Pumping for the masses: evolution of groundwater management in metropolitan Los Angeles

Abstract

Groundwater supports many aspects of human life. In cities, groundwater can provide a cost-effective source of water for drinking and industrial uses, while groundwater basins provide storage. The role of groundwater in a city’s water supply tends to change over time. In the Los Angeles metropolitan area, groundwater is critical. Over decades, users in the region’s many basins allocated annual pumping rights to groundwater among users through adjudications. These rights were determined through collective processes over decades, which contributed to the complex array of public and private organizations involved in water management. The rights also continue to evolve. We analyzed changes in the distribution of groundwater rights over time for adjudicated basins in Southern Los Angeles County. Results indicate that groundwater rights are increasingly: (1) controlled or regulated by public institutions and municipalities, and (2) consolidated among larger users. Yet, both the percentage of total supplies provided by groundwater, as well as the distribution of groundwater rights, varies widely among cities and communities throughout Los Angeles. As metropolitan Los Angeles faces reduced water imports and emphasizes local water reliance, access to pumping rights and storage capacity in groundwater basins will become even more vital. We discuss implications of our results for future urban water management.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. Acheson, J. M. (2006). Institutional failure in resource management. Annual Review of Anthropology, 35(1), 117–134. doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.35.081705.123238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Asano, T. (1985). Artificial recharge of groundwater. Boston: Butterworth.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Baker, M. M. (1948). The quest for pure water: The history of water purification from the earliest records to the twentieth century. New York: The American Water Works Association.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bakker, K. (2003a). A political ecology of water privatization. Studies in Political Economy, 70, 35–58. doi:10.1111/j.0016-7398.2003.00097.x.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bakker, K. (2003b). Archipelagos and networks: Urbanization and water privatization in the South. The Geographical Journal, 169(4), 328–341. doi:10.1111/j.0016-7398.2003.00097.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bakker, K. (2005). Neoliberalizing nature? Market environmentalism in water supply in England and Wales. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 95(3), 542–565. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8306.2005.00474.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Barrett, M. H., & Howard, A. (2002). Urban groundwater and sanitation—Developed and developing countries. In K. Howard & R. G. Israfilov (Eds.), Current problems of hydrogeology in urban areas, urban agglomerates and industrial centres (Vol. 8, pp. 39–56). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Blake, N. M. (1956). Water for the cities: A history of the urban water supply problem in the United States. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Blomquist, W. A. (1992). Dividing the waters: Governing groundwater in Southern California. San Francisco: ICS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bocquet, D., Chatzis, K., & Sander, A. (2008). From free good to commodity: Universalizing the provision of water in Paris (1830–1930). Geoforum, 39(6), 1821–1832. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2008.09.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Brown, R. (2007). Local Institutional development and organizational change for advancing sustainable urban water futures. Environmental Management, 41(2), 221–233. doi:10.1007/s00267-007-9046-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Brown, R., & Farrelly, M. (2009). Delivering sustainable urban water management: A review of the hurdles we face. Water Science and Technology, 59(5), 839–846.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. California Water Service Company v. City of Compton et al. Proposed Amended Judgment., No. 506806 (Superior Court of the State of California, Los Angeles County 9 December 2014).

  14. Census. (2013). 2010 Census of the United States of America. Washignton, DC: Government Printing Office: U.S. Census Bureau.

  15. Central and West Basin Water Replenishment District v. Charles E. Adams et al., No. 786,656 (Superior Court of the State of California, Los Angeles County 11 October 1965).

  16. Central and West Basin Water Replenishment District v. Charles E. Adams et al: Third Amended Judgment., No. 786,656 (Superior Court of the State of California, Los Angeles County 18 December 2013).

  17. Cheung, D., & Pincetl, S. (under review). Fragmented flows: Water and the political ecology of governance in Los Angeles County.

  18. Chino Basin Watermaster. (2014). http://www.cbwm.org/. Accessed Dec 2014.

  19. City of Los Angeles v. City of San Fernando et al., No. 650079 (Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles 26 January 1979).

  20. City of Pasadena v. City of Alhambra et al., No. L.A. Number 19610 (Supreme Court of California 3 June 1949).

  21. Committee, Senate Local Governance. (2010). What’s so special about special districts? A citizen’s guide to special districts in California (4th ed.). Sacramento: California State Senate.

    Google Scholar 

  22. De Graaf, R. E., Dahm, R. J., Icke, J., Goetgeluk, R. W., Jansen, S. J. T., & van de Ven, F. H. M. (2009). Receptivity to transformative change in the Dutch urban water management sector. Water Science and Technology, 60(2), 311. doi:10.2166/wst.2009.179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. DWR. (2013). Watermaster Service in the West Coast Basin of Los Angeles County (West Coast Basin Watermaster Report). Sacramento, CA: California Department of Water Resources (West Coast Basin Watermaster).

  24. Fish, R. D., Ioris, A. A. R., & Watson, N. M. (2010). Integrating water and agricultural management: Collaborative governance for a complex policy problem. Science of the Total Environment, 408(23), 5623–5630. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.10.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Folke, C., Hahn, T., Olsson, P., & Norberg, J. (2005). Adaptive Governance of Social-Ecological Systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 30, 441–473. doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Fossette, C. (1986). The story of water development in Los Angeles County. Los Angeles: Central Basin Municipal Water District.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Foster, S. S. (2001). The interdependence of groundwater and urbanisation in rapidly developing cities. Urban Water, 3(3), 185–192. doi:10.1016/S1462-0758(01)00043-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Gelo, K. K., & Howard, K. (2002). Intensive groundwater use in urban areas: The case of megacities. In Intensive use of groundwater: Challenges and opportunities (p. 484). Boca Raton: CRC Press.

  29. Gleick, P. (2003a). Water use. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 28(1), 275–314. doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.28.040202.122849.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Gleick, P. (2003b). Global freshwater resources: Soft-path solutions for the 21st century. Science, 302(5650), 1524–1528. doi:10.1126/science.1089967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Hanak, E., Lund, J., Dinar, A., Gray, B., Howitt, R., Mount, J., et al. (2011). Managing California’s water: From conflict to reconciliation. San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Holling, C. S. (Ed.). (1978). Adaptive environmental assessment and management. [Laxenburg, Austria]. New York: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Wiley.

  33. Howard, K. (1997). Impacts of urban development on groundwater. In N. Eyles (Ed.), Environmental geology of urban areas (pp. 93–104). St. John’s: Geological Association of Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hughes, S., & Pincetl, S. (2014). Evaluating collaborative institutions in context: The case of regional water management in southern California. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 32(1), 20–38. doi:10.1068/c1210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Johnson, T. (2008). Groundwater replenishment at the Montebello Forebay spreading grounds (WRD Technical Buillet Volume 14). Los Angeles, CA: Water Replenishment Distrct of Southern California.

  36. Kjær, A. M. (2004). Governance. Malden: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  37. LADPW. (2014). Spreading grounds database: Water conserved information. Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. http://dpw.lacounty.gov/wrd/SpreadingGround/watercon/.

  38. LADWP. (2010). Urban water management plan. Los Angeles: Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.

    Google Scholar 

  39. LADWP. (2014). Stormwater capture master plan: Interim report. Los Angeles: Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Lerner, D. (1990). Groundwater recharge in urban areas. Atmospheric Environment. Part B. Urban Atmosphere, 24(1), 29–33. doi:10.1016/0957-1272(90)90006-G.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Leys, C. (2001). Market-driven politics: Neoliberal democracy and the public interest. London; New York: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The science of’muddling through. Public Administration Review, 19(2), 79–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Llamas, M. R., & Custodio, E. (2002). Intensive use of groundwater: A new situation which demands proactive action. In intensive use of groundwater: challenges and opportunities (p. 484). Boca Raton: CRC Press.

  44. Lubell, M., Leach, W., & Sabatier, P. A. (2009). Collaborative watershed partnerships in the epoch of sustainability. In Toward sustainable communities: Transition and transformations in environmental policy. Cambridge: MIT. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=27229. Accessed Aug 8 2012.

  45. Lubell, M., & Lippert, L. (2011). Integrated regional water management: A study of collaboration or water politics-as-usual in California, USA. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 77(1), 76–100. doi:10.1177/0020852310388367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Lund, J. R. (1990). The location of closed watersheds for urban water supplies: A theoretical and historical analysis. Environment and Planning A, 22(5), 667–682. doi:10.1068/a220667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Main San Gabriel Basin Watermaster. (2013). Annual Report 2012–2013.

  48. Marks v. Whitney., No. 6 Cal.3d 251 (California Supreme Court 1971).

  49. Melosi, M. (2000). The sanitary city: Urban infrastructure in America from colonial times to the present. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Melosi, M. (2011). Precious commodity: Providing water for America’s cities. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Morris, B. L., Lawrence, A. R., & Foster, S. S. D. (1997). Sustainable groundwater management for fast-growing cities: Mission achievable or mission impossible? In P. J. Chilton (Ed.), Groundwater in the urban environment: Volume 1: Problems, processes, and management; Proceedings of the XXVII IAH Congress on Groundwater in the Urban Environment (pp. 55–66). Rotterdam, Balkema.

  52. MWD. (2007). Groundwater assessment study. Los Angeles, CA: Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.

  53. OMB. (2013). Metropolitan statistical areas (No. OMB Bulletin No. 13-01). Washington, D.C.: Office of Management and Budget.

  54. Ostrom, E. (1965). Public entrepreneurship: A case study in ground water basin management. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles.

  55. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Ostrom, E., & Cox, M. (2010). Moving beyond panaceas: a multi-tiered diagnostic approach for social-ecological analysis. Environmental Conservation, 37(4), 451–463. doi:10.1017/S0376892910000834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Pahl-Wostl, C., Holtz, G., Kastens, B., & Knieper, C. (2010). Analyzing complex water governance regimes: The management and transition framework. Environmental Science & Policy, 13(7), 571–581. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2010.08.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Pincetl, S. (2010). From the sanitary city to the sustainable city: Challenges to institutionalising biogenic (nature’s services) infrastructure. Local Environment, 15(1), 43–58. doi:10.1080/13549830903406065.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Raucher, R., & Tchobanglous, G. (2014). The opportunities and economics of direct potable reuse. Alexandria: Water Reuse Research Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Raymond Basin Management Board (2014, January 15). Meeting minutes.

  61. Raymond Basin Management Board. (2013). Annual Report July 1st 2012–June 30th, 2013.

  62. Rhodes, R. A. W. (1996). The new governance: Governing without government. Political Studies, 44(4), 652–667. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb01747.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Rijke, J., Farrelly, M., Brown, R., & Zevenbergen, C. (2013). Configuring transformative governance to enhance resilient urban water systems. Environmental Science & Policy, 25, 62–72. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2012.09.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Rogers, P., & Hall, A. (2003). Effective water governance. Stockholm: Global Water Partnership.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Rotmans, J., Kemp, R., & van Asselt, M. (2001). More evolution than revolution: Transition management in public policy. Foresight, 3(1), 15–31. doi:10.1108/14636680110803003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Rushton, K. R. (1994). Control of rising groundwater levels in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. In W. B. Wilkinson (Ed.), Groundwater problems in urban areas: Proceedings of the International Conference organized by the Institution of Civil Engineers and held in London, 23 June 1993. T. Telford.

  67. Six Basins Watermaster. (2013). Annual report for calendar year 2012. Prepared by Wildermuth Environmental, Lake Forest, CA.

  68. Six Basins Watermaster. (2014). About us. http://www.6bwm.com/. Accessed June 2014.

  69. Sprague, M. (2014, December 20). Metropolitan water district to sell replenishment water to Central Basin for first time in 3 years. Whittier Daily News.

  70. Swyngedouw, E. (1997). Power, nature, and the city. The conquest of water and the political ecology of urbanization in Guayaquil, Ecuador: 1880–1990. Environment and Planning A, 29(2), 311–332. doi:10.1068/a290311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. ULARA Watermaster. (2013). 201112 Annual report: Upper Los Angeles River area watermaster.

  72. Watkins, D. C. (1997). International practice for the disposal of urban runoff using infiltration drainage systems. In P. J. Chilton (Ed.), Groundwater in the urban environment: Volume 1: Proceedings of the XXVII IAH congress on groundwater in the urban environment. Nottingham, UK.

  73. WRD. (2013). 2013 Engineering survey and report 2014. Los Angeles: Water Replenishment District of Southern California.

    Google Scholar 

  74. WRD. (2014). 2014 Engineering survey and report 2014. Los Angeles: Water Replenishment District of Southern California.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported through grants from the John Randolph Haynes and Dora Haynes Foundation and the National Science Foundation (Award Number 1204235).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephanie Pincetl.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no potential conflicts of interest with the information reported in this manuscript. No research involving human participants was included and the research required no informed consent.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 4 lists characteristics of each basin, including year of adjudication, governance structure, native or operating safe yield, and recharge sources. The basins of Verdugo, Eagle Rock, Sylmar, and San Fernando all fall under the ULARA judgment.

Table 4 Adjudicated groundwater basin characteristics for Los Angeles County

Table 5 lists definitions for terms that govern extraction limits, divide aquifer resources, define types of water, and define types of pumpers and rights’ holders.

Table 5 Definitions provided in adjudications and the basins using the terms

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Porse, E., Glickfeld, M., Mertan, K. et al. Pumping for the masses: evolution of groundwater management in metropolitan Los Angeles. GeoJournal 81, 793–809 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-015-9664-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Conjunctive use
  • Integrated urban water management
  • Groundwater
  • Adjudications
  • Los Angeles