California enacts statewide water restrictions

Water districts throughout California are required to develop and activate water contingency plans, after an emergency resolution passed by the State Water Resources Control Board July 15.

The board, a department within the California EPA, adopted the resolution to mandate minimum conservation efforts across the state. Under the rule, local water districts with a water shortage contingency plan must put it into practice. Districts without a contingency plan must develop one.

“If they have a plan, they go to the stage of that plan where there are mandatory restrictions on outdoor water use,” says Max Gomberg, senior environmental scientist for the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB).

About 30 percent of water suppliers in the state have already gone to some stage of mandatory restrictions this year. That number covers about 10 million people, which makes up about a quarter of the state’s total population.
 

Landscape irrigation

For outdoor irrigation, that conservation must either limit irrigation of ornamental landscapes with potable water to no more than two days each week, or implement plans to reduce water use by a comparable amount of a landscape’s 2013 water use total. Either restriction puts outdoor irrigation roughly in line with the 20 percent water use reduction requested by California governor Jerry Brown at the beginning of the year. They both should have about the same effect on the overall use total, says Gomberg.

“Our analysis, which goes along with this as a supporting document, is that we can achieve up to 20 percent reduction in use statewide from implementing these regulations,” says Gomberg. “’Comparable’ is what could really be achieved by the two-day-a-week plan, and we think that’s roughly 20 percent.

“The message we’re trying to send here is that everyone can do more, even if it’s a little bit more. This is a drought that affects the entire state.”

An important aspect for landscape and turf professionals is that these restrictions only affect potable water. There are currently no restrictions on the use of recycled water, which can be a resource for outdoor irrigation. Offering non-potable water as an alternative is “something we’re really trying to promote in California,” says Gomberg.
 

Industry reaction

Jon Reelhorn, owner of Belmont Nursery, is able to water plants with well water. Belmont Nursery is a wholesale nursery and garden center in Fresno.

“Our aquifer water comes from snow melt, and it was a bad year,” he says, adding that he expects restrictions on those types of water sources, too.

The nursery also strives to water away from the peak power rates, which are from noon to 6 p.m. Operating an automatic irrigation system helps, and the nursery is able to schedule irrigation at any time, he says.

But there’s a bright side. Belmont Nursery’s business saw a boost in sales because of homeowners removing water-thirsty plants and replacing them with water-wise plants.

“Our advertising campaign focused on water-wise plants this spring and we’ve increased our homeowner consultation business measurably,” says Reelhorn.

However, simply marketing water-wise plants will not solve the problem of drought. The green industry must be vocal.

“As an industry, we need to be on the forefront of letting our city, county and state leaders that our landscapes are valuable enough to continue to support. I’m not sure that we are doing enough in that regard, and in the end we may regret not doing more,” he says.

The California Landscape Contractors Association supported the SWRCB’s runoff provision and the overall approach of the regulation in a letter to the water board and in testimony at the July 15 hearing, says Larry Rohlfes, assistant executive director for CLCA.

The letter states: “The SWRCB proposal appropriately recognizes that individual property owners should be required to participate in California’s emergency conservation effort. Relative to other methods of accomplishing this goal that the water board considered, prohibiting the application of water to outdoor landscapes in a manner that causes runoff appears to be an excellent way to target water waste.”

Placing a target on runoff is preferable to limiting outdoor irrigation to no more than two days a week, which would have required complicated exceptions to be fair to all, says Rohlfes.

“We also pointed out that CLCA and other landscape industry associations have long stressed the importance of eliminating runoff to save water as well as protect our waterways,” he says.

Rohlfes also points out that the SWRCB’s original proposal required urban water suppliers to implement all of the requirements and actions of the stage of their water shortage contingency plan that imposes mandatory restrictions on outdoor irrigation. The change to the original proposal gives urban suppliers the option to ask the water board for approval of an alternate plan that involves an allocation-based rate structure. The approved version of the regulation states that the SWRCB may approve the alternate plan if it is deemed to achieve a level of conservation that would be superior to that achieved by limiting outdoor irrigation of ornamental landscapes to no more than two days a week.

“Had the water board not made this change to its proposed regulation, many water suppliers with allocation-based rate structures would have had to forbid their customers to irrigate their landscapes more than two days a week because that is what is spelled out as the first mandatory restriction in their water shortage contingency plan,” Rohlfes says. “Some water agencies would have been required to enforce more extreme measures. For example, one southern California agency with an allocation-based rate structure apparently would have had to forbid all outdoor irrigation. These agencies long ago made a decision to make their rate structures their primary tool for reducing water use. Their water shortage contingency plans made day-of-the-week irrigation restrictions a last resort for the bleakest of water supply situations and consequently inappropriate for the severity of the current drought in some cases.”
 

Individual agency plans differ

Many California cities and districts already have mandatory restrictions in place, like Los Angeles and San Diego. Some involve alternative conservation plans. Others, like the Palm Springs-based Desert Water Agency, have cracked down on outdoor usage by restricting watering during the hottest parts of the day for lawns, as well as commercial nurseries and golf courses. The Desert Water agency’s mandatory measures include:

• Commercial nurseries can only water between midnight and 6 a.m.
• Golf courses, parks and schools can water only between sunset and sunrise.
• Lawn watering and landscape irrigation is prohibited between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m.
• Washing hard surfaces like driveways, parking lots and building exteriors is prohibited at all times.

A complete list of the agency’s drought contingency plan can be found at www.dwa.org.

Large water providers will be required to report to the board on monthly water use.
 

Across the board

Under the state water board’s regulation, all Californians are expected to stop: “washing down driveways and sidewalks; watering of outdoor landscapes that cause excess runoff; using a hose to wash a motor vehicle, unless the hose is fitted with a shut-off nozzle, and using potable water in a fountain or decorative water feature, unless the water is recirculated. According to the resolution, 50 percent or more of daily water use is for lawns and outdoor landscaping in many areas.

The restrictions could save enough water to supply 3.5 million people each year, says Gomberg.

Water users could see fines up to $500 each day requested by local agencies if restrictions aren’t followed. But that’s a maximum fine at the district’s discretion, says Gomberg. More likely, if a district gets a complaint, “they’ll send a letter, send someone out. It depends on their resources.”

“We’re not expecting people to go out and levy $500 fines,” he says.

A water agency out of compliance with the state board’s order could see a penalty of up to $10,000 each day. That would only happen after a district received and refused a cease-and-desist letter from the SWRCB.

The State Water Board will submit the resolution to the state’s Office of Administrative Law for final approval, with an eye to an Aug. 1 effective date. From there, it would remain in effect for 270 days unless extended by the board for continued drought conditions.

“We’re looking at another three-plus months of very dry and warm conditions, and that’s only going to exacerbate the current drought impacts,” says Gomberg.

The new statewide resolution comes after two drought emergency declarations by Brown following three dry or critically dry years. In January, Brown asked all Californians to cut back on water use by 20 percent. In April, he issued an executive order to strengthen the state’s ability to manage drought.

Despite Brown’s requests, water consumption in the state has risen 1 percent this year, according to updates from a recent water-use survey released by the board July 15.