‘Pumping for profit’ is exploitation

  • Sunday, August 10, 2014 6:18pm
  • Opinion

Who owns the water? That’s the
essential issue in a controversial plan to pump 26,000 acre-feet of groundwater over two years and sell it to a water district that runs from western Merced County into San Joaquin County.

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation approved using the Delta-Mendota Canal to transfer water pumped from beneath 4-S Ranch Partners LLC and SHS Family LP to the Del Puerto Water District. Valued conservatively at $600 an acre-foot, the transaction could net ranch owners Steve Sloan and Stephen Smith and their partners $15 million or more.

Twelve pumps on Sloan’s 4-S Ranch and two on Smith’s neighboring ranch would extract the water. Since most of it would flow to other counties, there’s little opportunity for that water to replenish the aquifer from which it was pumped. Since it is almost a certainty that the aquifer also underlies neighboring properties, nearby farmers are concerned. They worry that high-volume pumping will draw groundwater away from their wells, which they’re counting on to keep their trees and crops from dying.

ADVERTISEMENT
0 seconds of 0 secondsVolume 0%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
00:00
00:00
00:00
 

Merced farmers have always combined river water and groundwater to irrigate crops, so those in the irrigation district have collectively invested in making their groundwater supply more sustainable. But there’s no realistic way to protect the groundwater they’ve conserved.

Laws in most California counties treat groundwater like a mineral that stays put. But groundwater moves around, flowing vertically and laterally toward a pump. And since most aquifers are vast, they can span many properties. That means whoever owns the deepest well or has the strongest pump can draw groundwater from beneath neighboring ranches.

No individual can sell surface water. That’s because the state actually owns all California surface water, granting only the right to use it. Starting in the 1880s, those rights were given to public irrigation districts, who divvied them up to member farmers. Those rights are enshrined in laws that go back to the 1850s, protected by lawyers standing guard over them like growling pit bulls. The state can’t break those laws, but it does encourage transfers.

Groundwater rules are different. Its use is essentially unregulated, except in a few urban counties. Virtually every rural county considers groundwater the property of the person with the pump. If that pump sucks water away from neighboring wells, well, that’s unfortunate.

Bob Weimer doesn’t mind sharing groundwater. Last year Merced Irrigation District pumped heavily so growers in Planada, LeGrand and El Nido could irrigate, he said. “We shared water within our district, taking our aquifer down to help those other growers.” This year, he said, there wasn’t enough, despite conservation efforts.

“We put in programs cutting back on flood irrigation, putting in retention basins to protect the aquifer,” said Weimer, who farms near 4-S Ranch. “And now you have somebody who comes along for private gain and pumps water outside of the aquifer.”

But not far outside. The 4-S water is destined for Del Puerto Water District, which has 9,000 acres in Merced County and whose growers are desperate to get it. To them, the groundwater sale is nothing less than salvation. They’re grateful and willing to pay.

The problem isn’t sharing water, it’s who profits from it.

If Del Puerto were buying surface water from an irrigation district, the money would go to the district and benefit all its members. But private groundwater sales benefit only the seller.

That’s why farmers — generally conservative and often downright disdainful of government regulations — might soon welcome state intervention. The legislature soon will consider bills for establishing state guidelines if not rules. Besides, they might not have a choice.

A recent case in Siskiyou County, if it survives appeal, could change the groundwater legal landscape. After overpumping lowered the Scott River, a Superior Court judge ruled that groundwater feeding the river belonged to the public and not solely to those who owned the pumps. It’s entirely likely similar challenges are being prepared to protect the Merced, Tuolumne and Stanislaus rivers.

Water is water, except in a courtroom. In times of scarcity, it needs to be shared, not exploited.

Merced (California) Sun Star,

Aug. 1

More in Opinion

Gov. Mike Dunleavy (R-Alaska) speaks to reporters about his decision to veto an education funding bill at the Alaska State Capitol on Thursday, April 17, 2025. (Jasz Garrett / Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: The fight for Alaska’s future begins in the classroom

The fight I’ve been leading isn’t about politics — it’s about priorities.

Dick Maitland, a foley artist, works on the 46th season of “Sesame Street” at Kaufman Astoria Studios in New York, Dec. 15, 2025. (Ariana McLaughlin/The New York Times)
Opinion: Trump’s embarrassing immaturity Republicans won’t acknowledge

Sullivan should be embarrassed by the ignorance and immaturity the president is putting on display for the world to see.

Rep. Justin Ruffridge, R-Soldotna, speaks in support of debating an omnibus education bill in the Alaska House Chambers on Monday, Feb. 19, 2024 in Juneau, Alaska. (Ashlyn O’Hara/Peninsula Clarion)
Capitol Corner: Choosing our priorities wisely

Rep. Justin Ruffridge reports back from Juneau.

Sen. Jesse Bjorkman, R-Nikiski, speaks in support overriding Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s veto of House Bill 69 at the Alaska Capitol in Juneau, Alaska, on Tuesday, April 22, 2025. (Mark Sabbatini/Juneau Empire)
Capitol Corner: As session nears end, pace picks up in Juneau

Sen. Jesse Bjorkman reports back from Juneau.

Alaska Department of Education and Early Development Commissioner Deena Bishop and Gov. Mike Dunleavy discuss his veto of an education bill during a press conference March 15, 2024, at the Alaska State Capitol. (Mark Sabbatini/Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: Strong policy, proven results

Why policy and funding go hand in hand.

Former Gov. Frank Murkowski speaks on a range of subjects during an interview with the Juneau Empire in May 2019. (Michael Penn / Juneau Empire File)
Opinion: The Jones Act — crass protectionism, but for whom?

Alaska is dependent on the few U.S.-built ships carrying supplies from Washington state to Alaska.

Cook Inlet can be seen at low tide from North Kenai Beach on June 15, 2022, in Kenai, Alaska. (Photo by Erin Thompson/Peninsula Clarion)
Opinion: Solving the Cook Inlet gas crisis

While importing LNG is necessary in the short term, the Kenai Peninsula is in dire need of a stable long-term solution.

Sockeye salmon caught in a set gillnet are dragged up onto the beach at a test site for selective harvest setnet gear in Kenai, Alaska, on Tuesday, July 25, 2023. (Jake Dye/Peninsula Clarion)
Capitol Corner: Creating opportunities with better fishery management

Sen. Jesse Bjorkman reports back from Juneau.

The ranked choice outcome for Alaska’s U.S. Senate race is shown during an Alaska Public Media broadcast on Nov. 24, 2022. (Alaska Division of Elections)
Opinion: Alaska should keep ranked choice voting, but let’s make it easier

RCV has given Alaskans a better way to express their preferences.

The Alaska State Capitol on March 1. (Ashlyn O’Hara/Peninsula Clarion)
Opinion: Keep Alaska open for business

Our job as lawmakers is to ensure that laws passed at the ballot box work effectively on the ground.

Image provided by the Office of Mayor Peter Micciche.
Opinion: Taxes, adequate education funding and putting something back into your pocket

Kenai Peninsula Borough taxpayers simply can’t make a dent in the education funding deficit by themselves, nor should they be asked to do so.

Brooke Walters. (Courtesy photo)
Opinion: A student’s letter to the governor

Our education funding is falling short by exuberant amounts.