Double Jeopardy for Bay-Delta and Rivers, Part 2: Sites Reservoir
State Moves to Weaken Sites Permit, Stripping Proposed Protections
These five members of the State Water Resources Control Board will decide whether Sites Reservoir is allowed to take water while damaging the environment—and taxpayer pocketbooks. From left to right: Board Members Jared Blumenfeld and Nichole Morgan, Board Chair E. Joaquin Esquivel, Vice Chair Dorene D'Adamo, and Board Member Sean Maguire. Credit: CA SWRC.
We need you to take action and speak up! It’s as simple as sending a quick email. See instructions below.
One of the biggest new water projects in decades – the proposed Sites Reservoir – is just one step away from being approved by the State Water Resources Control Board in early November. It’s bad enough that the Board is likely to greenlight this expensive, harmful, and unnecessary boondoggle. Now, the permit will lack even the minimal protections the Board had included in its first draft of the water rights order.
This article is part two in a series this month about two major water decisions that are extremely high stakes for California rivers and the Bay-Delta estuary. We are at a tipping point. Now is the most critical time to get involved and use your voice. Read ‘Double Jeopardy, Part 1: Bay-Delta Plan’ here.
On September 3, the Water Board ‘s Administrative Hearing Office released the final draft of the water rights permit for Sites, a proposed set of dams and canals which would divert water from the Sacramento River into a large, shallow impoundment in the western Sacramento Valley (where evaporation rates and greenhouse gas emissions will run high).
(See: our previous article on the first draft of the water rights permit)
The new version strips meaningful protections for river ecosystems and water quality that were in the March 2026 draft. While not perfect, the March version included a prohibition on diverting water when river flow into and through the Delta was less than 55% of natural flows and when winter-spring flows are less than those needed to support salmon migration. But under pressure from water users and their political allies, including Governor Newsom, the Board reopened the proceedings over the summer, received “new” evidence from Sites backers, and then removed the 55% permit term, weakened the salmon flow requirement, and made other changes to the revised order.(1) The 55% term was a critical protection. Sites claims to be a high flow project, and 55% is a bare minimum flow to prevent ecosystem collapse.
The changes increase the project’s potential water supply yield, a critical concession to Sites backers since the project provides a relatively small amount of water at a very high cost, making it a risky investment.
The Board is planning to receive public comment and approve the permit at a public hearing on November 4. Friends of the River is working with its allies to submit written comments on the final draft, testify at the hearing, and organize public participation in the process.
WHAT YOU CAN DO:
Send a quick email to the State Water Board with the below talking points.
TO: Sites-WR-Application@Waterboards.ca.gov
SUBJECT: Sites Reservoir Draft Water Right Permit
BODY:
Write 1-2 sentences introducing yourself and why you care
Please reject the final draft water right permit and reject Sites Reservoir
Or, if they must issue a permit, at a minimum please put the 55% minimum flow requirement back into the permit, and the other protective permit terms from the March draft permit
Look for more action alerts in coming weeks with information about how to participate in the hearing and training sessions to help you prepare.
Resources
(1) OpEd – State Water Board Capitulates to Special Interests in New Sites Reservoir Permit
