The futures of tourism, wildlife and ranching in Mono County are now at the mercy of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power - according to environmental groups - now that a court has upheld the agency's authority to cut irrigation water.
For about 100 years, the agency has leased its land and provided water for ranchers to graze cattle in Long Valley and Little Round Valley. But Wendy Schneider, executive director of the nonprofit Friends of the Inyo, said the damage from allowing less water to irrigate these valleys would be widespread.
"We are talking about taking away the scenic value and the recreational value, of a large portion of the county," said Schneider. "Also, this area is really important for the survival of the bi-state sage grouse population."
Schneider also said she worries about the survival of trout and the potential for increased dust storms and fire danger.
The DWP did not immediately respond to a request for comment - but has argued in court that it has the right to modify its leases and that the historic drought has forced its hand, since its primary mission is to serve millions of families in the Southland.
The current watering season will continue through September. The DWP hasn't said how much it plans to cut water deliveries to the alpine meadows near Mammoth Lakes.
Stacey Simon, legal counsel for Mono County, said the court did provide a backstop to prevent the city from cutting off the water entirely.
"The court is saying, 'Look, we can't direct this public agency as to how to exercise its discretion,'" said Simon. "'But we do say that, if it goes so far as to dry out these lands completely, that's a new project, environmental review is required.'"
The DWP first notified leaseholders about its intention to cut back on water in 2018. A trial court initially sided with Mono County and the Sierra Club, but the appeals court partially reversed that decision on Thursday.
According to Simon, if the agency turns off the flow altogether, stakeholders would consider litigation under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Disclosure: Friends of the Inyo contributes to our fund for reporting on Endangered Species & Wildlife, Environment, Public Lands/Wilderness, Water. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
An Environmental Protection Agency rule, finalized near the end of the Biden administration, calls on states and cities to replace all lead pipes in drinking-water systems within a decade.
This work is taking shape in Minnesota, even with uncertainty looming.
The federal rule was announced last fall, and prior to that, Minnesota laid out its goal of replacing all lead service lines by 2033. Cities such as St. Paul have been aggressive on that front.
With the help of state and federal aid, Brent Marsolek - the lead program project manager at the St. Paul Regional Water Services - said his staff has gradually increased no-cost pipe replacements for property owners, topping a thousand last year.
He touted the fairness of these projects.
"There are many residents," said Marsolek, "that just simply could not afford the $7,000 to $10,000 to get a lead service line replaced on their private property."
The federal Bipartisan Infrastructure Law emphasizes steering money toward disadvantaged areas.
Prior to these efforts, cities such as St. Paul were replacing main lines running along streets but now have flexibility to move across property lines.
However, the Biden rule faces a legal challenge from a utility association, with questions lingering about the Trump administration possibly rescinding the changes.
Those concerned say the federal rule puts too much pressure on utilities to do their part in a short amount of time.
Maureen Cunningham - the chief strategy officer and director of water at the Environmental Policy Innovation Center - said applying for grants can be a difficult process but notes there is technical help.
She said keeping pace with the EPA mandate, which begins in 2027, will result in meaningful health safeguards.
"There would be a reduction of 1,500 cases of premature deaths from heart disease," said Cunningham, "and it would prevent up to 200,000 IQ points that are lost in children on average every year."
The contamination crisis in Flint, Michigan from a decade ago brought focus on health risks linked to lead levels in drinking water.
St. Paul officials say they have enough funding for line replacements for the next couple of years.
But President Donald Trump has been vocal about reducing spending and scaling back Biden-era investments. And Minnesota faces a budget deficit a few years from now.
Disclosure: Environmental Policy Innovation Center contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Environment, Water. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email
The State of Minnesota faces a new lawsuit over the connection between harmful nitrates from farm fields and the threat they pose to natural resources.
Groups behind the legal action have said that, despite recent changes, regulations need to be stronger. A trio of organizations, including the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, filed the lawsuit Tuesday. It comes just after the state finalized new permitting rules for larger animal feedlots. They cover practices such as manure application, with the hope of limiting surface and groundwater pollution.
The MCEA's supervising attorney, Joy Anderson, said actions like that are helpful, but don't go far enough.
"Those only apply to the largest feedlots in the state - about the top 6% of feedlots," she said. "The rules that we are asking MPCA to look at would cover all the registered feedlots. And so, that's many, many thousands more feedlots."
The plaintiffs want a district court to force the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Department of Agriculture to revisit their rules for these water permits, and make sure vulnerable regions have enough safeguards. In a joint statement, the agencies said they can't comment on the case, adding that the recent changes strike a balance in protecting the environment and supporting farmers.
Jeff Broberg, founder and member of the Minnesota Well Owners Organization, another plaintiff in the case, said information gathering has vastly improved in trying to get a handle on this longstanding problem. But he feels some tools are still being left on the shelf.
"We've made huge investments in data, geology, hydrology, land use, fertilizers," he said, "and we're asking that all of those tools be put to work."
The Minnesota Department of Agriculture just published an updated online map, showing vulnerable areas it said will help farmers comply with the Groundwater Protection Rule. But Broberg said it has limitations. These groups have said the case also is a response to the new Trump administration, contending that the federal EPA likely won't be as forceful on this issue as it was under President Joe Biden.
get more stories like this via email
President Donald Trump's new executive order on California water policy is drawing criticism from many water conservation advocates.
The order directs the feds to study ways to override state environmental protections and send more water from northern California down south.
Bruce Reznik, executive director of the nonprofit L.A. Waterkeeper, said the devastating fires can be blamed on extreme winds, dry brush and local infrastructure issues, not on a lack of water. He said Trump is taking advantage of a disaster to benefit corporate farms.
"To the extent that they're going to deliver more water, a lot of that is going to big agriculture in the Central Valley," Reznik observed. "Folks that have supported Trump."
Groups such as Restore the Delta said Trump's policies could harm the San Francisco Bay-Delta ecosystems and devastate the salmon fishery. They also oppose Gov. Gavin Newsom's Delta Conveyance Project, which the state said is intended to capture more water from large but infrequent storm events.
Reznik argued if the state and federal governments really want to make an impact, they would invest a lot more money into existing projects to clean up contaminated groundwater, improve conservation and recycle more wastewater.
"In L.A. County, we import about 700 million gallons of water a day, of the 1.2 billion gallons we use," Reznik noted. "Importing that water requires a lot of energy and expense. Right now, we treat it, flush it, treat it again, and then we dump about 450 million to 500 million gallons of that back into the ocean. The Metropolitan Water District, the county and the city have plans that we could be reclaiming 330 million gallons a day. That would reduce our regional demand for imported water and save the energy it takes to move it here from faraway places."
get more stories like this via email