Scott River: Shasta River: watersheds.

Assembly Member Rogers, joined by principal coauthor Ramos and coauthor Connolly, advances a watershed-specific measure that extends emergency regulations for the Scott River and Shasta River and charts a path toward permanent in-stream-flow rules to protect salmon habitats. The core objective centers on stabilizing regulatory oversight in these watersheds by extending the duration of emergency regulations and embedding a formal, ongoing process to advance long-term flow standards, while maintaining an explicit emphasis on public participation.

The bill amends the Water Code to allow emergency regulations adopted for the Scott River and Shasta River watersheds to remain in effect through January 1, 2031, or until permanent long-term instream flow rules are adopted, whichever occurs first. It preserves the existing framework that an emergency regulation may be renewed if conditions persist beyond an initial period and requires the State Water Resources Control Board to provide annual public updates on progress toward developing permanent flow rules, with opportunities for public comment. The act maintains that findings attached to emergency regulations are not subject to review by the Office of Administrative Law, and retains penalties for violations of emergency regulations, defined as infractions up to $500 per day. It also preserves a funding mechanism whereby civil liabilities for violations of emergency conservation regulations are deposited into the Water Rights Fund, available for water conservation activities and programs upon appropriation, and narrows the scope of “emergency conservation regulation” to measures that require end users, retailers, or wholesalers to conserve or report on water conservation, excluding curtailment of diversions when priority of right is not available or related reporting.

The bill frames a special-statute rationale, asserting the Scott and Shasta watersheds have unique circumstances and constitutional considerations that justify targeted legislation beyond general provisions. It highlights findings about drought dynamics, climate change impacts, the ecological and economic importance of salmon, and the historical adjudication context that has affected water rights in these rivers. By tying the extended regulatory window to progress toward permanent rules, the measure creates a explicit linkage between emergency measures and a future transition to long-term standards. The act contemplates ongoing rulemaking and public engagement as the extension unfolds, and positions the Water Rights Fund as the channel for civil-liability proceeds to support conservation activities, subject to existing appropriation processes.

Implementation would require the state water board to administer a separately tracked regime for these two watersheds, publish annual progress updates, and continue the overarching long-term rulemaking toward permanent flow requirements. The bill does not authorize new appropriations, and fiscal implications would depend on existing resources and budget actions; enforcement remains via daily-infraction penalties, and the civil-liability funding mechanism would operate within the Water Rights Fund, contingent on appropriate appropriations. In this context, AB 263 codifies a watershed-focused approach that preserves emergency authorities while advancing a clear transition plan to permanent instream-flow rules, framed around public participation and targeted conservation funding.