New Water Bill Grants Secretary Power to Move Orland Water to Sacramento Canal Unit, Regardless of Drought

The Orland Project Water Management Act is a short but significant piece of legislation that changes the rules for moving water around one of California’s major water systems. Essentially, it amends the existing drought relief law to give the Secretary of the Interior the green light to transfer water from the Orland Project to the Sacramento Canal Unit of the Central Valley Project (CVP) whenever the Orland Unit Water Users Association asks for it. Crucially, this transfer can happen in any water year—wet or dry—as long as the Secretary decides the move fits the “overall goals” of the CVP.

The New Flexibility: Water on Demand?

Before this change, water transfers under the Emergency Drought Relief Act were primarily focused on, well, drought. This bill makes the process much more flexible. Think of it like this: If you’re a farmer relying on the Sacramento Canal Unit, this bill provides a new, streamlined mechanism to potentially access water from the Orland Project without having to wait for a declared emergency. This could mean more reliable irrigation water, which translates directly into better crop yields and less financial stress, especially during dry spells that aren't officially classified as a drought. The Orland Unit Water Users Association now holds a key position, as they are the ones who initiate the request for the transfer (Sec. 2).

The Fine Print: What Stays Protected

The bill is careful to include some key safeguards. First, it explicitly states that getting this transferred water doesn't count as a new or extra benefit under the Reclamation Reform Act of 1982. This is bureaucratic jargon for making sure that users receiving this water aren't suddenly subject to new size limitations or rules that apply to those receiving new federal water subsidies. Second, and perhaps most importantly for existing stakeholders, the bill protects established water rights. Whatever rights you had before this bill, you still have them. Furthermore, any temporary contract to move this water cannot cause any negative impacts to the Orland Project itself (Sec. 2).

The Catch: All Power, No Metrics

While the flexibility is a clear benefit for those receiving the water, the bill introduces a significant element of discretion. The Secretary of the Interior’s only requirement for approving a transfer is determining that it fits the “overall goals of the Central Valley Project.” This is a pretty vague standard. For people living near the Orland Project, this lack of clear operational metrics could be concerning. If the Secretary uses this broad authority to approve transfers during wet years, it could potentially drain water that might otherwise be stored or used locally for environmental needs or future growth, based on a subjective interpretation of “overall goals.” In essence, the bill removes the drought requirement without replacing it with a clear, objective metric for when transfers are appropriate, which gives the Secretary a lot of room to maneuver.

Who Pays the Price for Flexibility?

The primary beneficiaries here are the Orland Unit Water Users Association and the users within the Sacramento Canal Unit, who gain water security. However, the cost might be borne by future users or environmental interests in the Orland Project area. By allowing transfers regardless of the water year, the bill weakens the implicit protection that water stays local during non-drought years. If the Sacramento Canal Unit consistently requests and receives Orland water, it raises questions about the long-term sustainability and availability of water for other purposes within the Orland Project area, even though the bill says it can’t negatively impact the project. This is a classic policy trade-off: increased flexibility for one group often means increased uncertainty for another.