Court ruling could limit groundwater pumping in Sonoma

Each year in Sonoma County, steelhead and coho salmon return to spawn in streams along the Russian River that are fed by groundwater.

Environmental advocates have long urged the county to take steps to prevent groundwater pumping and well drilling from drying up these streams and damaging vital fish habitat.

Now, a Sonoma County Superior Court judge has sided with environmental groups, ruling that the county violated state law and failed to meet its obligations to protect so-called public trust resources when officials adopted rules for the wells under an amended local ordinance.

“We’ve known for a long time that overpumping from wells can harm our public-trust resources, like salmon and steelhead,” said Don McEnhill, executive director of the nonprofit group Russian Riverkeeper. “We’re seeing significant habitat degradation.”

Coho salmon are listed as endangered, while steelhead are listed as threatened. Both spawn in tributaries of the Russian River, including Mill, Mark West and Green Valley creeks.

The court's decision underscores a legal requirement that California counties ensure that uncontrolled groundwater pumping does not dry up streams and threaten the survival of species, said Sean Bothwell, executive director of the California Coastkeeper Alliance.

“Groundwater and surface water are connected, they are basically the same thing and they should be managed in the same way,” Bothwell said. “We really hope that this ruling will lead counties to be proactive and manage the system as a whole.”

Bothwell said the environmental groups filed the lawsuit because Sonoma County was “simply issuing groundwater permits without any review or analysis of the impact on the river.”

Coastkeeper Alliance initially sued the county in 2021 under the public trust doctrine, the principle that certain natural resources should be preserved for the public. That case was settled in 2022, when county supervisors temporarily suspended issuing well permits and began working to amend the county’s well ordinance.

Last year, Sonoma County supervisors approved amendments that, according to the county website, “create a new regulatory process that considers potential adverse impacts on public trust resources, such as coho salmon habitat, when approving well permits.”

However, environmental group leaders argued that the measures were insufficient and lacked sufficient analysis.

Another problem, McEnhill said, was that the county still did not require well owners to install meters to measure and report how much water they pumped.

“It was like putting a speed limit on the road and not having police to enforce it,” he said. “When it comes to water, when it comes to a ‘trust me’ situation, that has never worked in California, or anywhere else in the country.”

A small amount of water flowed in Mill Creek, a tributary of the Russian River, during the June 2021 drought.

(Don McEnhill)

The plaintiffs argued that the county failed to meet its obligations under the public trust doctrine as well as under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Superior Court Judge Bradford DeMeo agreed in his Aug. 21 ruling, writing that based on previous cases, the state has “an affirmative duty to consider the public trust when making decisions affecting waters.”

Bothwell said this was the first time a California court had required a county to consider public trust resources when issuing permits for new wells.

Sonoma County officials were disappointed with the court's ruling, said Paul Gullixson, a county spokesman. He said the ruling was the result of “a robust public policymaking process with considerable public, scientific and technical input, which took seriously the public trust doctrine and CEQA compliance.”

Gullixson said in an email that county officials are awaiting a final ruling in the case, which will initiate a 60-day period to file an appeal.

Until that final decision is issued, the county is continuing with its normal process of reviewing applications and issuing well permits, Gullixson said. If Sonoma County decides to appeal, any stay of the decision would allow the county to continue issuing permits under the amended ordinance pending the outcome of that case.

Environmental groups said the ruling means the county will need to analyze the “cumulative impacts” of allowing more wells to be drilled and take steps to ensure stream protection when new wells are authorized.

The decision should lead to science-based limitations on well drilling and pumping when necessary to protect the flow of streams that fish depend on, McEnhill said.

“We see a way to solve this problem,” he said. “Our goal is to provide enough water for the salmon to survive.”

California's groundwater law includes provisions designed to protect groundwater-dependent ecosystems. However, many of these vulnerable natural areas are located outside regulated groundwater basins. Scientists have found that only 1 percent of the state's groundwater-dependent ecosystems are sufficiently protected by current measures.

McEnhill said that's the case in Sonoma County, where streams that provide valuable fish habitat and are at risk are outside the target areas of measures to address overpumping under the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.

Bothwell said the goal in Sonoma and elsewhere should be to balance the demands of those diverting surface water and those pumping groundwater with the needs of fish and ecosystems, particularly during severe droughts, which are becoming increasingly intensified by climate change.

“Our biggest goal is to balance the watershed,” Bothwell said.

The county's response is especially important, he said, because the state's groundwater law, which calls for addressing overpumping by 2040 in many areas, is moving “too slowly, frankly, to address the issues facing the Russian River Basin now.”