1. WRITING SAMPLE, ORIGINALLY WRITTEN APRIL 2015
The California Water Crisis
California is in the midst of a water crisis. Though drought is typical to the state this
particular event is one of the longest and driest in recent California history. Proper water
management is necessary to ensure that all residents have access to this precious resource. This is
difficult to achieve in a state where drought is the norm. Accordingly, some communities in
California are more vulnerable to the ill effects of water shortages than other communities. Often
large, wealthy urban areas have more resources at their disposal which enable them to have access to
water supplies while other – more rural areas – have no such advantages.
The California State Water Project (SWP) and the Central Valley Project (CVP) both provide
residents of the state with water. These systems draw water from various sources and distribute the
water throughout the state. The SWP delivers water to approximately 70% of the urban areas in
California while the water provided by the CVP goes to farmers in the Central Valley of California.
Both of these systems get water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, a hydrological
confluence that is fed by snowmelt from the Sierras and discharges in the San Francisco Bay.
However, these aren’t the only two sources of water in California. Communities that are not served
by the CVP or the SWP must rely on groundwater and local sources of surface water. Groundwater
makes up 38% of the state’s water supply. However, when surface water sources are exacerbated by
drought, the percentage goes up to 46%. What happens when groundwater sources dry up as well?
The communities that are most deeply impacted by water shortages due to drought are
usually small, isolated, and can be found in counties from Northern Central California to Southern
California. Often these are small towns where the municipal water suppliers are not able to raise
prices in order buy adequate water supplies. They simply do not have enough customers. In order to
ensure that residents in these areas have access to clean water, the state has had to intervene by
trucking in water using money from the emergency drought fund. This type of solution provides
people with water in the short term but does nothing to address the larger issue. These areas usually
require millions of dollars of upgrades in infrastructure in order to provide a reliable source of water
to its residents.
Rural agricultural areas also experience the brunt of water shortages. This is due to a
combination of unreliable water deliveries during times of drought and over drafting wells to

2. WRITING SAMPLE, ORIGINALLY WRITTEN APRIL 2015
compensate for the lack of water. Farmers in the Central Valley produces one fourth of the nation’s
fruits and vegetables. It is also one of the area’s that is most at risk during drought as it holds 75% of
all irrigated land in California. The situation is similar in Imperial Valley of southern California
where most of the country’s winter vegetables are produced. The farmers there receive their water
from the Imperial dam which gets its water from the Colorado River. As drought conditions
continue, water from the Imperial dam has become less and less reliable. This has caused tension
between agricultural and urban water needs with each side insisting they need water the most. The
state has taken some steps to make sure that all communities have a reliable source of water.
In order to ensure that everyone in California has access to clean and reliable water
Governor Jerry Brown signed the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). A draft of
this new piece of legislation was released by the Department of Water Resources (DWR) in March
2015. The purpose of SGMA is to create responsible and equitable groundwater management in a
way that includes community members and policy makers. It recognizes that water management is
most effective and equitable when it takes place at the local level. Local entities in the water basins
established by the DWR must form sustainable groundwater management agencies by June 30, 2017.
By 2020 these agencies must adopt new water management plans. This is a revolutionary
development in groundwater management because it grants local agencies oversight to decisions
regarding water resources. The State Water Resources Board Control Board will have the power to
intervene if water management plans are not met or are insufficient. Additionally, this legislation will
have long term effects into the future and will hopefully establish a precedent of responsible water
management in rural and urban areas alike. Whether or not this will be a successful or effective way
to manage groundwater remains to be seen.
One of Gov. Brown’s strategies to improve reliable water access is the construction of two
large, underground tunnels meant to conduct fresh water from the Sacramento River. The water
pumps will provide water for the Central Valley Project and the State Water Project. This $25 billion
plan is a departure from original Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP). Previously, the BDCP
included a portion of funds – about $8 billion – that was to be used specifically for habitat
restoration. The habitat restoration plan was intended to be a part of a long term fifty year plan. The
San Francisco Bay Delta contains the largest expanse of wetland habitat in the west coast. It relies
on fresh water that comes from snowmelt in the Sierras that fills the Sacramento River each spring.
This water is necessary to for the maintenance of the ecosystem in the Delta.

3. WRITING SAMPLE, ORIGINALLY WRITTEN APRIL 2015
The SWP and the CVP already diverts water from the delta through a series of aboveground
pumps. The water is then conveyed south throughout the state by the California Aqueduct and the
Delta-Mendota Canal. Water for San Francisco is taken up by the Contra Costa Canal and the North
Bay Aqueduct. The proposed tunnels would access the fresh water directly from the Sacramento
River rather than draw the water across the delta and deliver it to communities that receive water
from the SWP and the CVP. They would not withdraw more water than is already diverted by the
original system. The tunnels would also allow safe fish passage for Chinook salmon, a protected
species, and the Delta Smelt, an indicator species for the health of the Delta.
This plan has been heavily scrutinized by environmental groups and federal agencies alike.
The main concern is the ecological health of the Delta. The current diversion of freshwater from the
Delta has already put a strain on aquatic species. The environmental group, Friends of the River
Foundation (FRF), has written about the shortcomings of the plan from a conservation perspective.
Their opinion on the issue echoes the sentiments of many groups opposed to the construction of
the tunnels. The FRF has noted that there have been no studies conducted determine how much
water is needed to keep the Delta fully functioning. They feel there has been no fair scientific
analysis on how much environmental change these tunnels might cause. There is also the fear that
conservation of the Delta will fall to the wayside to allow for the construction of the tunnels. This
project could cause unexpected environmental changes. Another criticism of the proposed tunnel
system is the fact that it cannot guarantee the safe passage of fish runs to the San Francisco Bay.
This may become a problem if the health of the protected fish species were threatened by the
tunnels. Water agencies would still have to pay for access to the water supply without the guarantee
of water availability. This could cause billions of dollars of debt for participating water agencies and
their customers.
Is Gov. Brown’s Delta tunnel plan a viable solution the drought that has wracked the state of
California? The proposed tunnels will provide a reliable water source to various counties throughout
Central and Southern California. With that in mind, the biggest question that remains is “reliable
water for whom?” The water that would be diverted by these tunnels would only provide water to
areas that already receive water from the Delta. This says nothing of how small isolated communities
will obtain a reliable water supply if they don’t already receive water from the Delta. The proposed
tunnel plan is not a particularly inclusive solution to the water shortage problem. Moreover, this plan
focuses on creating reliable water access and does not focus on how this water will be used.

4. WRITING SAMPLE, ORIGINALLY WRITTEN APRIL 2015
Responsible and economical use of this water is just as important how reliable access is. While the
proposed tunnels may address some issues raised by the drought, it does not address the issue of
responsible use.