California Targets Private Property With Latest Water Well Fees, Charges: Report

[fatjay]

Imagine being charged to pump water from your own well.

California Targets Private Property With Latest Water Well Fees, Charges: Report | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

California is siccing its Environmental Protection Agency on property owners who have private water wells on their land and making them pay based on how much water volume they use, according to a new report.

California Globe reported Wednesday that an anonymous tipster produced a letter signed by Natalie Stork, identified as chief of groundwater management program unit 1. The letter advised the San Diego-area resident that they would have to report the volume of well water they used and pay a fee per acre foot of groundwater extracted starting in February 2023.

The letter was on the official letterhead of California Water Boards and was sent under the authority of Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA) and Secretary for Environmental Protection Jared Blumenfeld.

“They’re sending out letters to property owners saying they must declare [if] they use just two acre feet,” the source told The California Globe. “If they use more, they must pay an annual fee of $300 for each well plus they must meter the water and send in a monthly usage report and pay a fee for water that is pumped starting in Feb 2023.”

“What a great racket!” the California resident added. “The government provides no service, no support, no product, doesn’t even do the billing! That’s all on citizens. All [the government does] is cash the check.”

“In addition to pumping volumes, reports must include the location of the well and the place and purpose of use of the groundwater. Groundwater extraction reports are not due to the state water board until February 1, 2023,” the letter added. “However, if you are required to report, the report must include pumping volumes for each month between the date of receipt of this letter and September 30, 2022.”

The letters came in the midst of a record drought and as local governments in California are also ramping up tactics to force residents to consume less water.

In Los Angeles, the Department of Water and Power team has created a team called the Water Conservation Response Unit (Water CRU). There is currently an ordinance in L.A. that limits how and when L.A. residents can water their property. The ordinance also says “any water use resulting in excess or continuous water flow or runoff onto adjoining sidewalks, driveways, streets, gutters, or ditches is always prohibited.” The unit goes around looking for pools of water on property and then determines whether or not the body of water could be in violation of the law.

 

[Rebeldad1]

There has been talk about this for the past few years. sofar nothing in stone. It would be quite a undertaking to convince everybody to install meters and report usage.

 

[Oaktree]

Seems like it would be pretty hard to enforce.

 

[fatjay]

Seems like it would be pretty hard to enforce.

The city could assume that if you aren't paying a water utility, you have a well. So it would be pretty easy to determine who has one to begin with.

 

[turnkey4099]

Seems like it would be pretty hard to enforce.

Big farms with lots of acres could hide a well or more but a residence? Not a chance. Enforcer just comes by and demands to see your meter.

Somewhere aound 30 years or so ago, Washington sate propsed to do that. It got shot down before it even got off the ground.

 

[Ken45101]

Here in southern Ohio, cisterns are probably more common than wells. The cisterns are supplied either by rainwater from home gutters or commercial water haulers who bring in water. My house here has two large cisterns although we now are supplied by a private county water system.

As for saying that the state has no right to tax people's private wells, remember, those wells are tapped into underground aquafers that are often very large so someone pumping high volumes is taking water from under neighbor's land. Two acre feet is a lot of water, about 60,000 gallons per month. We only use 2500-5000 gallons a month with most of the variation going to watering our seven horses, So anyone using more than 2 a/f of water is probably a commercial operation, likely taking water from beyond their own land.

As I understand it, southern California has a major water resource problem so trying to limit excess use sounds reasonable to me, something rare for California politics ;-)

Ken

 

[Doofy]

Wow! just Wow! It is no wonder why their Residents are cashing out and leaving in droves! I would too!

 

[ponytug]

I don't know if that report is real or not, but California law has for some time required groundwater management, and reporting. The original report is here;

Cal EPA Asserts Shockingly Broad Domain Over Private Property - California Globe

California is marching toward a world where those with wells on their own property will be required to put a meter on them and pay the government.

californiaglobe.com

and includes the letter, that specifically exempts private wells using less than two acre feet of water per year. That is 651,703 gallons per year.
Currently, the reporting requirement is aimed at large farms and orchards. California is coming to grips with the fact that ground water reserves are not unlimited water sources, and need to be managed for the long term.

Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA)

In 2014, Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. signed three bills known collectively as the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) . For the first time in its history, California had a framework for sustainable, groundwater management - “management and use of groundwater in a manner that can be...

water.ca.gov

This was signed into law in 2014. Not exactly news to Californians.

Other parts of the country face similar issues, and in a few areas, e.g, Ogalla aquifer, which has undergone a 9% loss since 1950, with an estimated recharge time of 640 years. Some water is in sealed aquifers and is truly fossil water.

All the best, Peter

 

[paulfun9]

Wow! just Wow! It is no wonder why their Residents are cashing out and leaving in droves! I would too!

I have been watching California politics since my first relative, sold out and moved back here. What I don’t understand is why more haven’t already left?

Janet

 

[Jstpssng]

In many places on the east coast companies are pumping water out of the ground by the tankerful, hauling it to processing stations, bottling and selling it. They pay little or nothing for the privelege.

 

[repete]

Big farms with lots of acres could hide a well or more but a residence? Not a chance. Enforcer just comes by and demands to see your meter.

Somewhere aound 30 years or so ago, Washington sate propsed to do that. It got shot down before it even got off the ground.

It has always been out there looking for an opportunity to make it law in Washington. It is not your water, it belongs to the state unless it floods and then it is not the state's water.

 

[Egon]

It may be the water rights have long ago been claimed. It will go as far as roof runoff water usage.

It’ll date back to the start of major irrigation. It also covers much more area tha one realizes. Like all of the Us and Canada.

 

[Jstpssng]

It may be the water rights have long ago been claimed. It will go as far as roof runoff water usage.

It’ll date back to the start of major irrigation.

That's something we don't understand on the east coast. Whoever pumps it first gets to use it. We also don't have the reserve shortages which they do out west.

 

[npalen]

Here in southern Ohio, cisterns are probably more common than wells. The cisterns are supplied either by rainwater from home gutters or commercial water haulers who bring in water. My house here has two large cisterns although we now are supplied by a private county water system.

As for saying that the state has no right to tax people's private wells, remember, those wells are tapped into underground aquafers that are often very large so someone pumping high volumes is taking water from under neighbor's land. Two acre feet is a lot of water, 28,000 gallons pr month. We only use 2500-5000 gallons a month with most of the variation going to watering our seven horses, So anyone using more than 2 a/f of water is probably a commercial operation, likely taking water from beyond their own land.

As I understand it, southern California has a major water resource problem so trying to limit excess use sounds reasonable to me, something rare for California politics ;-)

Ken

Wouldn't two acre feet of water equate to about 650,000 gallons or about 54,000 per month?

 

[npalen]

About every home in my neighborhood has a well for lawn irrigation. Some homeowners abuse it by watering their lawns on the same schedule regardless of rainfall. We see sprinklers running the day after a substantial rain. I doubt that many of them have any idea how much water they are pumping per week.

Edit: I grew up on a farm where we had to haul water for domestic and livestock use. It bothers me to see it wasted regardless of supply.

 

[Ken45101]

Wouldn't two acre feet of water equate to about 650,000 gallons or about 54,000 per month?

Oops! I calculated ONE acre foot, not two. Thanks for the catch.

(I will correct my original post.)

 

[ultrarunner]

I have been watching California politics since my first relative, sold out and moved back here. What I don’t understand is why more haven’t already left?

Janet

Reasons vary but for many family and business ties often lead and then there is the climate and natural beauty...

I've looked around some and California, Oregon and Washington seem to have a lot in common.

Spoke to a business owner that has a very good business, beautiful home and family that packed it all up collectively for Tennessee 5 years ago and they say regrets are few and they should have moved sooner in hindsight.

I think the limit on annual property tax increases keeps some here too... can be significant over the years.

 

[stuckmotor]

It would take a mighty powerful incentive to make me live in s place famous for catching fire every year that comes.

 

[ultrarunner]

That would cover most of the West and South

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/interactive/2022/wildfire-risk-map-us/

 

[fatjay]

It would take a mighty powerful incentive to make me live in s place famous for catching fire every year that comes.

http://whereiscaliforniaonfire.com/

I've checked fairly frequently, year round, and have never seen there be no fires.