Waterlogged boundaries, the case for bioregionalism, and its unfortunate demise

Fording a river, Grouse mountain, British Columbia, Summer 2021

If you’ve ever been in the Pacific Northwest, you've seen the local “uniform.” Amongst the water-resistant (nothing is waterproof!) Carhartt pants, flat-billed trucker hats, and colourful spectrum of flannels, there is a waterproof jacket in the armoury. This jacket must have a hood so that you do not need an umbrella, a sin that only a tourist would make.

A bad idea, Squamish mountain, British Columbia, Spring 2022

The jacket is necessary because in the wet winter months, any person caught on the scenic trails of Squamish (known for the Chief, one of the largest granite domes in the world) would think that Noah’s flood was upon him, that the sun would never reappear, and that rain has so consumed reality that any imagination of the world can only find a cloudy mist covering a canopy of pine trees. In short, the water cycle of the PNW calls for the jacket.

In contrast, in a place like the Central Valley, deciding how to dress requires taking into account the overhead sun and the dust. Therein lies the non-ironic donning of cowboy hats and boots respectively (A recent blog post about western apparel is here). Continue further east on the Interstate 70 past the plains and the Mississippi river and you will find the habit of tucking long sleeve shirts into pants, which are then tucked into socks, a necessity in the tick laden bushes of Appalachia. (A study from Nebraska Medicine about the migration of tick populations west).

Each of these clothing outfits make sense in the place where they are adopted. Sartorial culture reflects the ecosystem hydrological and biological of the region where people live. This understanding is one key tenet of bioregionalism. Bioregionalism (defined by one non-profit here) is a philosophy which holds that political systems should reflect naturally definable, local regions rather than artificial political boundaries. (Read more about this philosophy as taught by a Bay Area theatre here). Bioregions are drawn by the natural lines drawn by watershed boundaries, topography, as well as the socio-cultural human histories of the area.

10% water capacity, Lake Hensley, California, 2025

Bioregionalists seek several core goals: including matching political boundaries with the aforementioned bioregions; prioritizing the usage of local resources and materials; and building regional sustainability and supply chains rather than global ones. This local focus benefits the making of policy that is suited to local ecological needs, rather than the difficulty of federal or state systems that cannot possibly take account of all local conditions and ecosystems. (Read more about federal funding to rural water systems here)

Current political divisions force rural and urban communities into statewide policy frameworks that, through competing interests and compromise, can poorly fit all. Agricultural water use in arid basins is legislated alongside, and often in, coastal zones where the flow of rivers can power 98% of electrical grids (read more about BC Hydro here). Or consider the current issue of the banning of or restriction of gasoline vehicles being impractical in rural regions that remain dependent on generators and gasoline vehicles (read more here).

Currently, the rural-urban divide is often framed within a structural power antagonism, where cosmopolitan elites- with vastly greater urban resources- intrude on traditional rural communities. The physical distance between these two groups sharpens these perceived differences. These urban elites live far from rural denizens, often in ecosystems that are vastly different. Consider the common epithet, “coastal elite.” (Read more about water disagreements between the rural and the urban here and here).

As the reasoning goes, how could someone in the Bay understand the water struggles of the Central Valley? A bioregionalist approach would instead link governance between metropolitan and rural communities wherever and whenever they are linked by watersheds and water cycles requiring literal downstream cooperation.

Of course, bioregionalism is not without flaws. Even from this brief inventory of bioregions, readers will see issues with assuming histories and shared interests in fluid boundaries that are anachronistic, ambiguous, and would be contentious and complex to draw. Land-based identity idealizes lives that are pre-urbanization, occasionally even pre-industrialization, and is often isolationist and exclusionary of any political change as a result.

In a globalized economy, high technology requires supply chains that cannot be localized efficiently, or at all. Anything that would require national coordination (national defense, macroeconomic policy, large scale infrastructure projects) would be difficult if not impossible under bioregional governance. Of course, there is also the potential of extreme inequality between natural resource-rich and natural resource-poor regions. Without national redistribution and the needs of national and global economy, spatial inequality would be all but guaranteed.

I finish with a point about Cascadia, the former bioregionalist movement stronghold within the PNW that spanned from Juneau, Alaska to San Francisco. Prior to the 47th American president, most money spent within Cascadia, (defined here, as in my heart, as Oregon, Washington, British Columbia), remained within Cascadia. Now with rising tensions between the United States and Canada, this seemingly unbreakable cross-border relationship is strained by the Canadians' general boycott of American goods (read more). Alas, the Cascadian identity, nascent if it ever truly existed, has yielded to national lines for now.

Superbloom, California, 2017

The extinction of mermaids

Photo Credit: UNxArtPartner Create COP25 Haenyeo 2019

Emerald sequins bathed in refracting light. Lavender velvet crushed beneath loose limbs. Shimmering turquoise dappled with the tacky remnants of a cherry ice pop. These were the qualities that sketched the lines of one of my most treasured childhood possessions: a swimsuit, inspired by the 1989 film, "The Little Mermaid." 

In a plastic pool in late 90s, Castro Valley, California, I would spend hours baking under the gaze of an overzealous sun, grieving the mythos of creatures that existed only in daydreams. However, nearly six thousand miles away, on the Island of Jeju, mermaids were very much a reality. 

Photo Credit: UNxArtPartner Create COP25 Haenyeo 2019

The sea women

Evidence of female free divers, or haenyeos (Korean:해녀), first appears in literature dating to the 17th Century. What began as a solely male-dominated field soon shifted into one of the quintessential representations of semi-matriarchal family structure in Asia. To become a haenyeo, women must join a fishing village cooperative, requiring the agreement of other members. Diving rights are often passed on from elderly haenyeo to their daughters and daughters-in-law. 

Diving barehanded, clad in simple cotton mulsojungi, without oxygen tanks or other technological adornments, these women routinely plunge their bodies into the gelid waters off the southernmost coast of the Korean peninsula. For seven hours a day, 90 days a year, haenyeo dive up to 20 meters below the surface to harvest marine resources, including abalone, other mollusks, octopi, sea urchin, seaweed, turban shells, and other shellfish for their families and the community. According to Kim Hoo-ran of The Korean Herald, the spirit of the haenyeo is communal, "The women seek equitable distribution of their harvest, giving away part of their catch to a diver who has a poor catch. Such favors are always returned by the recipient."

As Dr. Miyoung Kim of Ewha Women's University notes, the lifestyle is not without its dangers:

These divers are [also] exposed to decompression sickness because they perform breath-hold dives, and these dives can cause neurological problems, such as muscle weakness and dysthesia, as well as other symptoms, such as vertigo, dizziness, and nausea. In addition, increases in intraocular pressure while diving damage the optic nerves and lead to headaches. Among this group, 83.5% take analgesics and antihistamines during work to prevent the headaches and earaches that occur due to diving, and they often take more than the recommended doses; thus, drug overdose is a serious problem. 

Photo Credit: Blog Duam 

Translating the currents

The adversities, however, are paired with marvels. According to a new study in Cell Reports, generations of diving has literally altered the genetics of divers and their children, passing down a series of psychological adaptations allowing them to dive more safely. Dr. Melissa Lardo and her team observed that:

Haenyeo's heart rates drop[ped] about 50 percent more during simulated dives compared with other groups, which helps them hold their breath longer by limiting oxygen that the body needs and reducing the work the heart needs and reducing the work the heart needs to do...This blood pressure genetic variant can protect the haenyeo as they dive while pregnant-typically, pregnant haenyeo will dive up until the day they give birth, says Ilardo. Researchers suggest this lower blood pressure genetic variant could protect against complications like preeclampsia, a health risk for pregnant women that can be exacerbated by diving. 

Centuries of diving has not only changed the anatomy of these women's bodies; it has embedded in them, what Dr. Samantha Chisolm Hatfield calls Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK). 

TEK "specifically relates to the environment in a given traditional homeland of Indigenous groups and/or Usual and Accustomed areas. This may include but is not limited to: botany knowledge, medicinal application (collection and/or administration), hunting, fishing, gathering, processing of materials(s), caretaking such as burning, coppicing, thinning, astronomy, phenology, time, ecological markers, species markers, weather, and climate knowledge."

In a paper published in the Journal of Marine Island Cultures, Hatfield and Dr. Sung-Hee Kong interviewed haenyeo and concluded that they have highly developed environmental acuity, a unique ability to read environments and document information on environmental changes. This is particularly vital as the collection of resources has steadily declined, and sustainability efforts are necessary to mitigate the ravages of climate change. 

Photo Credit: Bernard Gagnon

The ebbing tide 

After thousands of years, the mermaids of Jeju face extinction. According to Katie Hunt of CNN Science "The practice is dying out. Young women are no longer continuing this matrilineal tradition; the current group of haenyeo divers, with an average age of around 70 years years may represent the last generation." The recalibrated values of a modern Korea are looking increasingly incompatible with this practice, threatening to erase the women of Jeju and their stewardship of the peninsula's marine ecology. 

Without haenyeo governance, author Taeyoung Kim expresses concerns that the combination of non-traditional extraction methods and capitalism-driven development will irreparably damage rural Jeju:

“Rapid economic progress [has] led to the exploitation of working class, women, and rural areas to reinforce the progress of national economic development. This action was justified as a means for "nation building", which led to severe repercussions to the natural habitat in Jeju marine ecosystem…External capital inflow extracted profits by expropriating Jeju people's land, resources and communal assets, which is a common mechanism used by traditional colonial extractive industries.”

Photo Credit: Peter Chanovec

A coruscation of hope

However, as in all fairy tales, the hope of happy ending remains. In 2016, the haenyeo were included on the UNESCO List of Intangible Cultural Heritage and just this month, haenyeo was added to the Oxford English Dictionary, which many hope will raise awareness for this vanishing way of life. Furthermore, although the population continues to dwindle, younger generations are beginning to answer the haenyeo's siren song. Together, these factors may protect the last of the mermaids. 

Right to water? Not for California's rural residents.

In 2012, California passed AB 685, becoming the first state to recognize the human right to water. Despite this, as of 2024, more than 900,000 California residents get water from water systems that fail to provide them with safe, clean drinking water. 

In 2024, the California State Water Resources Control Board published data showing that 379 of the 457 failing water systems were small water systems with 3,000 or less service connections (often translating to households), mostly located in California's rural agricultural regions in the Central Coast or San Joaquin Valley. Most of these systems rely on groundwater, which may be contaminated with arsenic, nitrate, or 1,2,3-TCP (trichloropropane).

This map shows all of the failing water systems in California that serve a population of less than 5,000. Credit: SAFER Dashboard

San Lucas is a small unincorporated rural community in the Salinas Valley with a population of 324. San Lucas has been under a 'do not drink' order for over 10 years because of elevated levels of nitrate in their water supply. The community's wells are located on nearby farmland, where nitrate from crop fertilizer leeches into the groundwater that the well ultimately pulls from. Nitrate consumption has been linked to cancers and pregnancy complications, including "blue baby syndrome." The California Department of Public Health has told San Lucas residents that because nitrate is not absorbed through the skin, babies can be bathed in contaminated water. But most residents choose to use bottled water for bathing, or at least rinsing, young children because of skin irritation they experience.

San Lucas residents are incredibly burdened by the lack of access to clean drinking water. The state provides households with 15 gallons of water per week, but for most families these 15 gallons do not meet their household's needs. Imagine being a family of five or six, having to allocate 15 gallons among your family for drinking, cooking, and sometimes even bathing. To supplement the small amount of water given to them, residents drive to King City (10 miles away) to buy bottled water. Still the must pay a flat rate water bill for unsafe water. 

Allotment of water jugs. Credit: Ray Chavez

California has attempted to address this problem through the creation of the Safe and Affordable Funding for Equity and Resilience Program (SAFER). Established in 2019, SAFER allocates $130 million each year to provide a funding source for operation and maintenance costs, consolidation projects, replacement water, and funding for administrators. Since in creation, SAFER has provided $700 million in grants for small, disadvantaged communities in California. While SAFER was originally set to end in 2030, in 2025 the California legislature extended the yearly allocation of funds to 2045.

San Lucas has spent years trying to solve their water problem. The community has received a little over half a million dollars in technical assistance funding from the SAFER program. This money has funded a study of solutions, with alternatives including an 8 mile pipeline to King City, two different well-head treatment systems, or drilling a new well. 

In June of 2025, the San Lucas County Water District (the small company providing water to San Lucas) voted to pursue alternative four: drill a new well. But drilling a new well comes with its own uncertainties. 

As Paul Hamann previously discussed on this blog, many rural landowners of private domestic wells are facing the problem of wells drying up due to over-pumping. Private domestic wells provide water to between 1.5 and 2.5 million California residents, but are not regulated by the state. If you own a private domestic well, you are responsible for testing for contaminants to ensure that it is safe to drink. 

While any new well drilled by San Lucas would still be a part of a water system regulated by the state, they undoubtedly will face the same uncertainties of ensuring that their well does not run dry. Seemingly even more pressing, how can San Lucas ensure that their new well does not face the same fate as the current wells? Surrounded by agricultural land, it seems like a tall task to find a location to drill a new well safe from nitrate contamination. 

Whatever path San Lucas takes, there is no doubt that many communities need clean drinking water. Indeed, they needed it ten years ago. While the State Water Board may tout that 98% of California's have clean drinking water, we must not neglect the other 2% because of their location in rural areas. 

Big tech sets its sights on rural Arizona

The blog’s most recent post discussed the Rural Health Transformation Program. Passed as part of Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill,” this “rural slush fund” was added as a last-minute sweetener to secure the support of Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski.

One of the $50 billion fund’s stated goals is “tech innovation.” States utilizing the funds must spend them on three or more approved uses, including:

Providing training and technical assistance for the development and adoption of technology-enabled solutions that improve care delivery in rural hospitals, including remote monitoring, robotics, artificial intelligence, and other advanced technologies.

This sounds promising. Rural hospitals face unique challenges, and technology that improves care and increases capacity could be transformative. An earlier post on this blog discussed how RFK Jr. has promoted AI nurses as a potential solution to the rural health care crisis. That optimistic vision contrasts sharply with how artificial intelligence is currently arriving in many rural areas.

In December 2025, Sharon Goldman reported for Fortune on a massive AI data center project planned for rural Arizona. The development would be built on a 2,000-acre property called Hassayampa Ranch, located about 50 miles west of Phoenix near the unincorporated community of Tonopah in western Maricopa County. The area is home to a few hundred residents, drawn there for its tranquility and clear skies for stargazing.

Photo caption: Buckeye Ranch, Tonopah. © Nextdoor

This quiet corner of the desert has become the center of intense activity since developer Anita Verma-Lallian purchased the land for $51 million, backed by billionaire venture capitalist and Trump mega-donor Chamath Palihapitiya. The plan is to spend as much as $25 billion to build a data center that would produce 1.5 gigawatts of compute and consume as much electricity as a million homes.

Photo caption: Visualization of the land parcel. © Jason Ma, 2025

Investment in rural communities sounds exciting, but who benefits? As Andrew Aitken noted in The Builder Bureau, AI is largely being developed for and used by urban populations, while rural people continue to struggle with poor network coverage and slow internet speeds. So while it remains unclear whether Tonopah will reap any benefits from hosting AI infrastructure, residents are already bearing the costs.

This pattern echoes concerns raised in prior entries on this blog. A May 2024 post discussed how rural folks in Montana are resisting efforts to make their land a “carbon sponge” for urban America. As one county commissioner put it:

The question I keep hearing is, ‘Why are they making us the dumping ground for the rest of the country?’

A similar dynamic is at play in Tonopah, with rural Arizona poised to bear the environmental burden of infrastructure that primarily serves urban tech consumers.

In her Fortune article, Goldman explains that Tonopah residents are already worried about incoming noise and light pollution, traffic and infrastructure strain, and negative impacts on property values. Concerned community members have organized and signed petitions against the development. But with such a small population, their political power is limited against billionaire-backed interests. As Kathy Fletcher, a 76-year-old resident who lives on a one-acre plot next to the Hassayampa Ranch site, said:

All we can do is plead with the people here... We’re kind of treated like the redheaded stepchild, and they just think they can throw anything they want out here... We’re having a difficult time fighting the battle to tell people, ‘You can make a difference.’

Another major concern is water. AI data centers generate vast amounts of heat and require millions of gallons of water per day for cooling. According to the Environmental and Energy Study Institute, a medium-sized data center can consume up to 110 million gallons of water per year—equivalent to the annual water usage of approximately 1,000 households. Larger data centers can use up to 5 million gallons per day. For the people of Tonopah, who rely almost exclusively on ground wells for their water needs, the prospect of a massive development tapping into their water supply is daunting.

As Dillon Beckett wrote on this blog, utility-scale projects are “overwhelmingly sited in rural areas” and tend to “benefit a sliver of the community’s social strata (wealthy, often absentee landowners, with extensive real estate holdings) while spreading the cost across the entire community.” The Hassayampa Ranch data center fits this pattern: Silicon Valley investors stand to profit, while local residents face rising utility costs, depleted aquifers, and a transformed landscape.

Tonya Pearsall, a Tonopah resident who has lived in the area since 1999, feels a profound sense of loss as this project rapidly changes the character of her once-calm community:

We used to be able to see the Milky Way—that’s why we moved out here... It’s painful... I could break down and cry.

Photo caption: The night sky over Maricopa County. © David Iversen, 2025.

There is some movement in Congress to address these concerns. Representative Jim Costa (D-CA) has introduced the Unleashing Low-Cost Rural AI Act, which would require the Departments of Agriculture, Interior, and Energy to study the impact of AI data center expansion on rural areas, including effects on energy supply, consumer costs, and infrastructure needs. Whether such a study will lead to meaningful protections for communities like Tonopah remains to be seen.

The Hassayampa Ranch project is not unique. Similar fights are playing out in Louisiana, Wisconsin, and Georgia, where rural residents are pushing back against data center proposals that promise economic development but threaten local resources and quality of life.

As AI continues its rapid expansion, rural communities across the country will increasingly find themselves on the front lines of a familiar struggle: who decides what happens to rural land, and who bears the cost of progress?

NYT feature on the consequences of California redistricting on rural northstate

Kellen Browning reports for the New York Times under the headline, "They Wanted a Conservative State. They Might Get a Democratic Representative Instead."  The story is a richly textured look at how the residents of far northern California feel about the November passage of Proposition 50, which adopted new congressional districts that will temporarily override the decisions of the state's independent redistricting.  As I've written about previously here, here, here and here, this means residents of the current District 1, an inland district stretching from Butte County, about 80 miles north of Sacramento, all the way to the Oregon state line, are likely to be represented by a Democrat after the 2026 midterm elections.  This is because parts of current District 1 will be combined with a strip of coastal wine country stretching down into Marin County, just north of San Francisco.   The current 1st District is shown in lavender in the map below.  Much of it will be subsumed into a new 2d District, outlined by the dotted orange line. 

Source: We Draw the Lines California, California Legislature
Credits: Jeremia Kimelman, CalMatters

Excerpts from Browning's story follow.  Some highlight rural-urban difference and others highlight the feelings of rural voters in California' north state.  

For decades, residents in the rural north have longed for a political earthquake that would cleave their region out of California and allow them to create their own fabled “State of Jefferson” with conservatives in Southern Oregon. They have increasingly felt underappreciated and misunderstood by the liberal Democrats who run California and dominate the congressional delegation — who, in their telling, siphon away their water and prioritize environmental regulations that undercut farmers’ livelihoods.

Now, they not only lack a conservative State of Jefferson, but their entire region is also likely to lose its Republican congressman and have him replaced by a Democrat after next year’s midterm elections. 

“People in the cities don’t have a clue what it takes to survive out here,” said Terry Williams, a 75-year-old rice and walnut farmer who moved to Richvale in 1974. “I don’t think people that were born and raised in the cities can represent us to the same extent.”

Here's a quote from Gene Lifur, a 52-year-old from Orland, population 8,2998, which claims to be the "Queen Bee Capital" of North America for its role in raising the pollinators:  

There was definitely a feeling of throwing up your hands.  You’re going to lose a lot of the interest for voting in the North State.

Another resident, DaNell Millerburg, 62, who manages the Richvale Cafe, "said the idea of her small town being represented by someone from the Bay Area was 'scary.' ...'They want to save the opossums and the beavers and the snakes.  But it’s not good for the farmers, because those animals dig holes in their ditches.'"

Browning meet many of those he interviewed at the cafe, "a nonprofit kept afloat by locals, who wanted to ensure that the area’s solitary farmers had a place to meet."  Richvale, population 234, is the home of current District 1 Congressperson Doug LaMalfa who asserted, "I understand people here far better than a Bay Area interloper."

Rural residents, Mr. LaMalfa said, grew crops enjoyed by California’s cities but were scorned by those living in cities. He said that Democrats were passing expensive pollution regulations, tearing down crucial dams in the name of protecting salmon populations and introducing wolf packs that attacked their herds. Proposition 50 was the latest affront.

“Their voice is being silenced on how they feel about the issues here, because Newsom and the three-to-one ratio of Democrats wanted to see if they could steal five seats,” Mr. LaMalfa said of the governor and state lawmakers.

* * *

“I’m furious,” [LaMalfa] added, “because I’ve had my people kidnapped from me.”

* * *

The Democrats running against Mr. LaMalfa agreed that rural Californians have been neglected by many in their party. But they also argued that Republicans like Mr. LaMalfa have hurt farmers and agrarian communities with their policies.

Those Democrats include Mike McGuire of Geyserville, in Sonoma County, who until recently was president pro tem of the California Senate, and Audrey Denney, who grew up on a coastal cattle farm but has lived and worked for 20 years in Chico, a college town in the same county (Butte) as Richvale.  Denney has already run twice, unsuccessfully, against LaMalfa.  McGuire's California Senate district stretches from Sonoma County all the way to the Oregon state line, but hugs the coast, a more progressive region.  I have observed over the years that he takes the needs of his region's very rural reaches very seriously.  Read about that here and here.  Denney will presumably vie to represent the new 1st District, and McGuire will seek to represent the new 2d District.  

I'll close with this quote from another resident, Chris Culp, 62, a retired Navy officer, who Browning found at the Last Stand Bar and Grill:  

Somebody from Santa Rosa, Oakland, they’re not going to understand, and honestly I don’t think they’re going to take the time to get educated about what’s going on up here.  We’ve got different needs than the people in the dense cities and the coast.

Other posts highlighting the different needs of rural and urban California and long-standing agitation related to the would-be State of Jefferson are here.   

Waste of water: opening dams to fight fires that are already under control

The United States Army Corps of Engineers is a government agency which falls under the purview the President of the United States in his capacity as Commander in Chief. On January 31st President Donald Trump ordered the Army Corps of Engineers to open two dams in California, emptying around two billion gallons of water from the Lake Kaweah and Lake Success reservoirs. Both reservoirs are located in the central valley, specifically Tulare County.

President Trump allegedly ordered the opening of the dams in order to provide additional water to assist with the fires in Los Angeles (though the fires had been contained at this point and the water sources were 200 miles south, more on that here.) In a departure from usual practice, the action was undertaken with little coordination between federal and local officials.

Usually, the water in those reservoirs is slowly released during summer for farmers in the central valley to use as the heat picks up. This is important as less surface water has been available to farmers in recent years due to lower storage levels and the implementation of water right limits meant to protect the environment and other use.  As a result, local officials, water activists, and farmers have expressed some concern, noting that the water would have been more useful if saved for the summer. 

 "'These kinds of shenanigans, they hurt smaller farmers,' said Dezaraye Bagalayos, a local water activist. Small growers have already been struggling, and the release of water from the dams means they will have less when they need it, Bagalayos said." 

Bagalayos also expressed concern over individuals who are uninformed of the local situation calling shots that impact the local communities.

However, others have noted that one significant benefit of the decision to open the dams is that the released water will go towards replenishing ground water reserves (another blog post on groundwater supply issues here). 

Only time will reveal the true impact of the unilateral decision. However, regardless of its actual impact, it provides a good opportunity to reflect on some important considerations.

First, the decisions seems to underscore the way the government and people assign value to urban and rural areas relative to each other. Immediately following the start of the Los Angeles fires, people were quick to pit rural and urban interests against each other with regards to the allocation of fire fighting resources. The unilateral action by the President, whatever his true intentions were, sacrificed a rural resource to supposedly help an urban area. 

Secondly, it highlights the staunch support Trump has garnered from rural communities by appealing to the issues they face. Even though the water was wasted on an urban problem that was under control at the time, some farmers in the area still had good things to say about the decision, praising the "trigger pulling attitude" and "just getting stuff done." Vince Fong, the congressman for the district affected by the water dump, stated that he was excited to have a president that was "engaged in California water policy and maximizing the coordination of systems."

Last, it highlights the importance of seeking out local insight before utilizing local resources. While rural problems are often discussed through a lens of neglect, citing a lack of government support, it is also apparent that ill-informed and rash government action has the potential to greatly damage rural communities. 

As domestic water wells run dry in California, many rural individuals cannot afford to drill another one

Access to water is becoming more of a challenge in California, especially for rural communities in the Central Valley. Many rural families across California get water from domestic wells that tap into groundwater, but some of these wells are drying up due in part to climate change and the overconsumption of groundwater resources. This sets the stage for many political and legal battles across California.

Many households across California are not connected or do not have access to municipal water or sewer services. My family was one of them. 

When my family and I lived in Mount Shasta, California, we had a domestic water well that sat about ten yards from the house. When my parents began to have problems with the well, a pump company we paid to investigate the problem told us the well was dry. The only solution was to hire a drilling company to drill a new domestic water well.

My parents soon discovered that there were only nine drillers licensed to drill domestic water wells in all of Siskiyou County. All were booked out for months due to the high demand for water wells in Siskiyou County. In the meantime, my parents bought a 1,000-gallon water tank and would have potable water trucked in every two weeks.

After two months, the well-drilling company called with an opening for the next week. My parents promptly said yes, but the cost was beyond what anyone anticipated. While this was four years ago, the price of drilling a domestic well has only increased. Today, drilling a well costs an average of $5,500 in the United States, but the price “can range between $1,800 and $24,500, or around $25 to $65 per foot.”

Well Drilling. Credit: Paul Hamann

Well Drilling and Pipe Welding. Credit: Paul Hamann

My family was fortunate enough to be able to afford the hefty price tag for the new 360-foot well, but many California families cannot.

The past two years have been relatively wet, reducing the number of domestic wells going dry. As as result, press coverage of the issue has also fallen. Before that, California was experiencing a major drought, and thousands of wells went dry. Climate change and overconsumption of groundwater mean that policy makers and politicians cannot ignore this problem. 

In 2023 the Rural Community Assistance Corp. published a study analyzing water supply issues in California’s Central Valley. The study found that “32% of the 29,567 domestic wells analyzed are at risk” and that this creates a “burden that’s likely to fall disproportionately on rural disadvantaged communities.”

In numerous instances, the California State Government has stepped in. The Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) was implemented in 2014 to help tackle groundwater management issues in California. The Rural Community Assistance Corp. study also identified the overpumping of groundwater as a major concern for those in rural communities. Large farming operations often have more resources and can afford to drill deeper wells than the surrounding residential homes and communities, but agricultural overpumping of groundwater lowers the water table, which raises the risk of domestic wells going dry. 

With so many domestic water wells going dry, non-profit organizations, like Self Help Enterprises have stepped in to help people in the Central Valley. Self Help Enterprises owns 1500 water storage tanks that they loan out to people whose wells have gone dry. While these tanks are not a permanent solution, they help those who cannot afford immediately to drill a new domestic well. Self Help Enterprises also offers domestic well drilling services to those who qualify for the program.

While the past two years have provided more rainfall to California than prior years, many people's wells are still drying up. Many of these wells are dated and were drilled before the effects of climate change and overconsumption of groundwater were fully recognized. Rural communities and families will be hit the hardest as many will not be able to afford the massive price tag for a new domestic well.

This is a very complicated issue, and many stakeholders are implicated. All Californians will continue to fight for access to dependable sources of water. Future policy decisions regarding groundwater usage need to consider potential impacts on rural communities as domestic water wells in rural areas will continue to be at risk.

In California’s Inland Empire, a complex battle for groundwater rages: if the wells go dry, there are no winners.

The Indian Wells Valley sprawls across Inyo, Kern, and San Bernardino county lines in the northwestern Mojave Desert. Beneath it lies the Indian Wells Aquifer, a major groundwater deposit upon which the local communities rely. In the dry Mojave, groundwater is the primary source of water for domestic and agricultural purposes; few aquifers in California have been as significantly depleted as Indian Wells. 

When former Governor Jerry Brown signed the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) into law, the Department of Water Resources identified Indian Wells Valley as one of many "critically overdrafted" groundwater basins. In response, a Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) was created to manage the basin. That agency is now embroiled in a seven-year fight against some of the basin's largest groundwater pumpers to keep their regulatory authority—and the authority of SGMA—intact. 

The GSA operates out of Ridgecrest, the Indian Wells Valley's largest community. With a population of nearly 30,000, the city is built around Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake, the U.S. Navy's largest landholding. Employing more than 5,000 military and civilian personnel and generating $36 million in state and local taxes, it is of vital importance to the Ridgecrest economy.

China Lake's website boasts of its "incredible access to natural resources and recreational activities," and of Ridgecrest's affordable housing, shopping amenities, and small town life. This description sits in stark contrast with nearby towns like Trona, an unincorporated community in San Bernardino county with a population well under 2,000 and a poverty rate roughly twice that of Ridgecrest. Devastated by a 7.1 magnitude earthquake in 2019, Trona is a community in recovery—eyewitnesses describe houses "cracked in half" and residents driven out. Trona native Marilyn McKee refers to it as a "dying town". (You can see photos of Trona on the blog here).

Trona Gun Club. Credit: Lisa R. Pruitt

Mural in Trona. Credit: Lisa R. Pruitt

Whether dying or recovering, Trona is heavily reliant on the neighboring Searles Mineral Company for jobs and domestic water; “With no Searles, there’s no Trona,” says another Trona resident, Regina Troglin. Perhaps unknowingly, she echoes Ridgecrest city attorney and counsel for the Indian Wells Valley GSA, Kieth Lemieux, who explained to the Los Angeles Times in 2024 that "without [China Lake], there's no Ridgecrest." Without water, of course, there is no China Lake.

Trona Picnic Area. Credit: Lisa R. Pruitt

Despite the parallel between these two communities, Searles argues China Lake has received more favorable treatment from the GSA in implementing SGMA. Searles has been required to pay a fee of $2,100+ per acre-foot of groundwater extracted, while China Lake has not; as a federal landholding, China Lake is essentially exempt from such fees. Nonetheless, vice president of operations for Searles, Burchell Blanchard, believes the fee could bankrupt the company, causing hundreds of employees (many of whom are Trona residents) to lose their jobs (see: San Bernardino County Sentinel, "Searles Valley Minerals Contesting Groundwater Authority's H2O use fees" for a full public statement from Searles).

These claims are part of an ongoing legal battle between Searles and the GSA. Joined by the Indian Wells Valley Water District and Mojave Pistachio, one of the largest pistachio-growers in California, Searles has triggered an 'adjudication,' a complex legal proceeding in which a court manually determines the individual groundwater rights of every stakeholder in the basin. The adjudication challenges the GSA's authority to impose fees and seeks to replace their technical plan to achieve groundwater sustainability in Indian Wells Valley—two of the GSA's essential functions.

Alongside several other state agencies, the GSA appealed to the California Supreme Court for an early ruling on the GSA's authority under SGMA. On January 29th, 2025, the court declined to take the appeal, meaning the adjudication will proceed and will be determinative of water rights in the basin.

This is certainly a victory for Searles and Mojave Pistachio. Perhaps it is also a victory for the people of Trona. But many smaller water users have been unable to participate in the adjudication, due to high legal costs. These users generally have much shallower wells than entities like Searles and Mojave, meaning theirs will be the first to fail if the valley cannot figure out a sustainable solution to its water needs. So as the adjudication drags on, and groundwater levels in Indian Wells Valley continue to decline, the question remains: what happens when those wells run dry?

Still more on the rural vote as Tammy Baldwin courts dairy farmers, from WSJ

Katy Stech Ferek reports in today's Wall Street Journal under the headline, "Democrat Woos Dairy Farmers to Keep Crucial Senate Seat."  The subhead is "Sen. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin hits country roads and agricultural fairs, seeking to win over rural Trump supporters once more."  Here is the lede: 

CHIPPEWA FALLS, Wis.—Sen. Tammy Baldwin had an unusual talent during her last election: convincing rural supporters of Republican Donald Trump that they should vote for her, too.

This November, Senate Democrats need Baldwin to do it again.

Wisconsin is a prime battleground to determine the next president, but Democrats also need a win in the Badger State to keep control of the Senate. Baldwin’s campaign for a third term against the wealthy banker Eric Hovde, who says the Democrat is an out-of-touch career politician, has sent her down country roads in sparsely populated counties that cut through farmland and curve around lakes.

“I might not have met every farmer, but I think I found over time that word gets out,” said Baldwin, 62 years old, after a long day of campaigning outside Leinenkugel’s brewery in Chippewa Falls. Voters might be frustrated with gridlock, she said, “But to know somebody’s out there fighting for them, it’s a big deal.”

And here's a further quote: 

Supporters have said Baldwin connects to some conservative voters by focusing on economic issues, such as the cap on the out-of-pocket cost for insulin at $35 a month. On the campaign trail, she talks about leading 2018 legislation requiring federal water infrastructure projects to use American-made steel products, a requirement signed into law by Trump. She has secured mental-health resources for farmers and is trying to get federal money to test private wells for contamination into the next farm bill.

* * * 

Baldwin avoided Biden during his campaign visits to Wisconsin earlier this year. But in an indication that Democrats see Harris differently, Baldwin joined the vice president at her first presidential campaign rally, held at a high school outside Milwaukee.

This is from 60-year-old dairy farmer Randy Roecker of Loganville, population 300, in Sauk County, just west of Madison: 

[Roecker] said he usually supports conservative candidates but will vote for Baldwin, in part because of the mental-health resources she secured. He said he supports her fight to keep the label “milk” off nondairy beverages made of almonds, oats and other alternatives.

Roecker said: 

Tammy is the only Democrat that I really have trusted.  I think she cares. That’s truly what it is.… These other ones just want to get elected and hold their power.

And here's the word from Baldwin's Republican opponent, Eric Hovde, a real estate magnate who has lent his campaign $13 million and who lives part time at a home in Laguna Beach, California:  

“It’s the No. 1 issue. No question about it,” he said of inflation, adding that, if elected, he would focus on fixing the economy and stopping the flow of fentanyl into rural communities. He said his support in rural areas is evident by the lawn signs on display. But, he acknowledged, “There is a percentage of voters we have to close the gap on.”

The Guardian publishes two-part series on Los Angeles' continuing control over California's Owens Valley

Don't miss Katie Licari's excellent, in-depth reporting here and here.  She is writing about the long-term consequences of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (DWP)'s secretly buying up Owens Valley water rights decades ago.  In short, LA DWP still owns so much land in the Owen's Valley, part of the Eastern Sierra, that both public and private entities there remain beholden to this Los Angeles entity.

The first story focuses on how LADWP is hurting private enterprise in the Owens Valley, where it is the landlord for so many businesses.  A short excerpt follows: 

The land under [Mike] Allen’s [feed and outdoor supply] store belongs to an owner 300 miles away: the city of Los Angeles, specifically its department of water and power (DWP).

LA has owned large swathes of the Owens valley, where Bishop is located, for more than a century. The city first swooped in in the early 1900s, at the dawn of California’s water wars. As the metropolis grew at breakneck speed, its leaders searched for ways to sustain that population, and when they entered the Owens valley, they found what LA lacked: plenty of water.

* * *

Today, DWP owns 90% of privately available land in Inyo county, which encompasses the Owens valley, and 30% of all the land in neighboring Mono county. Aqueducts transporting water from both counties provided 395,000 acre-feet of water to LA last year – about 73% of the city’s water supply.

Stories of LA’s brazen land grab in the Owens valley have been told for decades – it was loosely depicted in the 1974 film Chinatown. And the fierce legal battles that have ensued, including over the environmental impact, have made regional headlines for years.

But residents, business owners, and some municipal leaders in this rural region say LA’s landownership in the valley has taken on a new, and crippling, dimension in recent years.

DWP has taken steps to exert even greater control over its land holdings in the valley. An AfroLA review of hundreds of documents obtained through records requests, as well as interviews with municipal officials, residents, legal experts and business owners, reveals DWP started changing the terms of leases in 2015, and formally added restrictions on the transfer of leases from one owner to the next in 2016.

DWP’s moves have meant that hundreds of families who have built lives in the Eastern Sierra region have seen their plans upended, often being left with the stark choice of abandoning their livelihoods or fighting DWP.

The second story is about how LADWP is hurting public infrastructure, like airports, by ham stringing the ability of local government agencies to make necessary repairs and improvements.  Here's more:  

Two rural California airports that are crucial to local air ambulance services, firefighting efforts and search and rescue operations are unable to perform critical repairs, blocked by an agency 300 miles away: the city of Los Angeles.

The airports are two of several major pieces of infrastructure in California’s Owens valley left in disrepair because of LA policies, an investigation by AfroLA, the Sheet and the Guardian reveals.

Los Angeles has owned large swaths of Inyo county, where the Owens valley is located, for more than a century. With ownership of the land comes rights to its water – water that is key to servicing the thirsty metropolis of 3.8 million people. Aqueducts carrying water from Inyo and neighbouring Mono county to LA provided 73% of the city’s water supply last year.

Today the Los Angeles department of water and power (DWP) owns 90% of privately available land in Inyo county, the majority of which it leases back to the county, its residents, business owners and ranchers.

But in recent years, county officials say, DWP has refused their applications to renew long-term leases, including those for the land that includes county airports, landfills and campgrounds.

An analysis of tax records shows nearly every DWP lease held by Inyo county is expired. More than 60% of leases between the county and DWP have been expired for more than a decade, and half of those have been expired since the aughts.

Without these long-term leases, the officials say, the county cannot apply for state and federal funding that supports critical infrastructure work. With fewer than 20,000 residents and a limited tax base, the county does not have the funds to bankroll those projects itself.

Developers of proposed new Bay Area city gather enough signatures to get re-zoning on November ballot

Solano County, California (April, 2024)
(c) Lisa R. Pruitt 2024

The Associated Press reported last week that California Forever, the group associated with secretly buying up farm land in southeastern Solano County, California (population 453,000), on the periphery of the San Francisco Bay Area, has garnered sufficient signatures to have placed on the November ballot whether the land can be re-zoned urban to permit its development.  Read more of the background on this matter here, here, and here.  A short excerpt from the AP story follows:  

Rio Vista Youth and Community Hall
(c) Lisa R. Pruitt 2024

A wealthy Silicon Valley-backed campaign to build a green city for up to 400,000 people in the San Francisco Bay Area has submitted what it says are enough signatures to qualify the initiative for the November election.

The campaign submitted more than 20,000 signatures but would need only about 13,000 valid ones to qualify for the ballot. If verified by Solano County’s elections office, voters will decide in the fall whether to allow urban development on land currently zoned for agriculture. The land-use change would be necessary for the development to be built.

Child visitors to the sales office express
their desires for the new community 
(c) Lisa R. Pruitt 2024

Jan Sramek, a former Goldman Sachs trader who heads the company behind the campaign, California Forever, said at a news conference Tuesday that he heard from thousands of people who want careers and homes in the county where they grew up but can no longer afford because of high housing costs and a lack of nearby work.

I had the opportunity in early April to travel to the parts of Solano County that will be most affected if this new development moves forward.  Those areas include the town of Rio Vista (population 7,360), on the Sacramento River Delta, and along the Montezuma Hills.  I found Rio Vista to be a charming town with one of the most appealing (and highly utilized) small public libraries I've ever visited, among other amenities.  The town also has a pharmacy that isn't part of a national chain, which I thought was pretty cool.  Plus, there are small eateries and an auto body shop with a prime location on the waterfront.  

Poster in California Forever sales office, 
also featured in brochures
(c) Lisa R. Pruitt 2024

Though it was not well publicized and not on my car's GPS, I did find the California Forever office in downtown Rio Vista--having taken up residence in the city's old Vista Cinema on Main Street.  Two California Forever employees were there, one who self-identified as a salesman.   They are collecting wish lists for community amenities, and I took a few photos of those lists--including one from what visiting children wanted.  (I list some of these at the bottom of the post).  

The salesman chatted me up about the project, noting that many residents of Rio Vista support it because, currently, there is "nothing" for their grandkids job-wise and in terms of activities.   If the city is built, it will provide not only jobs, but also many amenities for Rio Vista residents.  The salesman said some amenities are currently available to residents of Liberty and Trilogy, two nearby planned communities, but that the new city will make facilities and amenities available to those living in nearby Rio Vista. 

I raised with the salesman the issue of the lawsuit California Forever brought against some area landowners who had refused to sell and been accused of price-fixing.  He said those sued by California Forever were not family farmers but instead were large corporate farms--basically "BigAg."  I disputed that based on my personal acquaintance with one of those land-owning families.

California Forever Sales Office in Rio vista
in former Vista Theatre
(c) Lisa R. Pruitt 2024

At the end of my visit, the salesman asked me if I was on board with the project, and I told him I was still undecided, but generally skeptical.  I'd already explained to him that I didn't live in Solano County and so could not vote on the anticipated ballot initiative.  

Here are some bullet points/highlights from the brochure I picked up at the California Forever sales office.  

Windborn Church,
Main Street
(c) Lisa R. Pruitt

The farmland in "East Solano County today" is "Rated among the worst for agriculture in all of Solano County." (I wonder about the quality of that farm land generally, in comparison to 

Auto Repair in Rio Vista
(c) Lisa R. Pruitt 2024

• The community California Forever wishes to build is a "new future for East Solano County, a new community for all of us." 
• "Middle-class neighborhoods.  Safe, walkable, and affordable.  $400 million in downpayment assistance for Solano County residents."
• "Good local new jobs.  15,000 new local jobs in manufacturing, services and technology paying $88,000 a year or more"
• "Parks and green space.  4,000 acres of park, trails and habitats.  The project affects less than 2% of Solano County's current agricultural production." 
• "Rio Vista Parkland.  A new 712-acre park between the new community and Rio Vista." 
• "Downtowns.  Major offices, entertainment, arts, shops, cafes, locally owned restaurants, apartment buildings and more"
• New Employers Zone.  New Manufacturing jobs and technology research labs in defense and other important industries.  A way to bring new employers and the good jobs of the future to Solan County."

Entrance to Marina
(c) L.R. Pruitt 2024

• Maker zones.  Workshops, art studios, and ohter light industrial spaces.  Also restaurants and entertainment, and loft-style homes."
• Open Space.  The plan requires at least 4,000 acres of parks and open spaces aligned with natural features, distributed across the new community, programmed with a variety of playgrounds, parks, and shared spaces for all ages and activities.
• Solar sheep are happy sheep.  Solar panels and grazing sheep make for great friends. The sheep happily eat the grass, greatly reducing wildfire hazards and  keeping weeks off the solar panels, as well as creating income for sheep farmers so they to rely less on meat sales.  The shade from the panels help the sheep stay cooler, rest more and experience less heat stress.  (This one incudes a reference:  New Scientist Magazine 2/1/2023)
• Solano Jobs Guarantee.  All new community growth beyond 50K residents is frozen, unless the new community creates at least 15K new jobs.  And each new job must be a good job, paying at least 125% of the average wage in Solano County (about $88K a year today).

Sign at Montezuma Hills area
along Highway 12
(c) Lisa R. Pruitt 2024

• Solano Homes for All.  We will provide $400 million to help Solano residents buy home sin the new community, and to build more affordable homes.  If $300 million is allocated to down payment assistance, that's enough to help 6K Solano families buy homes with a $50K each down payment grant.
• Solano Scholarships.  The new community will bring good new jobs.  To prepare, we will provide $70 million in funing to help Solano residents pay for vocational training, college, or to start or expand a small business.  

  

  Riverview Middle School
  Rio Vista, California
  Lisa R. Pruitt 2024

  
  
• Green Solano.  We are providing $80 million in community-benefits funding for public parks and trails, open space and natural habitats.  This funding will also help support Solano's agriculture economy, including family farms and workers.  We are exciting to work with the Solano community to help identify priorities for this funding, to nurture our county's strong connections to its lands.  
• Solano Downtowns.  We believe in investing in all areas of Solano--both in the new community in East Solano and in Solano's existing cities.  Why not just invest in existing cities?  We need more room for homes families can afford and for new industries.  We will provide $200 million in new investment in building and renovating homes, offices,  shops, and other mixed use projects in the downtown areas of Benicia, Dixon, Fairfield, Rio Vista, Suisun City, Vacaville, and Vallejo.  
• Smart Growth Guarantee.  Our initial commitments are to provide $500 million in community-benefits funding and $200 million for investments in Solano Downtowns over the build-out towards $50,000 residents.  But our commitment to Solano does not end there.  If our community grow beyond 50,000 residents, all of these financial commitments will continue to scale up in proportion to the growth of our community.  We are excited to grow with Solano, and be a good neighbor for generations to come. 

Downtown Rio Vista
(c) Lisa R. Pruitt 2024

Water Guarantee. Before a brick is laid, we guarantee to provide our water supplies through the highly regulated and state-mandated Water Supply Assessment and Water Supply Verification process.  Regulated closely by the State of California, this process requires us to prove we can deliver water to the new community for many decades going forward, including through drought periods. 

• Transportation Guarantee.  We will provide right of way for upgrades for Highway 12 and 113, including the Rio Vista and Dixon bypass, and we will pay above our proportionate share to fund these upgrades.  
• Schools Guarantee.  We are required to ensure that new schools are ready in our new community when first residents move in. That way parens and teachers an be sure that existing schools are not overly burdened with new students.  Our schools remain in the existing school districts, but we will ensure that new schools are ready by the time the first children move in. We want the new community to be a big win for public education in Solano County.
• Solano Taxpayer Guarantee.  We will pay our own way through the significant tax revenue we will generate as the new city gains residents.  The initiative guarantees no new cost to Solano taxpayers, except to those new residents who live in the new community. 

Wind turbines and gravel road running 
South from Highway 12 between I-80 & Rio Vista
area known as Montezuma Hills
(c) Lisa R. Pruitt 2024

A significant part of one 12-page brochure addresses nearby Travis Air Force Base and a buffer zone that will lie between it and the new community. 

Til this weekend, the only billboard I'd seen promoting California Forever was on eastbound I-80 in Solano County, and it touted the 15K jobs paying more than $88K.  Then, on May 5, traveling westbound on I-80 , I saw one touting the $400 million in downpayment assistance for Solano County residents.  

Among the items on the crowd-sourced list of amenities folks had written on giant note pads in the sales office   

• Music events, dining destinations, emphasis on nature in the community
• Affordable housing--not market rate
• Smart growth
• Movie theatres (good for teens)
• Let's re-create our normal!
• Medical Center
• Big Box retailers
• Preserve wetlands
• Widen Highway 12 from Suisun
• Satellite junior college campus
• Archeological recognition (Native Americans)
• Nightclub!!!
• Chain Hotel (Nice!)
• Elderly/Alzheimers dementia care facility (home) with 24/7 nurse on site
• Quality restaurants on the water front

On the kids list, one wrote, "If I had my own city, I would want a dirt bike track, a Walmart, and lots of houses."  The child included a drawing of this place, complete with a dirt bike track and a church, along with a Walmart and several houses. 

Crowd-sourced list of desired amenities
(c) Lisa R. Pruitt 2024

California Forever has three sales offices in addition to the one in Rio Vista; the others are in Vacaville, Vallejo, and Fairfield.