California bees can legally be fish and have the same protections, a ...

(CNN) A fishy ruling from California: A California court has ruled bees can legally be considered fish under specific circumstances.

The ruling, released May 31 , reversed an earlier judgment which found bumblebees could not be considered "fish" under the California Endangered Species Act.

"The issue presented here is whether the bumblebee, a terrestrial invertebrate, falls within the definition of fish, as that term is used in the definitions of endangered species in section 2062, threatened species in section 2067, and candidate species (i.e., species being considered for listing as endangered or threatened species) in section 2068 of the Act," wrote California's Third District Court of Appeal in its ruling.

The California Endangered Species Act was designed to protect "native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant."

Notably, invertebrates are absent from the list of protected species.

Read More

5 things to know for June 10: January 6, Covid-19, Ukraine ...

CNN —

Get '5 Things' in your inbox If your day doesn’t start until you’re up to speed on the latest headlines, then let us introduce you to your new favorite morning fix. Sign up here for the ‘5 Things’ newsletter.

Although President Joe Biden would surely rather be talking about gas prices going down, he’s now targeting drivers’ key concerns about buying electric vehicles so they can avoid high prices at the pump entirely. On Thursday, the Biden administration proposed a rule to standardize about 500,000 electric vehicle chargers across the US so they can work with any electric vehicle – similar to the way a gas pump works with any car or truck.

Here’s what you need to know to Get Up to Speed and On with Your Day.

(You can get “5 Things You Need to Know Today” delivered to your inbox daily. Sign up here.)

1. January 6

The House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol held its first prime-time hearing Thursday, detailing the findings of the panel’s investigation and playing new disturbing video of the riot. The panel showed some never-before-seen material, including bird’s-eye view footage from security cameras that showed the enormous pro-Trump mob as it started swarming the Capitol grounds. The footage also showed how the crowd took its cues directly from Trump, with one rioter reading a Trump tweet over a megaphone for the other rioters to hear. In addition to other closed-door depositions of members of Trump’s team, the committee also revealed testimony from Trump White House officials who said the former President did not want the attack to stop, angrily resisted his own advisers who were urging him to call off the rioters, and thought his own vice president “deserved” to be hanged as the violent crowd chanted “Hang Mike Pence.”

2. Coronavirus

A team of scientists responsible for determining the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic released its first report Thursday, saying that all hypotheses remain on the table – including a possible laboratory incident. The 27-member advisory group convened by the World Health Organization said available data suggests the virus jumped from animals to humans, but there are still gaps in “key pieces of data.” The most closely genetically related viruses were found in bats in China and Laos, according to the report, but a “spill-over event to humans” has not been identified. The preliminary report also said that it is important to evaluate the possibility that Covid-19 was introduced into the human population through a laboratory incident because lab leaks have happened in the past. And since there is no new data available, the group said the lab-leak theory cannot be ruled out.

3. Ukraine

As Ukraine tries to hold on to key frontline cities, Russia is struggling to provide basic public services to civilian populations in Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine, according to a British intelligence report published today. The report claims that access to drinking water, internet connectivity and phone services remain inconsistent, while the Ukrainian city of Kherson “likely faces a critical shortage of medicines” and Mariupol runs the risk of a cholera outbreak. Last month, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov admitted that many occupied areas remained without electricity, water or sewage services. The report also comes a day after Russian President Vladimir Putin compared himself favorably to Peter the Great, a Russian monarch from the late 17th century, using the likening to justify Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Video Ad Feedback 02:17 - Source: CNN 'We're staying': Why some in Sloviansk won't leave their homes

4. Maryland shooting

A 23-year-old man shot four coworkers – three fatally – at a manufacturing plant in western Maryland Thursday before fleeing the scene and exchanging gunfire with state police, authorities said. A trooper and the suspect were wounded and hospitalized, according to Lt. Col. Bill Dofflemyer of the Maryland State Police. Investigators have not yet established a motive for the shooting. The incident is the 254th mass shooting this year, as the country is on pace to match or surpass last year’s total, according to the Gun Violence Archive. Separately, a man was shot and killed by a police officer outside of an Alabama elementary school Thursday after an altercation with a school resource officer, Etowah County Sheriff Jonathon Horton said during a news conference. At least 34 students were inside Walnut Park Elementary School when the man tried to get inside, Gadsden City School Superintendent Tony Reddick told CNN.

5. India

India is facing a firestorm after some of the country’s ruling party officials made derogatory comments about Islam. The United Arab Emirates, Malaysia, Oman, and Iraq are among at least 15 Muslim-majority nations to have condemned the remarks made by India’s ruling party spokeswoman Nupur Sharma, which were described as “Islamophobic,” with several countries summoning India’s ambassadors. The incident sparked protests in neighboring Pakistan and prompted calls from around the region to boycott Indian goods. Sharma, who is now suspended, later withdrew her remarks and said it was never her intention to “hurt anyone’s religious feelings.”

BREAKFAST BROWSE

Mystery creature is caught on camera and authorities need help ID’ing it

Texas officials are asking the public to help identify this mystery “wolfman” creature. What do you think it is?

Britney Spears wedding

And they lived happily ever after! The pop superstar and her partner Sam Asghari are embarking on an exciting new chapter.

Two people rescued after falling in a tank full of chocolate

Thankfully, the people were rescued. (Did you think of the scene from “Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory” too? I can’t be the only one…)

Perseverance rover has made a friend on Mars

The rover has a new pet on the red planet! But it’s probably not the type of pet you’re thinking of.

11-year-old gets plucked from audience and stuns judges on ‘America’s Got Talent’

And just like that, a star is born.

QUIZ TIME

According to a recent California ruling, which insect can legally be considered a fish and have the same protections?

A. Spider

B. Ladybug

C. Bumblebee

D. Butterfly

Take CNN’s weekly news quiz to see if you’re correct!

TODAY’S NUMBER

17

That’s how many professional golfers were suspended from playing in PGA Tour tournaments due to their participation in the controversial Saudi Golf League/LIV Golf series. PGA Tour golfers were previously warned that they were not authorized to participate in the Saudi-backed tour because it violated PGA regulations. Despite the warning – and Saudi Arabia’s record of human rights abuses – several famed golfers including past major winners Dustin Johnson, Phil Mickelson and Sergio Garcia still opted to participate, largely because Saudi Arabia’s breakaway tour has pledged to award $250 million in total prize money.

TODAY’S QUOTE

“It’s outrageous that oil and gas companies are able to take advantage and make four times the profits that they made when there wasn’t a war.”

– White House official Bharat Ramamurti, criticizing Big Oil for banking huge profits in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which the Biden administration has blamed for soaring gas prices. He pointed out that the top five oil companies raked in $35 billion in profits during the first quarter alone as energy prices spiked during the onset of Russia’s war. Major oil companies are, in fact, ramping up supply, but just not quickly enough to drive down prices.

TODAY’S WEATHER

Video Ad Feedback 02:39 - Source: CNN Risk for flooding in the Central Plains

Check your local forecast here>>>

AND FINALLY

Honey in space

Honey in space

As this astronaut says, strange things happen when you remove gravity! (Click here to view)

Federal officials: No reason to list Joshua tree as 'threatened'

The Joshua tree does not require protection under the Endangered Species Act, the Fish and Wildlife Service said in a decision announced Wednesday.

Conservationists had petitioned the service in 2015, seeking to have the iconic desert plant and namesake of Joshua Tree National Park in Southern California listed as a threatened species. On Tuesday, the petitioners, a group called Wild Earth Guardians, filed a lawsuit complaining that the service was long overdue to respond to their petition.

Fish and Wildlife, part of the Department of the Interior, said Wednesday that it had determined that the Joshua tree's habitat is primarily on federally managed land, and has seen "no major contraction in populations" in the last 40 years. Joshua trees are found not only in California but also in Nevada and Arizona.

Federal wildlife officials on Wednesday also declined to protect eight other species across the U.S., citing commercial and scientific data. The determinations come two days after the Trump administration unveiled changes to how the Endangered Species Act will be implemented, including ending a ban on considering economic impacts and decreeing that climate change impacts should not be considered.

Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt has called the changes “improvements to regulations" and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross has praised the changes, saying they would ease the regulatory burden on the American public.

Agency: Joshua trees have 'enough resiliency'

The decision from the Fish and Wildlife Service's Carlsbad office reviewed the primary stressors to Joshua trees, among them wildfire, invasive plants, effects of climate change, and habitat loss. However, because the two species of Joshua tree, Yucca brevifolia and Yucca jaegeriana, still occupy their historical ranges of roughly 12 million acres, there is “enough resiliency in the population despite threats acting on them,” the service said. The species native to Joshua Tree National Park, Yucca brevifolia, has a historic range of 6.4 million acres, the service said.

Taylor Jones, the biologist and advocate who authored the petition, expressed frustration with Wednesday's decision.

“It appears that this administration is ignoring the science because they don’t believe in climate change,” Jones said. “This is blatant disregard of the climate crisis.”

Jones' petition cited climate models indicating the Joshua tree could lose roughly 90% of its habitat in the next 80 years, should the most severe climate conditions bear out. The gradual warming and drying of Southern California, which could see average maximum temperatures in July rise by as many as five or six degrees, could reduce the Joshua tree population in California to one small refuge in the center of Joshua Tree National Park.

It is unclear whether the agency agrees with the projections cited by Jones, though the findings state that “future stochastic and catastrophic events would not lead to population- or species-level declines in the foreseeable future.” A more detailed examination of the climate change impacts is still to be released, and will include the agency's own 80-year projections.

“This administration has a history of climate-change denial," Jones said. "President Trump called climate change a hoax, and Bernhardt discounted climate change when opening up public lands to oil and gas development. Denial of protections to Joshua trees fits that pattern.”

Changes to the Endangered Species Act

This week's changes to the Endangered Species Act for the first time allow authorities to compile and review economic impacts of protecting a particular species during the review process; end blanket protections for animals newly deemed threatened; and reduce the scope of assessments during the listing review process. Instead of blanket protections for threatened species, officials said they will require “species-specific regulations for protective status.”*

Legal challenges are expected by California and other states, as well as environmental groups.

“Even as we suffer an extinction crisis and a climate emergency, the Trump administration continues to serve only narrow corporate interests,” said Tierra Curry, a senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity. “By shooting down protections for these imperiled plants and animals, Trump officials are displaying contempt for America’s natural heritage."

More:Joshua trees, monarch butterflies among species that may be impacted by Endangered Species Act change

More:Riverside County report deals blow to Paradise Valley, a proposed 'new town' near Joshua Tree park

Wednesday's decision on the Joshua tree was not made public as a result of Wild Earth Guardian's court filing on Tuesday, according to a Department of Fish and Wildlife spokesperson, Jane Hendron. Wild Earth Guardians said in a statement Wednesday it plans to file another lawsuit appealing Tuesday's decision.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) responded to Tuesday's announcement by saying: "The iconic Joshua tree defines the California desert, but it could be lost forever if the administration has its way." Feinstein also criticized the Trump administration's rule changes for the Endangered Species Act.

Bee, mussels, blackbird also rejected

Besides the Joshua tree, the Fish and Wildlife Service said Wednesday it would decline to extend protections to another tree, freshwater mussels, reptiles and insects across the United States.

Petitioners were seeking protections for species including:

the Arapahoe snowfly

the brook floater and smooth pimpleback (two types mussels),

golden orb spider

the seaside alder, a tree

the tricolored blackbird

the yellow-banded bumble bee.

The agency asked the public "to submit to us at any time” any new, relevant information on the status of the species or their habitats.

Commercial as well as scientific information was used in the decisions not to protect the species, the federal agency said. Critics say economic impacts should not be allowed to outweigh biological and other research. Home developers, farmers and others have long argued that economics should be weighed as well.

The brook floater, a North American mussel, has historically been found from Georgia to Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, clustered in sand pockets behind boulders and stream banks. The medium-sized mussel has been wiped out of approximately half of its U.S. locations, making the Canadian population “an important global stronghold for the species,” according to Fisheries and Oceans Canada. U.S. wildlife officials said there are also resilient populations in North Carolina and Maine.

More:Imperiled by climate change, Joshua trees could be declared a threatened species

More:How Minerva Hamilton Hoyt saved Joshua Tree park for future generations

California’s tricolored blackbirds have declined by nearly 90% since the 1930s because of the destruction of wetlands and grasslands, pesticide use that wipes out their insect prey base and loss of nest sites during agricultural operations, environmentalists say. Federal officials said the fact that the bird is protected by California as an endangered species is adequate.

Yellow-banded bumblebees, once common in the American Midwest and East Coast and in southern Canada, have declined due to pesticide use and large swaths of habitat lost to development, conservationists say. Federal officials said: "In the species’ current condition, there is occupancy across the majority of the yellow-banded bumble bee’s historical range."

The seaside alder tree lives in riparian and marshy areas in the East, where it may be threatened by salt-water intrusion via sea-level rise due to climate change. A separate population in Oklahoma is threatened by cattle grazing. But the tree has adequate, diverse habitat and populations, and is equipped to adapt to future change, the wildlife service said.

The Siskiyou Mountains salamander lives in the Klamath-Siskiyou region of Oregon and California, primarily in old-growth forests. It is threatened by U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management plans to increase logging, according to environmental biologists. Federal officials said that environmental groups had not presented "substantial" information to support their contention that fires, logging, mining and other factors were imperiling the salamander's existence.

Three creatures — the golden orb spider, smooth pimpleback mussel and Arapahoe snowfly — were determined to no longer be genetically distinct species. Curry, of the Center for Biological Diversity, said the government appeared to have properly relied on science that determined they are subgroups of larger species.

Trump has protected 18 species to date

The Endangered Species Act, signed by President Nixon in 1973, covers more than 1,600 species in the United States and its territories. The Trump administration has now protected 18 species and declined protections for more than 60 species, said Curry. Eighteen is the lowest number of species protected by any president this far into a first term, she said.

During the eight years of the Obama administration, 360 species were protected under the Endangered Species Act. Under President Bill Clinton's two terms, 523 species were protected.

Under President George H.W. Bush, who served one term, 232 species were protected. Under President George W. Bush, who served two terms, 62 species were protected.

During Ronald Reagan's eight-year presidency, 254 species were protected.

*Clarification: This story has been clarified to explain more clearly about the role economic impacts will play in the Endangered Species Act process and how protections will be extended to species listed as threatened.

Crabs, octopus and lobsters feel pain, study says. They will be ...

Lobsters, octopus and crabs will be recognized as sentient beings in the U.K. after new research suggested they have a central nervous system and can feel pain.

The U.K. government announced Friday that all decapod crustaceans and cephalopod mollusks will be added to the Animal Welfare (Sentience) Bill after a study from the London School of Economics and Political Science found evidence that the sea creatures are sentient, or can feel.

Decapod crustaceans include shrimp, lobsters, crayfish and hermit crabs. Cephalopod mollusks include squid, octopus and cuttlefish.

"The UK has always led the way on animal welfare and our Action Plan for Animal Welfare goes even further by setting out our plans to bring in some of the strongest protections in the world for pets, livestock and wild animals," Animal Welfare Minister Lord Zac Goldsmith said in the announcement.

'1 in a 100 million' chance:Rare 'cotton candy' color lobster caught off the coast of Maine

'Crab lockdown':Millions of crabs shut down the streets on Australia's Christmas Island

The legislation will not affect fishing practices or restaurants that sell shellfish but will protect the animals in future decision-making. Once the bill becomes law, an Animal Sentience Committee will be created and report on how well the government is accounting for sentient animals it its decisions.

"The Animal Welfare Sentience Bill provides a crucial assurance that animal well-being is rightly considered when developing new laws," Goldsmith said.

"The science is now clear that decapods and cephalopods can feel pain and therefore it is only right they are covered by this vital piece of legislation."

Want daily news from USA TODAY on your smart speaker? Here's how to get set up.

Follow reporter Asha Gilbert @Coastalasha. Email: agilbert@usatoday.com.

Monarch butterflies won't get legal protection, despite meeting ...

The federal government has decided against listing the monarch butterfly as either threatened or endangered.

The Trump administration has rolled back protections for endangered and threatened species in its push for deregulation.

“We may be witnessing the collapse of the of the monarch population in the West."

The federal government has decided against listing the monarch butterfly as either threatened or endangered – at least for now.

Instead, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will next consider the black-and-orange butterfly, once a common sight in backyard gardens, meadows and other landscapes, as a “candidate” for designation as either threatened or endangered in 2024.

The delay is because there are so many other higher-priority species across the nation – 161 to be exact – that are ahead of the monarch, the Fish and Wildlife Service said.

“We conducted an intensive, thorough review using a rigorous, transparent science-based process and found that the monarch meets listing criteria under the Endangered Species Act," said U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service director Aurelia Skipwith, in a statement. "However, before we can propose listing, we must focus resources on our higher-priority listing actions.

“While this work goes on, we are committed to our ongoing efforts with partners to conserve the monarch and its habitat at the local, regional and national levels," Skipwith said. "Our conservation goal is to improve monarch populations, and we encourage everyone to join the effort.”

Protection under the Endangered Species Act would have required the government to develop and fund a comprehensive, nationwide recovery plan, according to National Geographic.

“The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service agrees that monarchs are threatened with extinction,” Sarina Jepsen, director of endangered species at the Xerces Society conservation group, said Tuesday. “However, this decision does not yet provide the protection that monarchs, and especially the western population, so desperately need to recover.”

The Trump administration has rolled back protections for endangered and threatened species in its push for deregulation, even as the United Nations says 1 million species – 1 of every 8 on Earth – face extinction because of climate change, development and other human causes.

Monarchs are known for their phenomenal spring and fall migrations, traveling across the continent to and from wintering sites. In eastern North America, monarchs travel north in the spring, from Mexico to Canada, over two to three successive generations, breeding along the way. Western monarchs continue to occupy and breed in warmer climates throughout the summer.

More:Monarch butterfly population at critically low levels in California

Scientists estimate the monarch population in the eastern U.S. has fallen about 80% since the mid-1990s, while the drop-off in the western U.S. has been even steeper.

For decades, monarchs in the West have been in decline because of loss of habitat, including destruction of their California overwintering sites and loss of both milkweed for caterpillars and flowering resources to fuel migration, the Xerces Society said. The insects are also impacted by climate change and pesticide use.

“We may be witnessing the collapse of the of the monarch population in the West,” said Jepsen of the Xerces Society.

Tierra Curry, a senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity, said Tuesday that “47 species have gone extinct waiting for their protection to be finalized. This decision continues the delay in implementing a national recovery plan which monarchs desperately need.

"Monarchs are beautiful, they play important roles in nature and culture, and their migrations are jaw-dropping. We owe them and future generations an all-in commitment to their recovery.”

Contributing: The Associated Press

Weird laws in Pa.: Did you know these were actually on the books?

If you pay a fortune teller and expect to get an accurate glimpse into your future, you're probably just a sucker. But if you do it while you're in Pennsylvania, you're also aiding and abetting a crime — since according to state law, fortune telling is illegal.

Good to know, right?

Well, it's not Pennsylvania's only wacky law. So here's a roundup of weird, bizarre, quirky, or otherwise nonsensical laws that really do exist...at least according to state legislatures, local newspapers, or legal databases.

More:Fastnachts: Where to get your fix in central Pennsylvania for Shrove Tuesday

More:Pennsylvania can't easily change the name of Negro Mountain. Here's why.

And warning, you're probably guilty of one or two violations.

Seven facts about keeping kosher

Andrew Wolfson

@adwolfson

» The word kosher, literally meaning “clean” or “pure,” refers to food that has been prepared in accordance with Jewish rules and rituals so it can be eaten by religious Jews.

» Because the Torah allows eating only animals that both chew their cud and have cloven hooves, pork is prohibited. So are shellfish, lobsters, oysters, shrimp and clams, because the Old Testament says to eat only fish with fins and scales. Another rule prohibits mixing dairy with meat or poultry.

» Jews can ensure they keep kosher by buying products certified as kosher with a mark called a hekhsher that usually identifies the rabbi or group that certified the product.

» Foods so certified are not "blessed." Rather it means the place they were processed is inspected to make sure kosher standards are maintained. Kosher meat, for example, must be slaughtered without causing pain to the animal, meaning that death occurs almost instantaneously.

» Approximately three-quarters of all prepackaged foods in the U.S. have some kind of kosher certification.

» Reform Jews are not required to keep kosher but if they decide to, they can accomplish that by refraining from eating pork or shellfish, or just observing dietary rules at home, rather than when eating out, or by becoming vegetarians.

» Some Conservative and Orthodox Jews, and businesses, especially in Israel, have rebelled in recent years from buying products stamped kosher because of concerns about corruption and bribery in the inspection process.

Sources: Judaism 101.org; Reform Judaism.org; My Jewish Learning.org

Solar surges in California desert. Environmentalists aren't happy

Alfredo Figueroa, an 85-year-old former miner, can rattle off the name of every major geographic feature rising from the desert floor outside of Blythe, Calif., a town of 19,000 off the Interstate 10 freeway, halfway between Los Angeles and Phoenix.

On a warm winter day, the descendant of the Chemehuevi and Yaqui tribes hiked along a mesa dotted with petroglyphs, and waved his walking stick at a chunky mountain peak 20 miles in the distance, bathed in orange by sunshine. "That's Palen," he chuckled, pointing at the formation. "See his chin sticking up?"

All of the peaks are part of creation stories, he says, from birth in the Big Maria range to death in the Mule Mountains just behind him. But it's the time-varnished desert floor that concerns him right now.

Two industrial solar farm projects — called Crimson Solar and Desert Quartzite — are proposed for just below where he's standing. And between here and Desert Center, 20 miles west, another 10 have been built, are under construction or are seeking approvals.

Mandated by law in 2018, California is attempting to engineer a monumental shift to zero-emission electricity by 2045. To get there, the state is adopting various measures, including a first-in-the-nation law that went into effect Jan. 1 requiring rooftop solar panels on nearly all new homes.

While California recently surpassed 1 million solar rooftops, clean energy advocates and industry officials say that won't be enough to reach the goals. They argue every possible option will be needed — including solar farms in the desert.

That's re-ignited a battle with longtime activists like Figuroa. He and area environmental groups say while they are 100% in favor of solar power, it should be installed on rooftops, landfills and other disturbed lands in urban areas — not hundreds of miles away on fragile desert landscapes.

"Along here are the ancient trails our ancestors took between all these sacred places," Figueroa says, pointing to the creosote-studded land where the 350-megawatt Crimson Solar project is proposed. "This is a pristine area that hasn't been destroyed, and they will destroy it."

Solar power for 400,000 homes?

But when others look out at the Southern California desert, they see a different story.

"There are two places in the world that have this high level of solar radiance: One is the California desert and the other is northern Africa," says Shannon Eddy, founding executive director of the Large-Scale Solar Association, based in Sacramento. "What's unique about the California desert is that ... it's so close to load centers (cities that need power). There's nothing like it in the world."

With carbon emissions from coal and natural gas-powered plants stoking climate change worldwide, Eddy and others say industrial-strength renewables are critical. "It's time to dispel the myth that rooftop solar alone is enough," says Eddy, who represents solar developers in California, Nevada and Arizona. "I love rooftop, but we need to be doing that, we need to do large-scale utility, and we need to be looking under mattresses for energy efficiency measures. We need it all!"

All told, nearly 30,000 acres of photovoltaic solar farms producing up to 4,000 megawatts could come online in the California desert within the next few years, a 30% uptick statewide over 2018, the latest year for which data is available. That's enough to power as many as 400,000 homes for a year.

Current solar projects:

Desert Quartzite (First Solar), about 3,800 acres, 450 megawatts, near final approval

Crimson Solar (Recurrent), about 2,500 acres; 350 megawatts, public comment period open until Jan. 30

Palen (EDF Renewables) approx. 3,140 acres; 500 megawatts, under construction

Blythe (NextEra), approx. 4,318 acres; 485 megawatts (235 operational, 250 pending construction)

McCoy/Arlington (NextEra) approx. 4,282 acres; 750 megawatts (250 operational, 500 pending construction)

Desert Sunlight (NextEra) approx. 4,084 Acres; 550 megawatts cconstructed and operational

Genesis (NextEra) approx. 1,950 acres; 250 megawatts constructed and operational

Desert Harvest (EDF Renewables) approx. 1,412 acres; 150 megawatts under construction

Arica (Clearway Energy Group) approx. 2,000 acres; 265 megawatts, application being processed

Victory Pass (Clearway Energy Group) approx. 1,800 acres; 200 megawatts, application being processed

IP Athos (Intersect Power) private land facility, 3,600 acres, 500 megawatts tie-in on public lands, being constructed

Two companies have applied for a 12th project on the same acreage; both are being reviewed by BLM.

Kevin Emmerich, co-founder of the environmental group Basin and Range Watch, based in Beatty, Nev., has methodically opposed every large solar project in the desert. He says the increase "is just a gigantic assault of these industrial projects on desert habitats and cultural sites."

"We have the ability to get off of fossil fuels in a responsive, ecologically friendly way," he says. "We're not doing that. We're creating new environmental problems by trying to create solutions to old environmental problems."

But Eddy says the new projects are far more environmentally friendly than earlier ones. She says the project boom may seem large, but it's a drop in the bucket compared to state modeling showing an estimated 90,000 to 125,000 megawatts of large-scale solar power needs to be added to the grid in the next 25 years.

"We have to figure out where we want to build these plants, and we can't fight each other anymore," she says. "The further we stall, the worse shape we're in" in terms of greenhouse gases.

Rooftops versus long-distance

The wrangling offers a snapshot of the current state of solar energy in California: It's surging, but not quite as planned. Thanks to homeowner rebates, a sharp drop in prices of photovoltaic panels, and consumer jitters over blackouts due to wildfires, rooftop solar installations have climbed to 9 gigawatts of power, closing in on the 12 gigawatts of industrial solar power.

Large-scale solar farms are growing too, but, some say, not at the pace originally envisioned in the 2016 Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP).

That plan was signed by federal, state, county, tribal, environmental and industry groups in the last months of the Obama administration. It was supposed to fast-track California's industrial solar, wind and geothermal projects across 388,000 acres (about 600 square miles). At the same time, it outlined a process to preserve six million acres of federal land.

But U.S. Bureau of Land Management officials have denied 93 proposals, often due to environmental concerns. Trump administration officials have ordered BLM to re-open the plan to all energy development, including oil and gas drilling and mining.

The initial slow ramp-up of big solar plants was fine with desert environmental and tribal groups.

"I don't think the average person driving by appreciates how ecologically valuable these desert wash habitats are," says Chris Clarke, associate director of the California desert program for the National Parks Conservation Association. He says large-scale power generation tied to a massive grid is "a 20th-century business plan for a 21st-century problem."

But others say all options need to be considered as officials push to potentially electrify the entire state with enough clean energy to power nearly 36 million cars and trucks and 17 million buildings.

"2020 is going to be a pivotal year; I would say it's going to set the pace for the next decade of renewables," says Bernadette Del Chiaro, executive director of the California Solar and Storage Association, a Sacramento-based group that represents manufacturers of rooftop solar and other small "distributed" systems. "We really don't have a clear road map for how to meet the zero-carbon mandate."

Del Chiaro says current state modeling wrongly assumes rooftop solar will plateau or even decline, and questions the megawattage that Eddy says must come from industrial solar farms.

Nevertheless, she says, California can't wait a decade to see if enough rooftop solar can be built. Approvals and construction of utility-scale projects in carefully selected landscapes also need to start now. "Climate change is doing far worse damage to species than habitat loss," she says.

Feds want 'to have the DRECP blown up'

While both environmentalists and industry representatives say the aims of the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan were noble, neither is totally happy with how things have played out.

In sun-drenched eastern Riverside and San Bernardino counties, many residents and conservationists say the seeming "no man's land" areas were wrongly made a "development focus areas," or as they see it, sacrifice zones.

Solar industry representatives, meanwhile, are not pleased with the fees they have to pay to lease public lands for their projects. The costs have skyrocketed 600% in recent years, said Eddy, via a series of increases. A BLM spokeswoman said they now collect $6 million in rent annually from eastern Riverside County projects.

Responding to rural constituents' anger, San Bernardino County has banned the construction of large solar and wind farms across more than one million acres. Riverside County continues to process projects on private lands.

One reason more projects have not been approved since the DRECP was adopted is that more endangered or threatened species have been found in areas slated for renewable development than expected. At the same time, species that the plan aimed to protect have not always been found in designated conservation areas.

"They thought the desert tortoise were going to be in one place, and instead, there were lots of them in an area identified for solar development, and none in the places where they're supposed to be," says Eddy of the Large-Scale Solar Association

Jeremiah Karuzas, BLM's renewable energy program manager for California, says his agency is drafting an amendment to the DRECP. "We realized some things we needed to fix or adjust to give additional flexibility, both for project developers and BLM itself."

Asked about the Interior Department order to allow all kinds of energy projects — including oil drilling and mining — in the DRECP, Karuzas acknowledged the proposed adjustments "wouldn't apply just to renewable energy, but to any BLM activity in that area."

That prospect sets off alarm bells for solar developers and environmentalists alike, despite their issues with the current plan.

"The BLM guys know the ways the regs got written has led to barriers that were unintended," says V. John White with the Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies, a Sacramento partnership of major environmental groups and clean energy companies. "And changes that could be agreed to by environmentalists,(and) solar and wind industry developers, can't get accomplished because the federal government wants to have the DRECP blown up to do more mining."

Eddy, the solar industry advocate, agrees the plan needs to be fixed, but says fossil fuels should not be added. "Oil and gas was never envisioned as part of the desert conservation plan," she says.

Clarke with the National Parks Conservation Association says: "People have a diversity of opinions about the DRECP, but the conservation community is unanimous that it needs to be defended in its current form."

There is good news, say some

Alex Daue, the assistant director of energy and climate for The Wilderness Society, a national organization, says the solar farm activity along the 10 freeway near existing transmission lines shows that the plan is beginning to work.

Daue sees it as a model for bipartisan legislation proposed in both houses of Congress to designate areas across the West for utility-scale renewables.

The Public Land Renewable Energy Development Act would identify lower-value areas for commercial-scale renewable development. But instead of sending all land leasing revenues to the general treasury, as is currently done, millions would go to local communities, states and federal conservation and innovation efforts.

As big cities and suburbs cut the cord with coal-fired power plants in Utah and elsewhere, they're looking to sign contracts with wind and solar power from rural California. That includes the fully approved Palen project, a 3,100-acre development named for a dry lake below the mountains of the same name, near Joshua Tree National Park.

EDF Renewables North America, the developer, announced last month that it has sold nearly all of the 500 megawatts the facility will create. Its customers include Southern California Edison, a subsidiary of Shell Oil, and CleanPowerSF, which serves 300,000 San Francisco customers.

Plants, animals and desert soil

Conservationists say the long-distance sales prove the desert is being used as a sacrifice zone. They and developers offer dueling research on the impact of the projects, which average five square miles in size.

Clarke with the National Parks Association and Emmerich of Basin and Range Watch say the solar farms are harming myriad plants and animals, like the desert tortoise, Mojave fringe-toed lizard, ironwood tree stands and a suite of desert flowers.

They point to wildlife mortality counts showing scores of species of birds, along with bats and monarch butterflies, have been injured or killed at solar projects. Thousands of birds have been incinerated or singed mid-air at the Ivanpah desert facility due to its concentrating thermal technology, which creates extreme heat via a series of mirrors.

Pilots also have complained about blinding glare produced by its thermal towers, which create a piercing light. BLM and other agencies are conducting "glint and glare" and wildlife studies. The thermal technology is not being used in new projects because the price of photovoltaic solar panels has plummeted, notes Eddy.

But photovoltaic solar can create a phenomenon called the "lake effect," says Clarke, sending birds winging their way into hot panels, mistakenly thinking they are a cool oasis.

Peter Weiner, head of the environment and energy practice at the law firm Paul Hastings in Los Angeles, says there's no research definitively documenting such a problem. "We don’t think there is evidence of a lake effect," says Weiner, who works with solar developers. He said while an early mortality count at the Desert Sunlight facility found dead water birds, there is also a working fish farm nearby that might attract them. Tracking at other PV solar facilities shows "insignificant" impacts on birds, he adds.

Another concern raised by Clarke is that solar installations disturb a type of desert soil called caliche. A 2014 UC Riverside study for the California Energy Commission concluded losses of caliche and organic matter in surface soil layers "compromise the value of solar energy as an alternative to fossil carbon burning by releasing stored inorganic carbon into the atmosphere and destroying the ability of the deserts to sequester carbon."

The researchers recommended locating solar developments on previously disturbed lands.

Weiner said he is not aware of further studies on caliche, but that solar farm sites are no longer mass graded, with post holes being dug in carefully selected spots. Eddy offered two other studies, funded by solar companies, showing that with proper siting, endangered kit foxes fared better than in raw wilderness at San Luis Obispo County PV farms, possibly even using the panels for protection from predators.

Public comment period closing soon

As technology has evolved, developers are proposing smaller solar projects than in the boom days of major federal incentives more than a decade ago. BLM staff now also often ask developers to surgically excise ravines and other watershed areas, to preserve woodlands and other key habitat.

That's the case with the Crimson Solar project, they note, where Recurrent Energy is seeking a right of way on 2,500 acres of public land to construct a 350-megawatt photovoltaic facility. That's down from nearly 7,000 acres first proposed years ago by another developer.

Scott Dawson, director of permitting for Recurrent Energy, said at a recent public hearing that the project would not destroy any petroglyphs or sacred sites, and was being proposed in an environmentally sensitive fashion. Public comment is open until Jan. 30.

Both Figueroa's cultural resources group, La Cuna de Aztlan, and Basin and Range Watch say while the project is smaller, neither Recurrent nor BLM are presenting the full picture. For instance, says Emmerich, a popular biking and jeep trail would be heavily impacted by chain link fencing, as would vistas from documented historic sites.

The adjoining 450 megawatt project, Desert Quartzite, by First Solar, could receive final approvals soon. It would connect with Southern California Edison’s Colorado Substation, on about 3,700 acres of federal land and 154 acres of private land.

As a former Sierra Club staffer, Eddy says tough choices need to be made about where to locate large solar projects.

"California has set some good and aggressive climate targets, and getting there is going to require breaking ground that hasn't been broken before," she says. "It requires very important conversations about land use, conversations that are deep and profound and difficult. ... The whole world is facing these decisions on a macro-level."

Correction: An earlier version of this story misspelled Alex Daue's last name and gave an incorrect title for him. He is assistant director of energy and climate at The Wilderness Society.

Janet Wilson is senior environment reporter for The Desert Sun and writes USA Today's Climate Point newsletter @janetwilson66 janet.wilson@desertsun.com

Tiny Borrego Springs agrees to huge water cuts to guarantee its ...

Borrego Springs, the small desert town at the entrance to California's sprawling Anza-Borrego State Park, has won a judge's approval for an agreement under which large farmers, resort owners and its own water district will slash water use by 74% by 2040. Officials say the cuts are needed to keep the town of 3,000 alive.

More than a dozen major landholders, including ranchers and developers who've long grown crops and created lush golf greens in the parched desert by pumping large amounts of water from a rapidly depleting aquifer, signed on to the settlement agreement. Together with the town, their share of water rights total more than 75% of an estimated 24,000 acre-feet of water pumped annually out of the desert floor. Within 19 years, that is required to plummet to about 5,700 acre-feet.

"It’s drastic, but it's necessary to make sure Borrego Springs survives and is a vibrant community," said Kathy Dice, president of the Borrego Water District. "It's going to be hard on agriculture and on recreational services like golf, but it should not affect small landowners out here."

Visitors and residents have long been able to grab a bag of fresh grapefruits or oranges from one of several roadside stands in town — a desert novelty. Retirees enjoy rounds of golf on emerald green courses surrounded by spectacular, heat-blasted mountains. That's been changing in recent years, with some farmers opting to fallow fields or sell and move out. One of the main golf courses has closed.

Now, with the water agreement, many landowners think they will not only be able to save what makes the place unique but also the community itself, which has struggled for decades with shrinking water supplies. Unlike Los Angeles or the Coachella Valley, there are no huge pipes or canals shipping imported water here, just a rapidly shrinking aquifer below their feet.

"We know that there's a shortage of water, but we wanted to get away from the pointing fingers and blaming each other, between all of the farmers and golf courses and the community at large," said Jim Seley, 79, owner of Seley Ranches. Seley's father first bought land here in 1953, and Seley's sons want to farm here for years to come. "The settlement agreement is an effort to put everybody together, working towards the same final result of sustaining the valley."

Under a front-loaded agreement, all large users, whether they signed on or not, will be required to ratchet down by 5% each year the amounts of water they take from the "critically over-drafted" aquifer that is gradually replenished with rainfall that flows down from surrounding mountains to Coyote Creek and below the Borrego Valley. By 2030, all will have halved their baseline amounts.

The first few years, considerable leeway will be allowed, as actual rates of water usage are determined. For decades, some farmers and other large landowners had no water meter, Dice said. They could simply pump as much as they wanted from beneath their parcels.

The voluminous agreement, signed by Orange County Superior Court Judge Peter Wilson on April 8, changes that. Every parcel will be metered, and amounts used will be monitored and limits enforced by a multi-person water master board. If it turns out the 24,000 acre-feet was an overestimate, then cuts could be relaxed a bit. Conversely, if it was an underestimate, even deeper cuts could be mandated.

State law forces solution

When Larry Gilstrap and Susan Deering retired and bought a 3½-acre lot in Borrego Springs in 2009, they were drawn by the stark beauty, forever preserved in the massive state park around them. The fact that it took hours to drive there from anywhere else, over torturously winding mountain roads or across barren, triple-digit desert, added to the appeal. It meant the town would likely never be overdeveloped.

"The fact that we saw large growth as not being a sustainable thing was definitely a desirable thing," he said. "And the fact that those natural places above us and around us will be protected in perpetuity was definitely an appeal. The mountains and the hundreds of thousands of acres of land that have never seen the hand of man, that will never see a plow or ax or bulldozer, it's amazing."

Still, there are unexpected costs.

When they began building on their lot in 2012, there was a water meter on site. It didn't mean they had guaranteed flow. By then, realizing there were finite supplies, town planners required the purchase of water "credits" in which someone no longer using their portion of the aquifer sold to someone who needed it.

"I met a guy in a parking lot ... and paid him $7,000 for a piece of paper," sad Gilstrap.

Gilstrap said he understands the need for the new agreement, and trusts Dice and other town leaders. Dice said ordinary customers who use less than 2 acre-feet of water a year should not notice any difference in water supply, or major changes in their bills.

One acre-foot equals about 326,000 gallons, or enough water to cover an acre of land, to a depth of 1 foot. An average California household uses between one-half and 1 acre-foot of water per year for indoor and outdoor use. The state park and local elementary school are also guaranteed their current water supply forever.

Dice said the water district hoped to offset much of its required cuts by buying up water rights as private property owners pull up stakes. The agreement was also tailored to try to prevent out-of-town water market investors from buying rights for resale.

She also hopes to maintain the high quality of town water. Flowing down from the surrounding hillsides and through a natural creek, she said it was fantastic water. But researchers feared with underground supplies being diminished, pumpers could start pulling out water that has sat underground for thousands of years, containing both natural toxins like arsenic and manmade contaminants like nitrates.

The town has been aware for years of the dire decline in its water supplies, with experts gauging losses to its underground aquifer at between 1 and 2 feet a year, depending on the location. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation looked at possibly importing water, but concluded it would cost up to $695 million to build and maintain, and to buy water over 50 years. Those plans were shelved. Discussions about what to do foundered.

In 2014, a tough new state law, the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, or SGMA, was passed, requiring all 515 of California's groundwater basins to remain usable.

"The overarching theme of SGMA is ... you still have to have water available for the long term, for generations to come," said Joyia Emard, spokeswoman for the California Department of Water Resources. "You're basically not using it all up now, it's there for the future."

Most of the state's 515 basins are in good shape, but 21, including Borrego Springs' subbasin, were declared to be in "critical overdraft," meaning they are drawing out far more than is being replaced, like a bank customer withdrawing far more funds than they are depositing.

The critically over-drafted basins were required to submit groundwater sustainability plans by Jan. 31, 2020, or show they had a viable alternative. If they didn't, they faced a takeover by the state, which can legally impose draconian pumping fees until a basin regains stability. Areas that don't submit plans or legal alternatives also can't qualify for grants for infrastructure and other projects.

In the Coachella Valley, the Indio subbasin has an alternate management plan submitted by the Coachella Valley Water District, Coachella Water Authority, Desert Water Agency, and the Indio Water Authority; it was approved in 2019.

Borrego Springs opted for an adjudicated, stipulated agreement instead, a legally binding document. State water resource officials will review the agreement and likely approve it.

Dice said the state law was "a godsend" because it forced all of the parties who had been talking for years about the valley's shrinking water supply to take concrete steps to shore it up. But to get there, the water district had to take the uncomfortable step of suing all of its members and every water user in the valley to comply with the state groundwater law, and to make sure the agreement would be binding.

Seley and most other major landowners signed, and those who didn't are still required to abide by the deal. He's already reduced Seley Ranches' water usage by 5% for 2020-21, as required. He, his sons and the ranch manager have stripped out old, less productive fruit trees. Some will be replaced in a different configuration that uses less water, others will not. They're already down from 370 to 333 productive acres. They'll also try out soil amendments and new technologies designed to make every drop of water count.

And they plan to work with townspeople to increase tourism, promoting their sweet "Seley Reds" grapefruits and other premium produce.

Seley says he won't be around to see it, but he still thinks the state and federal governments — which have been promising to clean up the dwindling, polluted Salton Sea to the east — could ship in water from the Gulf of Mexico, desalinate it and supply some to this tiny but fertile spot.

For Gilstrap, a retired high school teacher, Borrego Springs is a microcosm of what's occurring globally with rapid climate change and water shortages. He's already seen native creosote on his property wilting with less rainfall and less water to tap into underground.

The constraints of the dry valley are also key to its sustainability, he thinks, and in the end could give it a better shot than cities and suburbs dependent on imports from the depleting Colorado River or Owens Valley.

For him, the future also lies with tourists, but eco-tourists respectful of nature, including birders, geologists and botanists, and "people just eager to get out and hike."

He doesn't fear it becoming another wild place overrun by visitors precisely because of its water constraints.

"Because of those limitations, there are only going to be so many motels, so many places to camp," he said. "Borrego Springs is a beautiful place because it's hard to get to."

Janet Wilson is senior environment reporter with The Desert Sun. She also co-authors USA Today's Climate Point newsletter. She can be reached at janet.wilson@desertsun.com or on Twitter @janetwilson66.

Bottling water without scrutiny

Story by Ian James | Photos by Jay Calderon, The Desert Sun | March 8, 2015

Miles from the nearest paved road in the San Bernardino National Forest, two sounds fill a rocky canyon: a babbling stream and the hissing of water flowing through a stainless steel pipe.

From wells that tap into springs high on the mountainside, water gushes down through the pipe to a roadside tank. From there, it is transferred to tanker trucks, hauled to a bottling plant and sold as Arrowhead 100% Mountain Spring Water.

UPDATE: Groups seek fast ruling in suit to halt Nestle water use

Nestle Waters North America holds a longstanding right to use this water from the national forest near San Bernardino. But the U.S. Forest Service hasn't been keeping an eye on whether the taking of water is harming Strawberry Creek and the wildlife that depends on it. In fact, Nestle's permit to transport water across the national forest expired in 1988. It hasn't been reviewed since, and the Forest Service hasn't examined the ecological effects of drawing tens of millions of gallons each year from the springs.

Even with California deep in drought, the federal agency hasn't assessed the impacts of the bottled water business on springs and streams in two watersheds that sustain sensitive habitats in the national forest. The lack of oversight is symptomatic of a Forest Service limited by tight budgets and focused on other issues, and of a regulatory system in California that allows the bottled water industry to operate with little independent tracking of the potential toll on the environment.

In an investigation of the industry's water footprint in the San Bernardino National Forest and other parts of California, The Desert Sun found that:

No state agency is tracking exactly how much water is used by all of the bottled water plants in California, or monitoring the effects on water supplies and ecosystems statewide. The California Department of Public Health regulates 108 bottled water plants in the state, collecting information on water quality and the sources tapped. But the agency says it does not require companies to report how much water they use.

That information, when collected piecemeal by state or local agencies, often isn't easily accessible to the public. In some cases, the amounts of water used are considered confidential and not publicly released.

Even as Nestle Waters has been submitting required reports on its water use, the Forest Service has not been closely tracking the amounts of water leaving the San Bernardino National Forest and has not assessed the impacts on the environment.

While the Forest Service has allowed Nestle to keep using an expired permit for nearly three decades, the agency has cracked down on other water users in the national forest. Several years ago, for instance, dozens of cabin owners were required to stop drawing water from a creek when their permits came up for renewal. Nestle has faced no such restrictions.

Only this year, after a group of critics raised concerns in letters and after The Desert Sun inquired about the expired permit, did Forest Service officials announce plans to take up the issue and carry out an environmental analysis.

A growing debate over Nestle's use of water from the San Bernardino National Forest parallels other arguments in places from the San Gorgonio Pass to Mount Shasta. And those debates have turned more contentious as a fourth year of drought weighs on California's depleted water supplies.

Statewide, the bottled water industry accounts for a small fraction of overall water use. The U.S. Geological Survey has estimated that roughly 1 percent of the water used in the state goes to industrial users, with bottling plants being a small portion of that. Pumping from wells can pull down groundwater levels, and drawing water from springs can reduce the amounts flowing in streams.

Bottled water companies in California are typically subject to environmental reviews only when a permit for a new project triggers a formal study. Otherwise, the impacts of bottling plants on creeks and aquifers often aren't scrutinized by government agencies.

In the San Bernardino National Forest, Nestle insists its bottling of spring water isn't causing any harm. Water from Arrowhead Springs has been tapped and sold for more than a century. The company says it is complying with all the requirements of its expired permit in the national forest and has been informed by the Forest Service that it can keep operating lawfully until a new permit is eventually issued. The company also says that at all of the springs where it draws water, it monitors the environment and manages its water use to ensure "long-term sustainability."

The Forest Service and Nestle have had a cooperative relationship over the years. In 2003, the Old Fire swept through the area and destroyed portions of Nestle's pipeline. A month later, deadly floods and mudslides thundered down from the mountains. As Nestle workers rebuilt the pipeline on the mountainside, Forest Service officials oversaw the work. But the agency didn't require a new permit at the time, and in the years since hasn't examined whether draining away spring water poses problems for the creek and the forest.

Two former Forest Service employees interviewed by The Desert Sun say they think it's wrong that the agency for decades hasn't studied the impacts on the national forest. During the drought, they say, there is now an urgent need to protect the water sources on public lands and reexamine Nestle's bottling operation.

"They're taking way too much water. That water's hugely important," said Steve Loe, a biologist who retired from the Forest Service in 2007. "Without water, you don't have wildlife, you don't have vegetation."

Standing on a roadside several miles from the springs, Loe motioned to the peaks in the distance, and to the steep mountainside where a natural rock formation shaped like an arrowhead marks the location of Arrowhead Springs. Beneath that arrowhead, hot springs bubble from the ground at a long-closed hotel that once attracted celebrities in the 1940s. In nearby Strawberry Canyon, cold springs gush from the mountain and into the pipes for bottling.

"When you take water from the springs that are the source of those waters, you dry up these canyons," Loe said. "And they're the most important habitats that we have."

An avid hiker and outdoorsman, Loe can rattle off a list of animals that need the water in Strawberry Creek: frogs, insects, salamanders, and birds such as Bell's vireo and willow flycatchers.

An increasingly rare species of native fish, the Santa Ana speckled dace, used to survive in Strawberry Creek. Then, after the wildfire and floods of 2003, the little fish disappeared from Strawberry Creek and other nearby streams. Scientists who surveyed the area concluded that the devastating fire and flooding had wiped out the populations.

Loe said he suspects the bottling operation contributed to their demise by leaving few spots with enough water for them to survive through the summers. "It makes everything in the stream more vulnerable having all of that water removed."

Nestle disputes that and says its use of water didn't harm the fish. But Loe said siphoning off water that could otherwise flow in the creek poses clear threats that need to be fully studied, particularly in light of the drought and climate change.

Loe first raised his concerns in an email in September to a list of federal and state officials and others, including a Nestle Waters manager. He pointed out that Nestle's permit "has long expired and needs to be reissued," requiring an analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). He suggested a meeting.

Soon afterward, Loe met with the Nestle manager and laid out his concerns. Five months later – after he and others sent additional critical letters to the government and after The Desert Sun posed questions about the expired permit – Forest Service officials met with Loe and told him they have started to evaluate the reissuance of the expired permit.

While pleased that the agency acknowledged the issue, Loe still has concerns. He wants to see an environmental study prepared by an independent third party. He also wants a review of Nestle's use of water from Deer Canyon Springs in the national forest. He said it's time for immediate measures to put more water into the streams while those environmental reviews, which can take years, are carried out.

"Because of the drought emergency, they need to go beyond just doing the NEPA," Loe said. "I would like to see the Forest Service and Nestle agree not to take water until they know if it's OK to take water. This hasn't been studied in a long time."

Ultimately, Loe said, protecting the flows of Strawberry Creek will likely require putting limits on how much water can be piped out.

"To keep taking water is just so risky if you care about the long-term health of that stream," he said. "We should be sitting down with Nestle and we should be saying, 'We've got to do something here.'"

Strawberry Creek cascades down from the mountains in a rocky canyon filled with live oaks, white alder trees and poison oak. Often, the stream is narrow enough to jump across. Running alongside it is a 4-inch stainless steel pipe supported on metal scaffolding.

"That's Arrowhead's pipe coming down right there," said Gary Earney, a retired Forest Service employee, standing on the bank of the creek and leaning on a walking stick.

Earney used to administer permits for the Forest Service, and he said the agency has never done an assessment of how the taking of water affects the creek. Back when the water pipes were installed in the early 20th century, he pointed out, no one conducted environmental reviews. Now, he said, it's long overdue.

"I'm not opposed to the taking of water. But the water removed needs to be surplus to the needs of the national forest," Earney said. If the water is needed for wildlife, he said, it should instead be diverted at the national forest's boundary after it has flowed through the creek.

Determining how much water is needed for a healthy ecosystem, he said, will require a thorough study. And that hasn't been done in all these years, he said, because the Forest Service lacks sufficient funding after repeated budget cuts and has a large backlog of expired permits.

"It's a national problem," Earney said. "I think it's just improper management and poor funding."

Walking among boulders, Earney said that if more water were allowed to flow in the creek, it would provide for plants and animals and would also sink into aquifers at the base of the mountains.

"We need to ensure that we have enough water to sustain the forest's health," Earney said. "I think we should look at whether or not it's a more beneficial use of this water to be bottled and sold in small bottles, or to be allowed to go down and drain off the forest and recharge the groundwater."

While Nestle's expired permit hasn't been scrutinized in nearly three decades, some other water users have been required to cut back. In the mid-2000s, as part of a regional review, the Forest Service went through the permits of hundreds of cabins on land in the national forest and reexamined their use of water from creeks. In Barton Flats, for instance, dozens of cabin owners were told they could no longer draw water from Barton Creek; instead, they would have to use wells or install tanks and truck in water. Cabin owners spent thousands of dollars putting in tanks.

"Some of these people had been using the water with water rights for 80 years, and it was very costly to make the change. Nestle takes more water from the stream in one day than the total of all of those cabin owners in a year," Loe said. "It's just so unfair."

"We made the little people do the right thing," he said, "and we're not making the big people do the right thing."

Amanda Frye, a community activist who lives in Redlands, said she finds the lack of oversight by the Forest Service disturbing, particularly during the drought.

"The U.S. government is just giving away our natural resources to an international corporation," Frye said. "I think that's really wrong."

Employees of the San Bernardino National Forest say they oversee about 1,500 permits for various uses of national forest lands, ranging from power lines to cabins. About 360 of those permits are expired, and officials say they are gradually working on the backlog.

"The Nestle permit is just one of those 360. It's not like we've purposely held that one out," said Al Colby, a public services staff officer who oversees permits. "The thing is that Nestle continues to pay the fee that they were charged back when the permit was still valid."

Because of that, he said, the expired permit's conditions have remained in effect. "Basically as long as they're paying the fee that was established before it expired, the permit is enforceable."

The national forest has continued to collect a permit fee of $524 from Nestle Waters each year.

The permit, granted to Nestle predecessor Arrowhead Puritas Waters, Inc., was signed in 1978. An amendment said it would "expire and become void" in 1988.

The permit allows the company to maintain more than 4 miles of water pipelines in the national forest, as well as horizontal wells that tap into the springs on the mountainside. Records show the water is drawn from a dozen spring sites, and flows through separate pipes before coming together in the single pipe that runs along Strawberry Creek.

Forest Service officials said that in the 2000s there was talk of renewing Nestle's permit but that other priorities took precedence. Over the years, they said, those other priorities have included wildfires, forest thinning projects, a new rail line through Cajon Pass, and updating permits relating to Southern California Edison.

In Southern California and elsewhere, backlogs of expired permits developed as the Forest Service underwent repeated budget cuts in the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s. The agency has also been burdened with the growing costs of fighting larger and more destructive wildfires, cutting into the amounts of money available for activities such as reviewing permits.

Jason Collier, a lands and recreation specialist who handles special use permits, said he didn't know how much water Nestle has been using. He pointed out that when the permit was issued in the 1970s, reporting the volumes of water wasn't one of the conditions.

"If that tool was in the box," he said, "then we could exercise it."

Collier recalled that reissuing Nestle's expired permit was "part of the discussion" at one point – until the additional railroad track in Cajon Pass came up.

"Then the discussion became, 'There's a backlog in Long Beach (port) and we can't get our shipping containers moved. You work on the railroad,'" Collier said. "That's our reality, right or wrong."

Asked why the Forest Service reviewed the permits of more than 700 cabin owners while leaving Nestle's alone, Collier said that he couldn't speak to how the priorities were set but that the agency took up the cabin permits as part of a region-wide review.

Now that the Forest Service is considering Nestle's permit, Colby said one of the agency's first steps was to request files from the company.

"We need whatever information they have, studies that they have about the area, whatever permit files that they've got," Colby said. "Once we look at all that information, plus our own permit file, that'll help us figure out the scope of what we need to be doing."

Reissuing the permit likely will require studies to answer questions about how the water would flow if it weren't being extracted from the springs, said Robert Taylor, the forest hydrologist. Some of those questions, he said, include where a drop of water would otherwise go, whether it would in fact reach the creek, and how long its journey down the watershed would take.

Taylor said he didn't have specifics of the amounts of water used from Arrowhead Springs because the information is collected by another agency tasked with that responsibility. Taylor said he hadn't looked at Nestle's use of water from Deer Canyon Springs either.

"We have a lot to do. There are a lot of expired permits. We get direction from the regional office and the Washington office on how to handle our levels of permits," Taylor said. "I have 660,000 acres of the national forest to work on, and I'm just one guy. When it becomes a priority, I'll deal with it."

Nestle SA, headquartered in Vevey, Switzerland, is the world's largest food company. Nestle CEO Paul Bulcke has made headlines warning that water scarcity poses a major threat to food security around the world. Another influential figure on Nestle's board of directors is former U.N. Children's Fund Executive Director Ann Veneman, who was U.S. secretary of agriculture from 2001-2005 and oversaw the Forest Service under President George W. Bush.

The company has invested heavily in expanding its bottled water business. Subsidiary Nestle Waters, headquartered in Paris, is the world's biggest bottled water company. And its division Nestle Waters North America is the largest bottled water producer in the United States, with a total of 29 plants in the U.S. and Canada and net sales of $4.1 billion last year.

Five of its bottling plants are located in California – in Sacramento, Livermore, Los Angeles, Cabazon and Ontario.

A display case in the lobby of the Ontario bottling plant shows early 20th century glass bottles for one of the many brands Nestle has purchased over the years: Arrowhead.

The company says water has been sold under an Arrowhead brand since 1894. Nestle has records showing that water has been collected from some of the springs it now uses since at least 1906, one year before the government in 1907 created the San Bernardino National Forest on lands that had previously been known as a forest reserve.

The story of how water bottling developed alongside the hot springs and resort is told in the book "Arrowhead Springs: California's Ideal Resort" by Mark Landis. According to the book, a sanitarium was first built at the hot springs in 1864, and by 1909 the Arrowhead Springs Company was formed to start bottling and selling water. For years, water was transported by rail in a "Water Train" of tank cars to a bottling plant in Los Angeles. Then, in the 1960s, trucks began hauling water to bottling plants.

Nowadays, water from Arrowhead and other springs arrives by tanker truck at the Ontario plant, while water from Deer Canyon Springs flows through a pipeline. Nestle says that nowhere else in the country does its spring water come from sites on national forest lands. The plant also uses purified groundwater to produce the brand Nestle Pure Life.

Inside the plant, machinery hums. A stream of empty bottles soar past on an air-driven production line. Filled and capped, the bottles emerge on conveyor belts ready to be sold.

David Thorpe, Nestle's western supply chain director, touted the company's water efficiency, saying it takes about 1.3 liters of water to produce one liter of bottled water – much less than soft drinks or beer.

"We're very, very efficient water users," Thorpe said. "One of the things we're constantly working on is how to become more efficient."

Statewide, Nestle Waters used a total of 2,164 acre-feet of water from all sources in 2014, said Larry Lawrence, Nestle's natural resource manager. That's about 705 million gallons – enough to irrigate roughly 700 acres of farmland, or keep two golf courses green, or fill 1,068 Olympic-size swimming pools.

The company's water use in the state has been growing along with its sales of bottled water. Figures provided by Nestle show that between 2011 and 2014, during years of extreme drought, the company's water use in California increased 19 percent. Lawrence said, however, that the company carefully monitors its springs and adjusts the volumes of water drawn from different springs in response to the amounts flowing.

In Southern California, the company can tap spring water from six locations in Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego and Inyo counties, and has been drawing water from five of those sites recently. The springs' names are printed on Arrowhead bottles: Southern Pacific Springs, Long Point Ranch, Palomar Mountain Granite Springs, Deer Canyon Springs, Arrowhead Springs and Coyote Springs.

"Everything is operated sustainably," Lawrence said. He said the company has been closely observing all of its springs as the drought has left less water flowing in many areas.

"We watch those flows and we manage our water take to those conditions," he said. "We look at environmental conditions around our sources as well to make sure that there's no impacts other than drought impacts that we see naturally occurring."

There are no regulations that would dictate drought measures for water bottlers and other industries in California. Lawrence said the company has its own internal procedures for managing springs during the dry years.

"We study our springs, and if we're seeing a spring slowdown in flow or being impacted in a way that we think is possibly from the drought itself, we may choose to take water from a different source or go to a source that's further away from our factory," Lawrence said. "We will restrict the flow from sources based on our assessment of the environment around the spring sites."

The company's water system at Arrowhead Springs is largely "self-regulating," Lawrence said, because it is gravity-fed and there is no pumping involved. He said Nestle uses the spring water that naturally flows from the ground, and the amounts change based on fluctuations in the springs' flow.

And while the company's overall water use had increased, Lawrence said Nestle has reduced the use of water from some springs, including Arrowhead, to avoid relying too heavily on them.

"We can harvest what's available," he said. "And on really wet years we certainly can't take all of the water that's available, and on dry years, we're pretty careful about what we do take."

The company says it bottled nearly 25 million gallons from Arrowhead Springs last year, on average about 68,000 gallons a day. That was down from about 27 million gallons during 2013.

Those amounts are only a portion of the water drawn from the springs by Nestle. The state water code requires that groundwater pumping data be collected in four Southern California counties, and a group of local water districts gather and verify the information. Records filed with the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District show a total of 51 million gallons of groundwater used in 2013. But Lawrence said a portion of that water is delivered to the old Arrowhead Springs hotel under a contract with the owner, and some of the water is also regularly released back into the canyon, both near the springs and near the hotel.

Over the years, the Forest Service has authorized maintenance work such as replacing deteriorated valves and pipes. In a 1993 letter, then-District Ranger Elliott Graham wrote that because the company had kept paying the annual fee and had complied with regulations, "the permit is deemed valid until a new Special Use Permit is reissued."

Lawrence said Nestle has sought to renew the expired permit several times and is ready to work with the Forest Service.

"We just have to work through the process," Lawrence said. He said Nestle is waiting for word from the Forest Service on the next steps and would welcome "a science-based study of the watershed."

"We're hoping just to work through whatever biological process or study of the environment that they want to work with us on," Lawrence said. "We think we can certainly support our conclusions that our business is not harming the environment."

Sales of bottled water have been booming for years in the United States. Last year, preliminary figures from the Beverage Marketing Corporation showed about $13 billion in bottled water sales in 2014, an increase of 6.1 percent from a year earlier.

Bottled water plants are regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and in California they are also regulated by the state's Department of Public Health.

The state's list of 108 licensed bottled water plants includes companies that sell individual-size bottles as well as larger jugs for home and office delivery. They range from CG Roxane, which packages Crystal Geyser Alpine Spring Water at plants in Weed and Olancha, to DS Services of America, which bottles brands such as Alhambra to Sparkletts at eight plants across California.

One small company, Borrego Springs Bottled Water, sells water pumped from the desert aquifer in San Diego County. Other companies with bottled water plants include Niagara Bottling, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo's Bottling Group, and supermarket companies such as Safeway, Vons and Ralphs.

To meet growing demand, companies have opened more bottling plants over the years. And some, such as Nestle, have sought out new springs.

"One of the things that we're constantly looking for is additional water sources that meet our requirements. They're relatively rare," Lawrence said. "The drought year is a great year to go look for water because if it's sustaining its volume during a drought, then it's a nice, stable source."

People often contact Nestle offering to sell water from new sources, Lawrence said. The vast majority of those springs don't meet the company's requirements. But occasionally they do.

Since 2005, Nestle has been bottling water from Deer Canyon Springs in the San Bernardino National Forest under an agreement with the Cucamonga Valley Water District. Nestle approached the water district about the possibility, and the agency wasn't using water from the springs at the time.

"We weren't pulling from this canyon source because it was yielding such a small amount of water," said Kristeen Farlow, a spokeswoman for the Cucamonga Valley Water District. The water district owns rights to use all of the "subsurface and surface flows" from the canyon.

"Because it's spring water, we sell that water to Nestle at a premium," Farlow said. "We opted to sell them that spring water at a premium so that way we could then take those funds and reinvest."

That deal, along with gradual rate increases paid by customers, has helped boost the water district's operating revenues, which grew from $44.7 million in 2005 to $83.4 million in 2014.

It's not clear how much Nestle is paying the water district, or how much the agency has benefitted from the deal. A copy of the agreement that the water district provided to The Desert Sun was heavily redacted to remove references to the price paid and other details. The water district cited an exemption in the state's public records law for "trade secrets."

The Cucamonga Valley Water District, which supplies water to more than 190,000 customers, says the earnings from Nestle have allowed it to keep customers' rates lower than they would otherwise be. Just how much isn't clear.

Lawrence said that Nestle and the water district have built "a great public-private relationship." As part of that relationship, Nestle has provided financial support for the Frontier Project, a state-of-the-art building next to the water district's offices that showcases water- and energy-saving construction. Nestle has also sponsored cleanups of creeks.

At Deer Canyon Springs, meanwhile, records show the amounts of water flowing to Nestle's bottling plant have increased during the drought. The Cucamonga Valley Water District, which sells water under an agreement with Nestle, reported 76 million gallons drawn from Deer Canyon last year, up from 56 million gallons in 2013 and more than in the previous two years.

Loe said he's troubled that Nestle is removing water that would otherwise flow through the canyon and provide for wildlife. He said it's urgent that the Forest Service take a hard look at whether the use of Deer Canyon Springs is taking a toll on the forest.

Others have raised concerns about Nestle's use of water from a desert spring in Millard Canyon in Cabazon, where the company runs a bottling plant on the reservation of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians.

Reports filed by the tribe with the state show that 598 acre-feet of groundwater was pumped in Millard Canyon during 2013, and 3 acre-feet of water was diverted. That translates to 196 million gallons a year, enough water to fill nearly 300 Olympic swimming pools. It's not clear how much of that water was bottled.

It also isn't clear how diverting that water may be affecting the desert spring and the oasis around it. The Morongo tribe has not granted requests by The Desert Sun to visit the area. The tribe and Nestle, however, insist they are managing water sustainably and causing no environmental harm.

"Morongo strictly monitors springs in Millard Canyon as part of its extensive reservation groundwater monitoring program," Michael Fisher, a spokesman for the tribe, said in an email. The tribe says it also uses surface water and flows from its wastewater treatment plant to replenish the aquifer. "Morongo and Nestle continue to carefully monitor and limit the amount of water used by the plant to ensure the springs remain healthy."

Disputes over bottled water have flared and led to lawsuits in California, Texas, New Hampshire, Maine and Michigan, among other places.

In parts of Northern California, some bottling companies have changed their plans in the face of strong local opposition. Nestle Waters proposed in 2003 to build a plant in the town of McCloud, at the base of Mount Shasta. Six years later, after a legal fight over the local government's agreement to sell water to Nestle, the company announced it was scrapping the plan and would instead use a plant in Sacramento.

In 2009, Crystal Geyser Water Company announced it would build a bottling plant in the Northern California city of Orland. But facing opposition and a court battle, the company canceled the plan in 2011.

Crystal Geyser has since bought a vacant bottling plant previously run by Coca-Cola on the outskirts of the city of Mount Shasta and says it will start bottling sparkling mineral water and other drinks later this year.

A group of residents say they're deeply worried about the effects on wells and a nearby spring, and are demanding an environment impact report – a step that Siskiyou County officials say isn't required in this case. It's the sort of argument that has sometimes emerged in fights over bottled water: whether or not agencies are meeting obligations under the California Environmental Quality Act, which requires a review when a project involves significant environmental impacts.

California also has other laws intended to protect the flows of streams. The state Department of Fish and Wildlife, for instance, must be notified of any project that would "substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow." However, the state agency doesn't have any program to monitor the potential impacts of bottling plants or other businesses on streams.

In that regard, the water laws in California and other western states generally provide fewer protections than those of much wetter states in the Great Lakes region, said Noah Hall, a professor who specializes in environmental and water law at Wayne State University in Detroit. In Minnesota, for instance, Hall said state officials respond proactively to relatively dry periods and reduce the amounts of water that permit holders are entitled to use.

"They don't wait for the overpumping to harm the stream during the low-flow period," Hall said. Not so in California, where Hall said the law is essentially "about taking the water out of the stream and using it."

"The law in most western states regarding water was written more than a hundred years ago when states wanted to see streams dried up to promote economic development," Hall said. If people want to see greater protections for streams, he said, "it's time to change the law."

One significant change came last year as Gov. Jerry Brown signed legislation that for the first time established a statewide framework for managing groundwater in California. Those measures, which will take years to fully go into effect, give the state new authority to step in when necessary to prevent depleted aquifers from declining further. Primary responsibility for oversight, though, will remain with local agencies.

And it's often local agencies that, when they are required to, collect data on the quantities of water used by bottling plants. That information isn't tracked in a comprehensive way by the state. In some cases, the information is kept confidential. In other cases, it isn't collected at all.

"It would be really great if there was public information about how much water these plants actually bottled, and where it came from," said Peter Gleick, a water researcher who is president of the Oakland-based Pacific Institute. In order to know whether bottled water is being produced sustainably, he said, people need access to information about the sources tapped and the amounts bottled.

"There's so much angst statewide about water in general, and a lot of it is the result of a lack of transparency about who's using water to do what, from where," Gleick said. "I'm a fan of public transparency about water use. The other issue, of course, is there is a question about converting a public good into a private product."

While researching the bottled water industry several years ago, Gleick requested records from the state and obtained data from license applications showing how much water bottling companies anticipated using.

The state Department of Public Health has said recently, however, that it doesn't "authorize, regulate, or track" the amounts of water used by bottled water plants.

The state also doesn't keep a breakdown of water use by other sectors, such as golf courses or breweries or factories. Morrie Orang, who manages the water use unit of the Department of Water Resources, said a detailed state breakdown of water use by different industries is on his "wish list." He said the agency plans to create a survey to send to businesses asking them to voluntarily provide information.

The way water is managed in California, bottled water plants are subject to the same simple rules as anyone else: As long as a company owns a right to water or buys it from someone who has a right to it, it can keep on pumping.

What's missing from that system, Gleick said, is oversight and monitoring.

"The real issue is nobody's really paying attention to the local consequences on groundwater and streams," Gleick said. "There's a real difference between saying, 'We know there's no problem because we're watching,' and 'We don't know if there's a problem because nobody's watching.' Those are different, and all too often with our environmental challenges, we learn that nobody's really watching. And that needs to be fixed."

In the San Bernardino National Forest, the newly announced plan to take up the matter of Nestle's expired permit comes as the Forest Service is developing a nationwide policy to manage groundwater on national forests.

The agency released a proposed directive for groundwater management in May, saying in a summary that "there is a clear need for the Forest Service—in cooperation with the States—to take an active role in managing all water resources on these lands."

The proposal, which is to be finalized later this year, would create new procedures for permits that involve using groundwater. It would also require that the potential impacts of groundwater withdrawals be evaluated, and that the quantities of water drawn from springs be measured and reported to the Forest Service.

It's not clear how those changes, if adopted, might affect Nestle's use of spring water from the national forest.

In Strawberry Creek, downstream from Arrowhead Springs, state and federal wildlife officials are considering whether to reintroduce speckled dace to help save waning populations of the fish.

According to Nestle, the flows cascading down through the canyon are sustaining a healthy creek. As the Forest Service considers reissuing a permit, the biggest question it will need to answer is whether that is in fact true.

Ian James can be reached by email at ian.james@desertsun.com and on Twitter at @TDSIanJames.

Join the conversation about bottled water in California by commenting on this story, sharing comments on Twitter using #CABottledWater and @MyDesert, or sending a letter to letters@desertsun.com.