- UNIVERS1TY OF C AU FORNIA-

U C_ School of Engineering UnMrs11y orCahrormo

Agricultural Issues Center

~ucDAVIS CENTER FOR

WATERSHED SCIENCES

Health and Economic Impacts of the 2012-2014 California Drought:

Lessons Learned Josué Medellín-Azuara

Acting Associate Professor, UC Merced Associate Director, UC Agricultural Issues Center

Drought and Public Health Symposium Sacramento, California, February 4, 2019

9 Omi 50 100 150

I I I I 0 km 80 160 240

.,.

Average annual runoff (land area)

■ 66%(20%)

■ 24%(20%)

9%(20%)

1%(10%)

■ 0.1%(30%)

"i

-~~ \ .

san D1egq

8 0ml I

0km

.,. 50 100 150 I I I

80 160 240

■ State project

■ State and federal project

■ Federal project

■ Local project

Urban area

Agriculture! o reo

""-" River

( Flow direction

• Pump/,tor•g~ facility

• Pumping facility

Reservoir volume (taf)

6 0-100

l:, 100-500

/j. 500- 1,000

£:.,. 1.000-5,ooo

L 5.ooo+

Annual delivery (taf)

0-50

51-150 = 151-300

=:J 301- 1,500

Hydroelect ric powerhouse c=::> 1,501-3,100

....

Water Resources in California

Hanak et al. (2011) Managing California’s Water

2

100

95

90

85

80 -;;;-.,

75 .c u C

70 -C 0 65 -:. ·;;_ 60 u t 55 Q. >,

50 £ C 0 45 ::;;

1 40 ·.; 0 ., 35 ,. -:. 30 :i E 25 :::, u

20

1 5

1 0

5

0

North Sierra Precipitation: 8-Station Index, April 26, 2017 __:::...-----MSC - Mount Shasta City

~

SHA - Sha. sta Dam • ~MNR - Mineral

• ~ORD - Quincy • • BCM-BrushCreek

...,..-----sRR - Sierraville RS • ..,,t---BYM - Blue Canyon

... ~PC F - Pacific House

Percent of Average for this Date: 206° Current Daily Precip (wettest): 92.8

)U1

1982-1983 (2nd wettest 88

_5

1997-1998

~---------- 82.4

2015-2016 Dail Preci 57.9

Average (1922-1998) 50.0

2014-2015 Daily Preci 37.2

19.0

Oct1 Nov1 Dec1 Jan1 Feb1 Mar1 Apr1 May1 Jun1 Jul1 Aug1 Sep1 Oct1 Water Year (October 1 - September 30)

C 0

:E ·;;_ ·.; t Q. .. .. ., >-.. ., -:. s: oi 0 I-

California is a land of climate extremes that change quickly

Oroville dam spillway 2017

2016

Monticello dam spillway 2015

The 2012-2016 drought Some Sectors affected

• Agriculture • Urban water use • Ecosystems • Small rural water

systems • Recreation • Forests • Hydropower

Some Health and Employment Implications

• Stress due to insecure employment and Income

• Relocation and childcare • Air quality effects • Dry wells • Concentration of

contamination in wells

San Joaquin Valley California

25 25

20 20 ■ Food and beverage processing

+-' 15 +-' 15 ■ Crop and animal C C production (].) (].) (.) (.) ,._ ,._ Q) Q)

a.. 10 a.. 10

5 5

0 0 Employment Revenues GDP Employment Revenues GDP

Agriculture is the main economic driver in the San Joaquin Valley

Hanak et al. 2017 Water stress and a changing San Joaquin Valley

Water Amount (MIiiion Acre-feet)

- Groundwater Replacement

- Surface Water Loss

Sacramento, South Delta 1·19 and East of Delta .. '

-2 .29 ~

- { San Joaquin River Basin 1 ·■' South of Delta

- • -1.84

s; • -~,~·" ~ fo~ce Lake Basia

"-, • -4.57

Centra10,0Q2 Coast ~ 05

South 0.000 Coast """o.oo1

South Inland

0.018 --0.011

Pacific Ocean

0 30 60 120 km I I I I I I I I

""r-----------.... Legend

0 Hydrologic Regions

Increase in Total Pumping Costs

(in $ thousands)

O o-3,800

■3,801 -12,800

■12,801-29,169

■29,170 -47,000

. 47,001 • 100,000

N

A

Recent droughts highlight the role of groundwater in agriculture

http://droughtimpacts.ucdavis.edu Also see: Why California needs better groundwater management Medellin-Azuara et al. (2015) Hydrogeology Journal 6

~ .............

( )

l _)

< )

2015 Estimated Agricultural Drought Impacts Description Impact Base year Percent Drought water shortage (million acre-ft) 8.7 26.4 33%

Groundwater replacement (million acre-ft) 6.0 8.4 72%

Net water shortage (million acre-ft) 2.7 26.4 10%

Drought-related idle land (acres) 540,000 9 million* 6%

Crop revenue losses ($) $900 million $40 billion 2.3%

Dairy and livestock revenue losses ($) $350 million $13 billion 2.7%

Costs of additional pumping ($) $590 million $780 million 75.5%

Net revenue losses ($) $1.8 billion 54 billion rev. 3.3%

Total economic impact ($) $2.7 billion NA NA

Direct job losses (farm seasonal) 10,100 200,000# 5.1%

Total job losses 21,000 NA NA

* NASA-ARC estimate of normal Central Valley idle land is 1.2 million acres. # Total agriculture employment is about 412,000, of which 200,000 is farm production.

90%

80%

-V)

Q) 70% ::l C ::c < Q) 0 l'D > 60% ::I,~ Q)

er:: -· .... n D.I =- er V) .... -

50% C l'D ..Q -,; Ill 0 l'D ... .....,

!20 -0 40% z ...... 0 C ::::s Q) I

u 30% ~

I... '"" l'D Q) l'D a..

20%

10%

0%

0

r=;· D.I

'Tl

'"" C ;:;: Ill

Cumulative Jobs and Revenues

_ n 0 '"" n :::r D.I '"" C. Ill -

0 ,:, 3 :a· D.I D.I .... n 0 :::r er Ill

Other Field, Grain, and Feed Crops

~-cummulative Jobs

~ Cummulative Revenues

2000 4000 6000 8000

Cummulative Irrigated Crop Area (1000 Acres)

10000

Most agricultural income and employment is in fruits, nuts and vegetables

Agricultural employment mostly growing, especially for contract labor

Agricultural Employment in California 450,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

Aver

age

Mon

thly

Em

ploy

men

t (jo

bs)

Crop and Animal Production Services to Agriculture

• • • • • • • •

: : I ■ I I : :

--... Total Agricultural 50,000

-2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Source: Author calculations with data from the Employment and Development Department

a nt & Season a l Farm Worker Emergency Dro ught Relief Needs Assessment Report

Prepared for: California Department of Community Se1vices & Development Prepared by: La Cooperativa de Campesina, Profile Research & Marketing, Inc. Date: November, 2015

Not Govered

Legend

Food Boxes Delivered

• 0 - 15,000

• 15,001 - 35,000

• 35,00 1 - 55,000

• 55,001 - 75,000 - 75,001 - 88,896

Estimate Total Job Losses

(Full time and Seasonal)

D o

- 1 - 9 □ 10 - 280

- 281 - 4,114

- 4,115 - 6,796

Not Covered

South Coast

Job Losses and Boxes Delivered by Emergency Services

• Food boxes were delivered to regions with job losses

• Tulare Lake Basin is the most seriously affected

10

• Reported Dry Water Supply Well

This graphic displays locations ofreported

dry water supply wells, as collected and

located by the Governor's Office of

Planning and Research as ot: 04-27-15.

Many of the locations are close to one

another and difficult to clearly display on

a statewide scale because the points

overlap. This graphic depicts nearly 1,900

,,,. • s.• r . J !.i": )

•'""""~ "·: ' Cl \/1, ll'il k: •• ,.i111l1111 .. .. , .....

·..-·'rJr t, ..

MaJ<imum Finding 2000-2009 [mg/Las Nitrate]

up 10 2.0

2.1 10.0

10.1 -22.5

22.6 - 45.0

45.1 - 90.0

oser90.0

40 l o 20

0 30 60 90Km http Noroundwatern1tn~te 11cdav1s edu

.. : .... ~ .-. .. ..,: ~ . ...., ~ \ • .: .. • ~ .. 4 ... ~i ., ~ : ,.-~~ i......, • . .. . , "' .,., . - .,,. ....

_.. .;\~a: ... ._ ~ ,, . . ~,. .!.., "it-9

I '-:j • i • • \ : ~

\_ "- . ~

4 ~

Water Quantity and Quality Issues in Small Water Systems

Concentration of Pollutants

Dry wells

•

• Small systems (population less than 3,300) with contaminated wells and MCL violations

D Hydrologic regions

'\ ... •

--·

Nitrogen loading to groundwater (kilogram per hectare per year)

,/'- ·v,I) f

;;: >) t; ~

l . ~ Sacramento River ~\ t hydrologic region

■ 0- 5 ■ 5 - 10 ■ 10- 35 ■ 35- 50

50- 75 ■ 75- 100 ■ 100 -150 ■ 150 -200 ■ >200

--~- San Joaquin River hydrologic region

\ \ Tulare Lake

)

hyd_rologic

~ } region

Solutions for nitrate in groundwater Farm programs to reduce nitrogen loading Safe drinking water programs

12

Hanak et al. 2017 Water stress and a changing San Joaquin Valley

Shallow groundwater salinity

Total dissolved solids (mg/L)

■ 1 - 250

■ 251 - 500

501 - 750

■ 751 - 1,000

■ > 1,000 ---- Sacramento River hydrologic region

_, ___ San Joaquin River

hydrologic region

Tulare Lake hydrologic region

Range of approaches for salinity, dust management

• Salts • Major infrastructure

(desalinate, “brine line”) • Crop choices, irrigation

management • Dust from idled fields

• Cover crops • Solar • Habitat

Hanak et al. 2017 Water stress and a changing San Joaquin Valley

13

Conclusions Drought Impacts

• Some health impacts: income and employment stress,air quality, access to safe drinking water

• Droughts help focus attention and encourage improvements in water management.

• A diversified economy with deep global connection buffered economic effects of drought.

• Major droughts have less impact under diversified water sources

• Small rural water systems are specially vulnerable todrought both in water quality and quantity

• Every drought is different

collaboration my many colleagues at UC Davis and other institutions, in particular:

a you. jmedellin-azuara@ucmerced.edu

I am grateful for past and current collaboration my many colleagues at UC Davis and other institutions, 1n particular: Jay Lund, Richard Howitt, Daniel Sumner and Ellen Hanak and Alvar Escriva-Bou. Funding from the California Department of Food and Agriculture 1s acknowledged.

- UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNTA -

UC ~ED School of Engineering

I UCDAVIS CENTER FOR

WATERSHED SCIENCES

"'\ i ,

~r cdfa ~

PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA

.. ---- .- --.....

'.'9til. _.: f91!~11..._ ,'A. ~~~~i·, I ml ' fll , . . . .

CALIFO RN I A DEPARTMEN T O F

FOOD & A G RI C U LT U RE · . .____ :

··-.. ': ~~---··

. eraeconom1cs

environment • resources • agriculture

Thank you! jmedellin-azuara@ucmerced.edu

I am grateful for past and current

Jay Lund, Richard Howitt, Daniel Sumner and Ellen Hanak and Alvar Escriva-Bou. Funding from the California Department of Food and Agriculture is acknowledged.