In a seesaw of regulatory movements, California’s Central Coast has come no closer to having stricter laws against agricultural contamination of its ground and surface waters.
On Oct. 27, a group of organizations sued both the state and regional water boards for what they say were fumbled opportunities to stop excessive fertilizer use. Petitioners include two communities around Salinas and a troop of water protection groups. The lawsuit boils down to two central complaints.
The first-ever mandate in the state for a numerical limit on fertilizer application was established in 2021 by the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. It was set to go into effect Dec. 31 of this year. The suit says the California State Water Resources Control Board used a Sept. 20 review to place the regulation on a back burner to be studied again.
A spokesperson for the California agency said, “The board has directed an expert panel to review the data generated by its irrigated lands regulatory programs over the last four years as the basis for calculating more accurate discharge requirements in irrigated lands statewide.”
But that panel of groundwater experts has been promised since 2018, when the state set the same rule for the San Joaquin Valley, according to Nathaniel Kane of the Environmental Law Foundation, the firm handling the suit.
“So, now it’s 2023. But there’s no official timeline for when that’s going to happen and when it’s going to wrap up, or when they’re going to issue any kind of further order based on that panel,” he said.
Battle over riparian buffers
The second complaint pivots and aims against the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board for not requiring farmers to use riparian buffers.
Riparian buffers are strips of trees and bushes that stand between water tributaries and farmlands. The rigid stems help filter surface runoff. They are a widely used conservation practice, proven to cut down the amount of fertilizer, pesticide and fungicide that runs off the fields with soil and finds its way into reservoirs, estuaries and eventually the sea.
According to the lawsuit, on Dec. 10, 2021, during the final drafts of a major farm water regulation law, Ag Order 4.0, regional board members said that setting a requirement for the buffers was too time-consuming and potentially “litigious.” So, they dropped the effort, leaving in place a previous prohibition against removing preexisting buffers.
“And the state board didn’t touch that, they just let that stand with no plans to return to the issue,” said Kane, which is why the group is also suing the regional board.
So, while the Central Coast regional board gave thumbs up to setting limits on nitrogen fertilizer application in 2021, it gave the thumbs down to riparian buffer requirements.
The state board gave two thumbs down, according to the lawsuit. This year, it rejected the regional board’s program for setting numeric limits on nitrogen, and in 2021 it did not challenge the regional board’s decision to nix riparian buffer requirements.
Behind the legal teeter-totter, people on the Central Coast are still waiting for regulations to clean groundwater.
The lawsuit was filed by a long list of advocacy groups including Comite De Salinas, an unincorporated association, as well as the California Coastkeeper Alliance and the Institute for Fisheries Resources.
Topping the list of plaintiffs is the San Jerardo Cooperative Inc. south of Salinas, where people have suffered for decades with rashes, infections and diseases related to nitrogen-contaminated well water.
“I would just like to see our groundwater be protected more,” said Ileana Miranda, general manager for the San Jerardo Cooperative.
All is not well for San Jarardo
San Jerardo is a low-income community of about 300 people, mostly farmworkers, who are completely dependent on well water. The co-op sits like an island surrounded by miles of vegetable farms.
Over the last 12 years, they have gone through three wells, one after another, due to nitrogen contamination. The state confirmed the contamination, provided the community with bottled water and directed the regional board to come up with an alternative water system.
Acknowledgment of pollution and evidence of that pollution harming a human is grounds for a suit using the federal Clean Water Act, but it can’t be used in this case.
“They won’t drink from the tap. Some won’t even cook with it. … They don’t see all the health effects the public is suffering.” Ileana Miranda, San Jerardo Cooperative
“The Clean Water Act does not cover groundwater,” said Kane. “So that’s why we need to use state law. And the federal Clean Water Act does not cover agricultural discharges to surface waters, which is why, again, we have state law for this.”
Beginning in 2016, with funds from the federal and state governments, the San Jerardo community built a new well two miles away. Today, they are stuck paying for the pipe and pumping system. An extra $72 a month is added to their water bills. Miranda said many people are still paranoid and buy gallons of bottled water.
“They won’t drink from the tap,” she said. “Some won’t even cook with it. We understand that these crops need those chemicals to grow, but there could be limits. If the farmers are just exploiting those limits, they’re not listening to us. They don’t see all the health effects the public is suffering.”
“Water is life. We need water to survive,” she said. “Eventually, this is going to be a problem everywhere, not just for small rural areas.”