Month: October 2016

California’s Fish Emergency

Three-quarters of the state’s native fish are in trouble, and options for recovery have been constrained by the drought. We talked to Peter Moyle—an eminent fish biologist at UC Davis’s Center for Watershed Sciences and a member of the PPIC Water Policy Center research network—about what can be done to bring native fish back from the brink.

PPIC: A year ago, your research showed that if the drought continued, 18 native fish would be at imminent risk of extinction. What is the situation now, and how has the state responded?

Peter Moyle: For many native species, things are even worse. Those 18 species are in the most immediate danger, and their situation has not improved. Delta smelt are on the verge of extinction. We currently know of 122 species of native fish in California, and 90 of them are in trouble in one way or the other, with 30 already listed under the Endangered Species Act. Climate change is making things worse.

The fish agencies have mostly used emergency-room responses during this drought. For example, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife did some emergency rescue operations this summer—capturing fish and putting them in hatcheries. And the US Fish and Wildlife Service sent some large experimental flows into the Delta to try to help smelt. What we really need to do is get better about planning for managing our species and ecosystems through droughts and floods, both of which are regular features of the state’s climate.

PPIC: What are your top three recommendations for managing water to prevent extinctions?

PM: The first thing is to ensure that every species has a home. We need to designate and manage “conservation waters”—core habitats to protect native species.

Second, I would ensure that every dam that blocks a stream has a more natural flow regime that favors fish. We need a systematic evaluation of the state’s 1,500 large dams to see which could be better managed to provide flows for native fish. Since virtually every river in the state has a dam, there’s a lot of room for improvement. Putah Creek is a good example of the potential—its flow is designed to mimic natural flow patterns but using a much smaller amount of water than historic flows. Fish in that stream are doing really well right now.

Third, we need to be more realistic about managing the Delta for native species. The big programs to try to fix the entire Delta just don’t work from a native fish perspective. The southern and central Delta have been so altered by human activities that it is very hard to make the changes that would make a difference. More promising is focusing on an arc of habitat in the north Delta that is all linked by the Sacramento River, from the Yolo Bypass to Suisun Marsh. Investing in habitat restoration there could make a big difference. Also, if we cluster projects in one area, they can build on each other’s ecosystem benefits. It’s a much more likely place to have a successful restoration.

PPIC: What are your thoughts about the recent effort to help the Delta smelt with flows through the Yolo Bypass?

PM: I’m hopeful about this project, which is being led by Ted Sommer of the Department of Water Resources. The idea is to expand food sources for the smelt by moving water into the Yolo Bypass, where it becomes enriched with nutrients and plankton. The water is then flushed downstream where it stimulates more plankton growth. The DWR team found plankton blooms all the way to Rio Vista. It seems to have worked, but it’s still in the proof-of-concept stage. It will be good to try on a larger scale. This is a good example of reconciliation ecology—the idea that while we can’t re-create ecosystems from the past, we can try to create conditions that will allow species to thrive within altered systems. The potential to improve habitat for native species based on reconciliation ecology is huge.

PPIC: What else gives you hope?

PM: I’m an intrinsic optimist. One thing that gives me hope is that there are a lot of very bright people working to conserve fish in this state. And there have been some recent developments in water law that make me hopeful. The major thing we’re short of is the will at high levels to do the kinds of extensive, risky projects that could bring our fish back to healthy populations. A good example of what I’m talking about is happening at Blue Creek in the Klamath Basin, which is an important cold-water refuge for migrating salmon and steelhead. The entire watershed is being purchased so it can be managed for fish by the local Yurok tribe, who’ve agreed to be its stewards. The Western Rivers Conservancy, which is partnering with the Yurok, has been extremely creative in finding funding for the project. Not only does this project help fish, it helps preserve the Yurok’s cultural traditions and creates jobs for tribal members.

Learn more

Read “California’s Ecosystems in Perpetual Drought” (PPIC Blog, August 30, 2016)
Read “Saving Native Fishes from Extinction” (PPIC Blog, October 30, 2015)
Read the report, What if California’s Drought Continues? (August 2015)

Declining Satisfaction with Presidential Candidates

Satisfaction with the choice of presidential candidates is low—considerably lower than in the 2008 and 2012 elections, our most recent survey shows.

Unlike 2012—when satisfaction with the choice of candidates increased as the election approached—satisfaction has been declining. This is not a view unique to California. A recent report by the Pew Research Center found that only 33% of registered voters nationwide were very or fairly satisfied with the choices of presidential candidates.

Compared with the last two presidential elections, satisfaction with candidate choices is down by more than 20 percentage points among California Democratic, Republican, and independent likely voters. Indeed, today only 28% of California’s independent likely voters are satisfied with their choice of candidates.

Among California likely voters, supporters of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are equally likely to say they are not satisfied with the choices of presidential candidates—48% of Clinton supporters and 49% of Trump supporters express this view.

Who are these unsatisfied supporters? Notably, 30% of unsatisfied Clinton supporters are between 18 and 34 years old.

Among Trump supporters, there is a difference when it comes to views on immigration policy. Unsatisfied Trump supporters are much more likely than satisfied supporters to say that undocumented immigrants should be allowed to stay in the country legally if certain requirements are met (59% to 43%).

These low levels of satisfaction with the candidates could have repercussions on voter turnout in California. We will have to wait and see if the two remaining debates make voters feel more satisfied with the choices before them or if they choose to voice their dissatisfaction by avoiding the ballot box.

Learn more

Read the September PPIC Statewide Survey: Californians and Their Government
Visit the PPIC Statewide Survey

New Laws Strengthen State’s Water Safety Net

Governor Brown signed nearly 60 new bills this year that will influence how California goes about the business of managing water. Several of these new laws will expand and strengthen the water safety net for disadvantaged communities. A suite of bills signed in recent weeks will bring a much-needed assist for communities lacking reliable access to safe and affordable drinking water.

While the vast majority of residential water customers in California have access to safe drinking water, several hundred small communities still struggle to provide drinking water that meets basic health standards. In addition, the drought has resulted in more than 2,000 domestic wells across the state going dry and shortages in 100 small rural water systems. Small water districts serving low-income communities are not like their much larger counterparts—their rate bases are smaller, costs per household are higher, and their customers can’t afford high rates. In addition, these communities tend to have a shortage of managerial and technical expertise. These interrelated challenges constrict small districts’ ability to fund and maintain new pipelines, wells, and water treatment plants. Recognizing that there is no “one-size-fits-all” solution, the state has recently begun to experiment with regulatory, administrative, and financial tools to help solve the problem.

Consolidating small water districts into larger ones is a relatively low-cost and durable solution that can bring lower per unit costs and improved levels of service to small, disadvantaged communities. The State Water Board has exercised the authority granted last year to mandate such mergers with six consolidations in the Central Valley. The state also covers some costs for consolidations. One of the most notable examples is the voluntary merging of 1,800 water-stressed homes in unincorporated East Porterville with the larger and more resilient water system serving the nearby city of Porterville.

The suite of bills signed this year—Senate Bill (SB) 552, SB 1263, and SB 1456—builds on past progress to strengthen the water safety net in several ways.

  • Improving access to funding: SB 1456 makes it easier for water systems serving small, disadvantaged communities to use state financing for capital improvements such as drinking water treatment plants. The bill extends this benefit to professional water service providers that serve small disadvantaged communities across the state.
  • Enhancing technical and managerial capacity: Even where financial resources are available, a small water system lacking experienced managers or expert technical staff may struggle to maintain water treatment and distribution systems. SB 552 offers a remedy by allowing the State Water Board to hire a third-party administrator to manage the water system on behalf of the community. The administrator can set and collect water rates and apply for other funding to build water treatment plants and cover operations and maintenance costs. This new tool potentially offers a long-term solution for small water systems, especially when the community doesn’t have any neighboring systems to easily connect with.
  • Preventing new unsustainable systems: SB 1263 aims to prevent communities from developing unsustainable water systems in the first place. The bill authorizes the State Water Board to deny permits for new water systems if the applicants cannot demonstrate adequate capacity to produce reliable and safe drinking water for at least 20 years under a variety of hydrologic conditions. Instead, it encourages them to partner with neighboring water suppliers that can.

These new tools for addressing drinking water issues in disadvantaged communities show that the state is both conscious of the complexity of the situation and willing to experiment with new approaches. We’ll be keeping track of legislative developments related to water in future blog posts.

Learn more

Read “Drinking Water Quality: Perceptions and Challenges” (PPIC Blog, September 6, 2016)
Read “California’s Water Quality Challenges” (PPIC Water Policy Center fact sheet, October 2015)
Read “Building a Better Water Safety Net” (PPIC Blog, October 21, 2015)

The Growing Gender Divide in Higher Education

In California and across the nation, women have surpassed men in educational attainment. In 2006, for the first time ever, a majority of college graduates in the state were women. By 2014, 52% of California adults ages 18 to 64 with at least a bachelor’s degree were women, up from 45% in 1990. This gender divide in educational attainment is likely to continue to grow because the disparity is especially notable among younger adults: in 2014, 718,000 (55%) of California’s college graduates under 30 were women, compared to only 588,000 men.

Why are women now more likely to earn a college degree than men? The most direct and obvious answer is that women are more likely to be prepared for college, and thus more likely to enroll in college and graduate from college once enrolled. For example, among high school graduates in California, women are more likely to have completed the courses required for admission to the University of California and California State University. In 2014–15, almost half (49%) of female high school graduates completed these college preparatory courses, compared to only 38% of their male peers. This gap has grown since 2004–05, when 39% of female and 31% of male high school graduates completed these college preparatory courses.

Better academic preparation among women leads to higher college enrollment and graduation rates. According to US Department of Education data, 55% of all undergraduates enrolled in California’s colleges and universities in 2014 were women. And once enrolled, women are more likely to graduate. Six-year bachelor’s degree completion rates in the state were 61% for women and 57% percent for men.

The strong progress that women have made in higher education is good news. Yet inequities remain. Female college graduates earn less than their male peers. Women also have lower rates of employment than men. Policies that promote pay equity, flexible work schedules, and parental leave may help address these issues.

Women are especially underrepresented in important fields such as computer science and engineering—as are African American and Latino men. For California to meet the challenges of the 21st century economy, we need even more women and men—including those from groups traditionally underrepresented in higher education—to earn a college degree.

Learn more

Visit the PPIC Higher Education Center

Video: Assessing Corrections Reforms

California leads the nation in correctional reforms. It has dramatically reduced incarceration and done so without a major increase in crime rates, a new PPIC report concludes. But the state and counties still faces major challenges. A panel of state and local experts discussed them in Sacramento last week. Among some of the challenges:

  • Preventing the prison population from increasing. Under federal court order to reduce prison overcrowding, California enacted public safety realignment and quickly reduced the prison population to about 200,000 inmates. But Scott Kernan, secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, said it may be a challenge to keep the number of inmates below the court-mandated target. Based on population projections, the prisons will run out of available beds soon, he said.

  • Continuing to improve prison health care. California continues to operate under a court-ordered federal receivership. Although the state has invested significantly to improve inmate health services, the receiver has turned over management of health care to the state at only 7 of the state’s 34 prisons. Kernan said the state is on a path toward full control.

  • Adapting to changing jail populations. The counties—sheriffs, probation departments, and the courts—have had to quickly adjust, first to an increase in their populations under realignment, then to an decrease under Proposition 47, which reduced penalties on some drug and property crimes. Today, jails built for short stays now house more serious offenders for longer periods. Probation departments had to quickly build relationships with community organizations to develop reentry services, said Wendy Still, Alameda County’s chief probation officer. “What I think is amazing,” she said, “Is just how fast the counties were able to make this shift and to be able to create the partnerships, to break down the barriers and begin to create these systems of care—and also to retrain their staffs.”

  • Understanding the impact of Proposition 47 on crime rates. The PPIC report says the impact of Proposition 47 on crime is not yet clear. Geoff Dean, Ventura County sheriff, argued that it has been significant and that it has clogged courts. He and Still both said that by reducing some felony drug offenses to misdemeanors, Proposition 47 removed incentives for offenders with substance abuse problems to get treatment. Before Proposition 47, certain offenders convicted of felonies went to drug court as an alternative to traditional prosecution, and they were required to get treatment. Misdemeanor offenders don’t face the same sanctions. “There’s a whole segment of that population that’s not getting treatment,” he said. “And the cycle continues.”

Panelists echoed the conclusions of PPIC report coauthor Magnus Lofstrom. The state and counties need to identify and implement cost-effective strategies to reduce re-offending—to reduce pressures on prisons and jails, improve public safety, reduce spending, and improve the lives of those in the corrections system and their families.