POLISCOPE
Back to feed

The civic record

Read. Follow. Verify.

2016 California Water Supply Oversight Hearing

Original title: OVERSIGHT HEARING ON THE 2016 CALIFORNIA WATER SUPPLY OUTLOOK DURING THE EL NINO AND THREE YEARS OF RESTRICTED WATER DELIVERIES

Record date · January 1, 2016

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

What This Bill Does

This document is the official record of a February 2016 Congressional regarding California's water supply challenges. The hearing examined the impact of weather patterns and three years of restricted water deliveries on the state's agricultural and municipal water systems.

Why it matters

The hearing provides a record of federal oversight into how water is allocated to California districts during periods of drought and changing climate conditions, affecting water availability for millions of residents and agricultural operations.

Who It Affects

Groups the bill's text affects, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.

Directly affected

California agricultural sector

Water delivery restrictions directly impact the volume of water available for irrigation and crop production.

Directly affected

California municipal water districts

These districts manage water supply for residents and are subject to federal delivery allocations.

Directly affected

Bureau of Reclamation

The agency is responsible for managing federal water projects and determining delivery allocations.

Key Facts

  • The hearing took place on February 24, 2016, in the Longworth House Office Building.
  • The hearing focused on the 2016 water supply outlook for California during the El Nino weather event.
  • The discussion addressed the cumulative impact of three consecutive years of restricted water deliveries.
  • Testimony was provided by representatives from the Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, municipal water districts, irrigation districts, and private industry.
Show all 5 facts
  • The hearing record includes prepared statements from members of Congress and invited witnesses regarding water management policies.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the purpose of this hearing?
The hearing was held to conduct oversight on how California's water supply was being managed during the 2016 event following three years of restricted water deliveries.
Who testified at the hearing?
Witnesses included officials from the and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, as well as representatives from California municipal water districts, irrigation districts, and the private fishing industry.

What else do you want to know?

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Full breakdown

Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.

Discoveries

1 pattern noticed across the record

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift90% confidence

Focus on Multi-Year Drought Impact

The hearing specifically highlights the cumulative stress of three years of water restrictions, indicating a shift toward long-term drought management oversight.

Connected Entities

John Fleming, Brett Barbre, David Murillo and 6 more
PersonJohn Fleming“Chairman of the Subcommittee.”Map →
PersonBrett Barbre“Director, Municipal Water District of Orange County.”Map →
PersonDavid Murillo“Regional Director, Mid-Pacific Region, Bureau of Reclamation.”Map →
PersonJared Huffman“Ranking Democratic Member of the Subcommittee.”Map →
OrganizationSubcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans“The congressional body conducting the oversight hearing.”Map →
PersonRichard Pool“President and Owner, Pro-Troll Fishing Products.”Map →
PersonThaddeus Bettner“General Manager, Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District.”Map →
PersonThomas Birmingham“General Manager/General Counsel, Westlands Water District.”Map →
PersonRen Lohoefener“Director of the Pacific Southwest Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.”Map →

Sources

Open source document

www.govinfo.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance60
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy40
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment10
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz15
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record