California Code of Regulations
Title 23 - Waters
Division 3 - State Water Resources Control Board and Regional Water Quality Control Boards
Chapter 2 - Appropriation of Water
Article 23.5 - Scott River and Shasta River Watersheds Drought Emergency Requirements
Section 875 - Emergency Curtailment Where Insufficient Flows are Available to Protect Fish in Certain Watersheds

Universal Citation: 23 CA Code of Regs 875

Current through Register 2024 Notice Reg. No. 38, September 20, 2024

(a) It is necessary to prevent the diversion of water that would unreasonably interfere with an emergency minimum level of protection for commercially and culturally significant fall-run Chinook salmon, threatened Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast coho salmon, and culturally significant steelhead. For this reason surface water and groundwater shall not be diverted from the watersheds listed below at a diversion point or for the benefit of a place of use that is subject to a curtailment order, during the effective period of the curtailment order under this article, except as provided under sections 875.1, 875.2, or 875.3.

(b) The Deputy Director for the Division of Water Rights (Deputy Director) may issue a curtailment order upon a determination that without curtailment of diversions, flows are likely to be reduced below the drought emergency minimum flows specified in subdivision (c), within the constraints detailed in this article. Curtailment orders shall be effective the day after issuance.

(1) Where flows are sufficient to support some but not all diversions, curtailment orders shall be issued, suspended, reinstated, and rescinded in order of water right priority provided in section 875.5. In determining which diversions should be subject to curtailment, the Deputy Director shall consider the need to provide reasonable assurance that the drought emergency minimum flows will be met with consideration of hydrologic, weather, and other conditions that influence flows.

(2) If maintaining the flows described in subdivision (c) would require curtailment of uses described in section 875.2 or 875.3, then the Executive Director may determine whether or not those diversions should be allowed to continue based on the most current information available regarding fish populations, human health and safety needs, livestock needs, and the alternatives available to protect human health and safety, livestock, and fish populations.

(3) The Deputy Director may determine not to issue curtailment orders, to issue curtailment orders to a smaller priority grouping described in section 875.5, or to suspend curtailment orders already issued in order of priority as described in section 875.5, as applicable, using information provided by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife described in section 875.1(c)(1)(B), as well as other information that could affect the need for curtailments to meet minimum flow needs for fisheries purposes, including weather forecasting, the need for flows to ramp up or down, the contributions of voluntary flow measures, and future flow needs.

(1) Scott River. The Scott River enters the Klamath River at United States Geological Survey River Mile 145.1.

(A) As measured in cubic feet per second at United States Geological Survey gage 11519500 located downstream of the city of Fort Jones at the northern end of Scott Valley (Scott River Mile 21), the natural flow of the system up to the following amounts:

Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	June 1-23	June 24-30	July	Aug	Sept	Oct	Nov	Dec
200	200	200	150	150	125	90	50	30	33	40	60	150

(B) The California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the National Marine Fisheries Service may notify the Deputy Director that the pertinent life stage(s) of the pertinent species the flows are crafted to protect is not yet present, or is no longer present at the time anticipated. Additionally, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, after coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service, may notify the Deputy Director that lower, alternative flows at the Fort Jones gage, or alternative flows at a different point or points in the watershed, provide equal or better protection for the pertinent species' relevant life stages.

(2) Shasta River. The Shasta River enters the Klamath River at United States Geological Survey River Mile 179.5, at the junction of State Routes 263 and 96.

(A) As measured in cubic feet per second at United States Geological Survey gage 11517500 located near Yreka:

Jan	Feb	Mar 1-24	Mar 25-31	Apr	May	June	July	Aug	Sept 1-15	Sept 16-30	Oct	Nov	Dec
125	125	125	105	70	50	50	50	50	50	75	105	125	125

(B) The California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the National Marine Fisheries Service may notify the Deputy Director that the pertinent life stage(s) of the pertinent species the flows are crafted to protect is not yet, or is no longer present at the time anticipated, or the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, after coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service, may notify the Deputy Director that lower alternative flows at the Yreka gage, or alternative flows at a different point or points in the watershed, provide equal or better protection for the pertinent species' relevant life stages.

(3) Compliance with the drought emergency minimum flows will be determined by the Deputy Director.

(d) Notice

(1) Initial curtailment orders will be sent to each water right holder, agent of record on file with the Division of Water Rights, or landowner, as applicable. The water right holder, agent of record on file with the Division of Water Rights, or landowner is responsible for immediately providing notice of the curtailment order(s) to all diverters exercising the water right(s) covered by the curtailment order(s).

(2) The State Water Board has established the "Scott-Shasta Drought" email subscription and distribution list that water right holders, landowners, and other parties may join to receive drought-related notices and updates regarding curtailments in the Scott River and Shasta River watersheds. The State Water Board has also established a "Scott-Shasta Drought" webpage at: https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/drought/scott_shasta_rivers/. Notice provided by email or by posting on the State Water Board's drought webpage shall be sufficient for all purposes related to drought notices and updates regarding curtailment orders.

(e) Suspension, reinstatement, or rescission of curtailment orders shall be noticed using the email subscription and distribution list or webpage described in subdivision (d)(2).

(f) Local Cooperative Solutions

(1) Local cooperative solutions by individuals or groups may be proposed by petition to the Deputy Director as an alternative means of reducing water use to meet or preserve drought emergency minimum flows, or to provide other fishery benefits (such as cold-water refugia, localized fish passage, or redd protection), in lieu of curtailment as described in this section.

(A) Petitions to implement local cooperative solutions that coordinate diversions, share water, strategically manage groundwater and/or surface water for fisheries benefits, reduce annual water use, or engage in similar activities may be submitted to the Deputy Director at any time, except as noted in subsection (f)(4)(D)(ii).

(B) The Division of Water Rights and the Executive Director may coordinate with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, National Marine Fisheries Service, the Scott River and Shasta River Watermaster District, the developers of any model or other information used as part of the petition, and others in evaluating local cooperative solutions.

(C) After or as part of approval of a petition, the Deputy Director shall not issue curtailment orders or shall suspend, rescind, or modify, as applicable, such orders already issued, affecting those rights relevant to the proposed local cooperative solution so long as the Deputy Director finds that any continued diversions under the local cooperative solution are reasonable and do not result in unreasonable harm to other legal users of water.

(D) Deputy Director approval of a petition for a local cooperative solution may be subject to appropriate conditions, including metering, monitoring, and reporting requirements, to assure that no unreasonable injury to users of water will occur, that the terms and purpose of the petition or the associated underlying binding agreement will be met, and to provide information useful in responding to the ongoing drought.

(E) The Deputy Director may delegate approval of any local cooperative solution to an Assistant Deputy Director for the Division of Water Rights.

(F) The Deputy Director may rescind approval of a local cooperative solution and issue or reinstate curtailment orders for the relevant water rights in the order described in section 875.5, notwithstanding approval of the local cooperative solution, if monitoring or other reliable information indicates that parties are not meeting their obligations under the local cooperative solution or the agreement is not providing the benefits outlined in the local cooperative solution, or based on an objection filed under (f)(2).

(G) A coordinating entity for the purposes of this section shall refer to an entity which possesses the expertise and ability to evaluate and require performance of the commitments made in a local cooperative solution, and which commits that:

(i) Evaluation of local cooperative solution proposals and inspections shall be conducted by representatives who lack a financial or close personal interest in the outcome, and

(ii) Information collected on compliance with local cooperative solutions is provided to the State Water Board monthly and upon request. The entity shall undertake data collection (including metering data) and inspections, either by itself or in coordination with State Water Board staff, sufficient to ensure implementation of local cooperative solutions, including inspection or data collection targeted within two weeks of completion of commitments to cease pumping as of a date certain.

With such commitment, the coordinating entity may be the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the National Marine Fisheries Service, the Scott Valley and Shasta Valley Watermaster District, the Siskiyou or Shasta Valley Resources Conservation District, a nonprofit organization with expertise and experience in water-saving transactions, or a similarly qualified public entity.

(2) Diversions covered by a local cooperative solution approved by the Deputy Director pursuant to this section are subject to this article and violations of such an approved local cooperative solution shall be subject to enforcement as a violation of this article. Notice of petitions and decisions under this section will be posted as soon as practicable on the State Water Board's drought webpage described in subdivision (d)(2). Normally, notice of the local cooperative solution petition shall post on the website at least one week prior to a decision on the merits; however, the Deputy Director may issue a decision under this article prior to providing such notice. Any interested person may file an objection to the petition or decision. The objection shall indicate the manner of service upon the petitioner. The State Water Board will consider any objection, and may hold a hearing thereon, after notice to all interested persons.

(3) The Division of Water Rights, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, National Marine Fisheries Service, Scott Valley and Shasta Valley Watermaster District, or North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board may install and maintain additional gages in the Scott River and Shasta River watersheds. The gages may be used to evaluate compliance with the flow requirements defined in subdivisions (c)(1) and (c)(2) on a watershed or tributary scale, as needed. Diverters or other entities may also request to install and maintain a gage or use an existing gage to support new flow requirement compliance points by submitting a written request with supporting data and information to the Deputy Director for approval.

(4) The Deputy Director may approve a petition to implement local cooperative solutions under this article as follows:

(A) For watershed-wide cooperative solutions: The Executive Director determines that a watershed-wide local cooperative solution will provide sufficient assurance that the flows in subdivision (c)(1) or (c)(2) are achieved for a specific time period, considering the amount of flow anticipated and the level of assurance that flows made available by agreements will be protected.

(B) For tributary-wide local cooperative solutions: The Deputy Director may approve the petition submitted under this article by a diverter or group of diverters that provides for tributary-wide benefits if:

(i) Sufficient information allows the Deputy Director to identify the appropriate contribution of the tributary to the flows identified in subdivision (c)(1) or (c)(2), and the Executive Director makes a finding that a local cooperative solution is sufficient to provide the pro-rata flow for that tributary. The Deputy Director may approve this solution regardless of whether the flows identified in subdivisions (c)(1) and (c)(2) are being met; or

(ii) The California Department of Fish and Wildlife finds that the in-tributary or downstream benefits are equal to or greater than the anticipated contribution to protections provided by the flows in subdivision (c)(1) or (c)(2). The Deputy Director may approve this solution regardless of whether the flows identified in subdivisions (c)(1) and (c)(2) are being met.

(C) For individual local cooperative solutions: In the absence of applicable watershed-wide or tributary-specific local cooperative solutions, the Deputy Director may approve a petition submitted under this article:

(i) Where the watershed-wide flows in subdivision (c)(1) or (c)(2) and tributary-specific pro-rata flows established by the Deputy Director cannot be guaranteed, and there is a binding agreement under which water users have agreed to cease diversions in a specific timeframe. Such binding agreement may be made with a coordinating entity. Where the diverter or coordinating entity submits a petition under this subdivision that includes a certification that diversion under a specified right has ceased for a certain time period, the Deputy Director shall approve the petition unless there is evidence that the diversion is nonetheless occurring.

(ii) Where an individual diverter or sub-tributary group of diverters has entered into a binding agreement with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the National Marine Fisheries Service to perform actions for the benefit of anadromous salmonids, and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife makes a recommendation for an exemption to curtailment based on an assessment that the benefits of the actions to anadromous fish in a specific time period are equal to or greater than the protections provided by their contribution to flow described in section 875, subdivision (c)(1) or (c)(2) for that time period.

(D) For overlying or adjudicated groundwater diversions for irrigated agriculture described under in section 875.5, subdivision (a)(1)(A)(ix) [Scott River] or section 875.5, subdivision (b)(1)(C) [Shasta River] the Deputy Director may approve a groundwater-basin-wide, groundwater-sub-basin-wide, or any number of individual local cooperative solutions where:

(i) The proposal may be based on a binding agreement made with a coordinating entity with primary responsibility to verify implementation of the local cooperative solution.

(ii) For individual proposals, the proposal must be submitted no later than April 15 and must be implemented during the entirety of the irrigation season (including during pendency of approval), unless the proponent withdraws.

(iii) The proposal includes a description of metering in place for groundwater well extractions, and a proposal to meter and record such extractions daily and report monthly to the Deputy Director or the coordinating entity, as applicable, except as described below. The State Water Board has funding and technical support available to support some amount of metering, and those interested in such assistance are encouraged to promptly contact the State Water Board.

a. The Deputy Director may waive this requirement for groundwater wells irrigating less than 30 acres. In determining whether to waive the requirement, the Deputy Director may consider, among other things, distance of the groundwater well from surface water and whether the groundwater well would provide uniquely useful information in light of other metered information being provided. The Deputy Director may require other information in lieu of metering in such an instance.

b. When a meter is not currently installed and may not be installed prior to the start of the irrigation season, the petitioner may submit a time schedule as part of a proposal that describes and substantiates the efforts, actions, and timelines for installation of a meter. The Deputy Director may approve a proposal with a reasonable time-schedule, and upon a finding that the proponent has taken reasonable steps to procure and install a meter, including coordination with the State Water Board or another entity with funding and/or expertise in meter installation.

c. The Deputy Director may waive the requirement upon a determination that metering in a particular instance is not feasible.

(iv) The proponent(s) agrees to allow compliance inspections with 24-hour notice.

(v) For percent-based reduction in pumping local cooperative solutions:

a. For the Scott River: The proposal provides at least:

1. A net reduction of water use of 30 percent throughout the irrigation season (April 1 -- October 31); and

2. A monthly reduction of 30 percent in the July through October time period.

b. For the Shasta River: The proposal provides at least:

1. A net reduction of water use of 15 percent throughout the irrigation season (March 1 -- November 1); and

2. A monthly reduction of 15 percent in the June through September time period.

c. The relevant water use reduction shall generally be based on a comparison to the 2020, 2021, 2022, or 2023 irrigation season, and may be demonstrated by evidence that provides a reasonable assurance that the change in farming practice or other action results in at least the relevant proportionate reduction in water use. Such evidence may include but is not limited to: pumping reports; actions that will be taken to reduce water use; estimation of water saved from conservation measures or changes in irrigation or planting decisions; and electric bills. However, if evidence for the amount of water applied for the 2020, 2021, 2022, or 2023 irrigation seasons indicates a base rate of applied water that is higher than 33 inches per year for alfalfa, 14 inches per year for grain, or 30 inches per year for pasture, then the base rate of applied water shall be the aforementioned values unless the proponent makes an additional showing that a higher base rate number is an appropriate comparison in light of relevant information that can include but is not limited to multi-year practices, soil type, and irrigation methods.

d. In implementing a local cooperative solution approved under this subdivision (f)(4)(D)(v), a diverter or water user may adjust the timing of the actions planned to meet the requirements of subdivision (f)(4)(D)(v)a or (f)(4)(D)(v)b, by up to one week as an adaptive response to precipitation or cool weather, if the shift in timing does not reduce the total irrigation season water savings. For example, a diverter may postpone a planned irrigation rotation for one week if rain or cool weather allows for greater time between rotations than initially planned, even if the shift would trigger a failure to meet the monthly reductions described in subdivision (f)(4)(D)(v)a.2. or (f)(4)(D)(v)b.2.

1. The diverter or user must provide the coordinating entity and the Deputy Director at least three (3) business days notice of the intent to shift actions, including the reason for the shift and a demonstration that it will continue to meet the approved irrigation season water savings.

2. The diverter or user may implement the change unless the Deputy Director disapproves the shift based on a failure to meet the requirements of this subdivision. Signed binding agreements do not need revision to incorporate this subdivision (f)(4)(D)(v)d. or actions thereunder.

(vi) Graduated Overlying Groundwater Diversion Cessation Schedules: The Deputy Director may approve a petition that provides for cessation of overlying groundwater diversions on one of the following two schedules, after evidence of compliance with the terms is evaluated. Such evidence shall include a demonstration that the proposal reduces irrigation as compared to standard practice on the property (e.g., practice in a similar unregulated year), taking crop rotation and number of alfalfa cuttings into account, unless not applicable (e.g., not for pasture).

a. Option 1: Diversion to irrigate the following percentages of irrigated acres shall cease by the dates below:

1. 15 percent by July 15;

2. 50 percent by August 15; and

3. 90 percent by August 31, with a maximum of 8 inches of water to be applied to the remaining 10 percent of irrigated acres during the remainder of the irrigation season. This 10 percent can be on land previously fallowed.

b. Option 2: Diversion to irrigate the following percentages of irrigated acres shall cease by the dates below:

1. 20 percent by July 20;

2. 50 percent by August 20; and

3. 95 percent by September 5, with a maximum of 6 inches of water to be applied to the remaining 5 percent of irrigated acres during the remainder of the irrigation season. This 5 percent can be on land previously fallowed.

(vii) Best Management Practices Local Cooperative Solution: The Deputy Director may approve a petition that incorporates all of the following:

a. Use of a low-energy precision application (LEPA) system on all irrigated acreage, including no irrigation of corners after June 15 and no use of end guns.

b. Use of soil moisture sensors to inform irrigation timing, with records available for inspection by the coordinating entity, if applicable, and/or State Water Board.

c. In years with a snow pack of 80 percent or less of the Department of Water Resources' California Data Exchange Center's first May snow water equivalent station average (or the average of the first April measurement if May snow pack measurements are not gathered in the irrigation year) in the Scott River watershed, or with a water year determination of dry or very dry in the Shasta River watershed, as determined under Table 2 of the March 2021 Montague Water Conservation District water operation plan (hereby incorporated by reference), cessation of irrigation on 90 percent of irrigated acreage by August 31, with a maximum of two (2) inches of water/acre to be applied to the remaining 10 percent of irrigated acres for existing alfalfa fields and grain, or four (4) inches of water/acre for pasture or new alfalfa plantings, during the remainder of the irrigation season.

(viii) A diverter may propose a local cooperative solution for all or a portion of their agricultural lands. In considering approval of a proposed local cooperative solution for a portion of irrigated land or affecting only certain diversions exercised by a diverter, the Deputy Director can require assurance that water use is not increased on lands outside the local cooperative solution in a manner that undermines the groundwater reductions achieved through the local cooperative solution. For example, the Deputy Director may consider whether increasing groundwater pumping on lands outside the area proposed will provide increased run-off to lands that otherwise would have reduced water application or consider whether a proposed local cooperative solution presents a water savings beyond that achieved by a standard grain rotation.

(ix) Overlying groundwater local cooperative solutions may be crafted or amended to allow for enhanced use of valid surface water rights as compared to previous years, in light of the potential for groundwater recharge benefits. Such local cooperative solutions shall include support for an anticipated improvement in groundwater elevations and/or instream benefits and may require monitoring for evaluation of benefits to groundwater elevation and/or instream conditions.

(E) Where a diverter receives a curtailment order for fewer water rights than are used on his or her property, the Deputy Director may approve a petition for a comparable reduction in use of a more senior right in favor of continuing diversion under the more junior right otherwise subject to curtailment where the petition provides reliable evidence sufficient to support the following findings:

(i) The change does not injure other legal users of water, including by reducing the contribution to flows described in subdivision (c) that other users would rely on;

(ii) The change does not result in an increased consumptive use of water; and

(iii) The change does not result in elevation of water temperature above that which would occur from curtailing the original source.

Note: Authority cited: Sections 1058 and 1058.5, Water Code. Reference: Cal. Const., Art X, Sec. 2; Sections 100, 104, 105, 109, 186, 275, 1011, 1011.5, 1051.1, 1058.5 and 5106, Water Code; Environmental Defense Fund v. East Bay Muni. Util. Dist. (1980) 26 Cal.3d 183; Light v. State Water Resources Control Board (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 1463; City of Barstow v. Mojave Water Agency (2000) 23 Cal.4th 1224; and Stanford Vina Ranch Irrigation. Co. v. State of California (2020) 50 Cal.App.5th 976.

Disclaimer: These regulations may not be the most recent version. California may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the state site. Please check official sources.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.