Water rights: water management.
The passage of AB 658 is poised to have significant implications on state water law, particularly regarding the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act. By allowing for conditional temporary permits and change orders, the bill aims to facilitate more responsive water management strategies that can address immediate and critical water needs. The State Water Resources Control Board is tasked with administering these permits and must ensure beneficiaries comply with regulations to protect fish, wildlife, and instream beneficial uses, emphasizing a balance between human needs and environmental safeguards.
Assembly Bill 658, authored by Arambula, addresses the urgent need for improved water management in the face of California's ongoing water challenges. The bill amends various sections of the Water Code to authorize groundwater sustainability agencies or local agencies to apply for temporary permits that allow diversion of surface water to underground storage. This legislative change is intended to enhance groundwater recharge during periods of high-flow events, thereby promoting sustainable water management practices essential for maintaining water supply in water-scarce regions.
The general sentiment surrounding AB 658 is largely supportive, particularly among environmental advocates and water resource professionals. Proponents argue that the bill embodies a proactive approach to managing California's water resources, especially in times of drought. However, some concerns have been raised regarding the potential for increased water extraction and the impact this could have on aquatic ecosystems, reflecting ongoing debates about the management of natural resources amidst competing demands.
Notable points of contention stem from apprehension about the adequacy of protections for local waterways and ecosystems when diverting surface water for underground storage. Critics argue that while the bill attempts to enhance water sustainability, it may inadvertently favor short-term water diversion solutions over long-term sustainable practices, potentially leading to environmental degradation in critical habitats. Additionally, the provision requiring public reporting on the effectiveness of these permit processes by 2024 adds an element of accountability, yet concerns remain about whether such measures will sufficiently mitigate ecological risks.