When Exactly Will We Meter Groundwater Usage?
“This Grand Jury (2014-2015) would stress that there are some troubling issues and that the County would be better served planning for a potential future disaster vs. waiting for it to happen and then trying to put a plan together quickly. Citizens should expect their governmental officials to be prepared for all potential outcomes and have procedures or policies in place that they may rely on when needed.”
The Napa County Grand Jury recommended:
1. By December 31, 2015, the Napa County Public Works Department to develop a contingency plan, approved by the Board of Supervisors, that lays out the major steps to be taken in the event of severe drought conditions.
2. By June 30, 2016, the Napa County Public Works Department to require major groundwater users to meter and report their water usage on a quarterly basis to ensure all well owners are following prescribed usage rates.
We are shocked that, in over a decade, the County has not implemented these recommendations and that the industry does not support them, even though it is in their best interests to do so.
Headlines bemoaning the regulatory costs for Napa Vineyards began to show up in mid-April, in part, due to a report sponsored by the Napa Valley Farm Bureau and performed by researchers at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo.
The report summary reads:
“Regulatory costs are an increasing concern for California growers. Recent studies in Salinas Valley lettuce and San Joaquin Valley fruit, vegetable and row crops show that regulatory costs are growing at a much faster rate than costs of production.”
They found that the largest compliance categories for crop production in both-sized vineyards are related to labor. Nearly 75% of the small vineyard’s regulatory costs are workforce-affiliated, while 88% of the large vineyard’s regulatory costs involve labor. This was also true in an earlier report by the authors on lettuce production in Salinas.
It seems a stretch to categorize labor costs as regulatory costs. Yes, the vineyards must pay their workers, and in the case of those with 50 or more employees, must fund health insurance, like any business. Other costs in this category deal with employee and environmental safety when spraying chemicals, the need to provide porta-potties in the field…
Over one hundred years ago it became clear that workers had a right to safety on the job. If we subtract the labor costs, the costs/acre drop dramatically.
The report also states: “This case study once again indicate that California agricultural producers face increasingly intensifying regulatory pressure. While Napa Valley vineyards have thus far shown more resilience than the rest of the state, the results of this study provide evidence that the regulatory burden may have a withering effect on the industry.”
Sounds dramatic: true there are regulatory costs, but not clear which burdens are of immediate concern except ground water agency fees.
The report continues: “Whether Napa Valley continues to be the paragon of U.S. wine grape production depends on growers’ ability to withstand not only the current industry headwinds, but the costs imposed by Napa County, Sacramento and Washington, DC.”
The costs imposed by Napa County are minuscule compared to the State and Federal regulations.
Then the report gets to what we consider its raison d’etre:suggesting the need to reform current Napa County regulations: “As yet, there are no required demand management strategies for groundwater users. If the basin does not meet its sustainability goals as required by the Department of Water Resources, there could be additional measures imposed on groundwater users in the future. Many groundwater basins across California are in similar situations.”
Yes, if the basin does not meet its sustainability goals there will be dire consequences. Napa farmers currently use 74 percent of the groundwater in the subbasin without measurement or fees. Few industries have free water.
With our groundwater basin in constant overdraft, it seems to us that a more important action point is how to address this depletion, especially as further challenges from climate warming lie ahead. The Public Trust doctrine makes it clear that all Californians have the right to water. You can’t manage what you aren’t measuring. So even though the county and the wine business don’t want to address the issue, litigation will eventually commence when the wells run dry. This is yet another example of the Tragedy of the Commons.
On April 14, the Napa Wine Industry petitioned the Supervisors to modify its regulations to help the industry survive. Some of these seem reasonable but are unlikely to be a panacea, as recent articles by Ted Hall and Tim Carl indicate that the main problem facing the industry is a lack of consumer interest in expensive wine and lodging in the valley, and that there are just too many wineries for all to survive. Tim masterfully shows that the industry is exhibiting the classic five stages of grief, with those most at risk in the “bargaining” mode to change regulations.
On top of this, there are currently 35 applications before the Napa Planning Department to initiate or expand vineyard/winery development. Many of these projects will require cutting more trees which we need to combat increasing climate temperatures. And it is well known that many grape varieties will not flourish under increasing temperatures and will have to be replaced. These are not regulatory costs, they are environmental and it is shocking that neither the industry nor the county seems to be modulating their growth plans in this regard. How can new projects and expansions be considered when the aquifer is already in overdraft?
Ted Hall discussed how the Tragedy of the Commons Really has operated in Napa to negatively diminish the power of the Napa Brand: “This interlude in the series of wine essays steps back from the specifics—too many wineries, too many scores, too many tasting rooms, too many similar claims to the same elevated ground—to examine the mechanism that allowed all of it to happen at once. The phenomenon has an old name. It is older than wine, older than appellations, older than any of the institutions that govern modern luxury. It is the tragedy of the commons.”
We see the same analysis applies to the diminishing aquifer: too many straws sucking from the same aquifer. This is concerning and will have dire consequences.
Dan Mufson
Napa
Afternotes:
1.Regulatory Cost of Production in Napa County Vineyards, Lynn Halmilton and Michael McCullough, Cal Poly SLO, March 2026.
2.Napa Valley and the Commissioner Who Never Came, May 8, 2026, Tell the Truth and Do the Right Thing, ted241@substack.com
3.Under the Hood: Where is Napa in the Five Stages of Grief, April 23, 2026, Napa Valley Features, napavalleyfocus@substack.com
4.The Commons We Forgot We Shared, May 13, 2026, Tell the Truth and Do the Right Thing