## Facts

- Environmental organizations alleged that groundwater pumping in Scott Valley (primarily for irrigation) reduced summer flows in the Scott River, a tributary of the Klamath River.
- The Scott River was treated as navigable for public trust purposes and historically used for boating and fishing, with fisheries identified as a principal trust use.
- Groundwater in the Scott Valley aquifer was alleged to be hydrologically connected to the Scott River, such that pumping diminished surface flows.
- Plaintiffs alleged reduced flows caused portions of the Scott River to become intermittent in summer, harming salmonid fisheries and other public trust resources.
- The County of Siskiyou required permits for new wells but allegedly did not consider public trust duties when authorizing or allowing groundwater extraction.
- Plaintiffs sued the State Water Resources Control Board and the County seeking declaratory and injunctive relief recognizing public trust duties regarding connected groundwater pumping.
- The County filed a cross-complaint against the State Water Board seeking declaratory relief limiting the Board’s authority under the public trust doctrine as to groundwater.
- The court addressed cross-motions for summary judgment/summary adjudication focused on whether the Board has public trust authority and duties regarding groundwater extractions that affect the Scott River.

## Issues

1. Whether a sufficient actual controversy existed to support declaratory relief concerning public trust duties and authority regarding groundwater pumping affecting the Scott River.
2. Whether the public trust doctrine applies to groundwater extraction that is hydrologically connected to a navigable river and reduces flows affecting public trust uses.
3. Whether the State Water Resources Control Board has authority and an affirmative duty under the public trust doctrine to regulate groundwater extractions that harm public trust uses in a navigable river, and whether the County could obtain a declaration limiting that authority.

## Decision

- The court reached the merits despite concerns about justiciability, treating the dispute as appropriate for declaratory relief given the public importance of the questions presented.
- The court held the State Water Resources Control Board has authority and an affirmative duty under the public trust doctrine to regulate extractions of groundwater that affect public trust uses in a navigable river.
- The court held the public trust doctrine may apply where hydrologically connected groundwater pumping adversely affects public trust resources and uses in a navigable waterway.
- Plaintiffs’ motion for summary adjudication/summary judgment on the central public trust issue was granted.
- The State Water Board’s motion for summary judgment was granted to the extent consistent with the court’s holding confirming its authority and duty.
- The County’s motion for summary judgment on its cross-complaint seeking a declaration limiting the Board’s public trust authority was denied.

## Legal Principles

- The state holds navigable waters in trust for the people and has a continuing duty to consider and protect public trust uses, including navigation and fisheries, when allocating or regulating water resources.
- Public trust obligations can require regulating conduct outside the bed and banks of a navigable waterbody when that conduct foreseeably harms trust uses of the navigable waterway.
- Where groundwater is hydrologically connected to a navigable river and groundwater pumping diminishes river flows, the public trust doctrine can require governmental consideration and protection of the river’s trust uses in decisions affecting that pumping.
- The State Water Resources Control Board has authority and an affirmative duty under the public trust doctrine to address groundwater extractions that harm public trust uses in a navigable river.
- Local permitting and regulatory actions affecting connected groundwater extraction may constitute state action for public trust purposes and must account for public trust resources and uses.

## Conclusion

The court declared that public trust duties tied to a navigable river may require regulating hydrologically connected groundwater pumping that reduces river flows, and it confirmed the State Water Resources Control Board’s authority and affirmative duty to protect public trust uses affected by such extractions while rejecting the County’s attempt to curtail that authority.


Env’t Law Found. v. State Water Res. Control Bd., No. 34-2010-80000583, 44 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,158 (Cal. Super. Ct. Sacramento Cnty. 2014)