in California, a federal judge will allow a pair of challenged
Trump-era biological opinions to remain in effect over the next three
years with added safeguards that some groups complain fail to ensure the
survival of endangered fish.</p>
<p>In December 2021, a coalition of fishing industry and environmental
groups asked a judge to temporarily block agencies from relying on two
“scientifically unsound and fatally flawed” biological opinions issued
during the Trump administration in 2019.</p>
<p>The two opinions — issued by the National Marine Fisheries Service
and U.S. Fish and Wildlife — enable more water to be sent to some 20
million farms, businesses and homes in Southern and Central California
via two massive federal and state water diversion projects. The opinions
eliminate certain requirements, such as mandating extra flows to
prevent water temperatures from rising to levels high enough to damage
and fry salmon eggs.</p>
<p>Supporters of the Trump-era water and wildlife policies say the
biological opinions will help provide needed irrigation water to help
family farms and ranches thrive, employ workers and keep California's
$50 billion-per-year agricultural industry afloat.</p>
<p>Opponents say those endangered species assessments for the Central
Valley Project and State Water Project will jeopardize the survival of
threatened Chinook salmon, steelhead trout, delta smelt and longfin
smelt.</p>
<p>“The 2019 [biological opinions] were designed, contrary to the
requirements of the [Endangered Species Act], to ‘maximize water
deliveries’ to water contractors even in drought, at the expense of
pushing these protected fish species toward extinction,” attorneys for a
coalition of environmental and fishing industry groups argued in a
motion for a preliminary injunction.</p>
<p>On March 11, a federal judge in Fresno rejected the coalition's
motion, finding an alternate proposal by state and federal agencies was
more reasonable.<br><br>In a whopping <a href="https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/water-ruling-3.11.22.pdf" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">122-page opinion</a>,
U.S. District Judge Dale Drozd endorsed the governments' plan to keep
the two challenged biological opinions in place while the Biden
administration reconsiders them. While those reviews are pending, an
interim operations plan will be put in place with provisions designed to
provide extra protections for the endangered fish. Drozd found the
government-backed interim plan “takes balanced and reasonable steps” to
address water temperature-related threats to winter-run salmon eggs and
sets “reasonable carryover storage goals” for Shasta Dam water.</p>
<p>The judge concluded the interim plan’s “middle-of-the road approach”
on setting targets for water storage and temperatures was “more likely
to be achievable” than what the coalition had proposed.</p>
<p>Members of the coalition that sought more stringent protections for
endangered fish include the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's
Associations and Natural Resources Defense Council.</p>
<p>The judge also rejected opposition by certain water users and
irrigation districts that said the interim plan would set up a potential
conflict with senior contractors, whose water rights predate the
existence of the Central Valley Project.</p>
<p>Claims that the interim plan will cause the U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation to violate its contracts with senior water users is “purely
hypothetical and speculative,” the judge wrote.</p>
<p>“The court is in no position to micromanage exactly how Reclamation
intends to make good on its commitments under the [interim plan] while
also abiding by its contractual obligations,” Drozd wrote, adding the
contracts “make it exceedingly and increasingly difficult for
Reclamation to operate Shasta Dam in a manner that is sufficiently
protective of winter-run [salmon].”</p>
</div></div><div class="ydp5305684ead-banner ydp5305684earticle-inline" style="height: auto !important;">
<span>ADVERTISEMENT</span>
</div>
<p>Jon Rubin, general counsel for the Westlands Water District, which
irrigates thousands of acres of agricultural land in California's
Central Valley, said it's clear from the ruling that Judge Drozd spent
significant time listening to and trying to understand each party's
posiion.</p>
<p>"The order I think reflects the judge’s perspective that it was asked
to deal with a very complicated matter from both the operational
standpoint as well as the law," Rubin said.</p>
<p>Westlands did not join other irrigation districts and water user
groups in opposing the state and federal government agencies' proposal
for an interim operations plan.</p>
<p>Doug Obegi of the Natural Resources Defense Council declined to
comment on the judge’s ruling, but his colleague Katie Poole, who heads
the group’s water division, wrote in a blog post that even with extra
safeguards in place, Governor Gavin Newsom and the Biden administration
will need to step up to ensure the survival of endangered native fish in
California.</p>
<p>“While the court adopted stronger temperature requirements than the
Trump [biological opinions], the Court declined to order Reclamation to
limit deliveries to the Sacramento River settlement contractors,
although it acknowledged the threat they pose,” Poole wrote in the <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/kate-poole/saving-californias-salmon-now-governor-newsom" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">blog post</a>.</p>
<p>In an emailed statement, California Natural Resources Agency
spokesperson Lisa Lien-Mager said the state is satisfied with Drozd’s
ruling.</p>
<p>“State agencies are pleased that a federal court has approved an
interim operations plan for the Central Valley Project and the State
Water Project through September 2022 to address severe drought while
protecting species and ensuring water for human health and safety,”
Lien-Mager said.</p>
<p>Drozd also granted a request to pause litigation through the end of
September, finding results of the agencies' reviews of biologicals
opinions will “likely change the administrative landscape of the case.”</p>
<p>Lien-Mager said California agencies support a litigation pause to
give stakeholders more time to confer on a longer-term plan for
balancing competing water needs for communities, the environment and the
economy.</p>
<p>“Last week’s court order is a key step toward resolving differences,
bolstering protections for species and managing through the challenges
of a third year of drought,” she said.</p>
<p>Representatives for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, National Marine
Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service did not return
emails and phone calls requesting comment by press time.</p></div><div><br></div></div></div></div></div></body></html>