This week, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to disapprove a rule submitted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that would have listed the San Francisco Bay-Delta distinct population segment of the longfin smelt as an endangered species under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA). The move blocks long-overdue protections for one of California’s most imperiled native fish species, in a clear attempt to ease water export restrictions and provide more water for industrial agriculture—regardless of the environmental cost.
A Collapsing Ecosystem
The longfin smelt, once abundant in the San Francisco Bay and Delta, has suffered severe population decline due to decades of water diversions, habitat degradation, and altered freshwater flows. It plays a key role in the estuarine food web, feeding salmon, birds, and larger fish.
But this crisis extends far beyond a single species. California’s salmon fishery has been shut down for the past two years, and likely will be again this year. Why? Because water mismanagement and excessive Delta pumping have collapsed the runs of Chinook salmon, devastating commercial and tribal fisheries and threatening jobs and food supplies along the coast.
Worse still, increased pumping from the Delta causes saltwater to intrude farther inland, contaminating the freshwater that farms and cities rely on and degrading fragile ecosystems that evolved to depend on brackish, not saline, water.
Rather than take steps to restore this damaged ecosystem, Congress just voted to strip away one of the last remaining safeguards.
Consequences of the Vote
- Greenlighting More Water Exports: Delisting longfin smelt removes key regulatory limits on how much water can be pumped south—particularly during droughts—giving agricultural interests in the Central Valley a freer hand, even at the expense of the Delta’s collapse.
- Pushing Species Toward Extinction: The smelt’s survival depends on freshwater flows. Without them, not only longfin smelt but salmon, sturgeon, and countless other species will continue to disappear.
- Undermining Science and Local Stewardship: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s scientific findings were dismissed by Congress. Several California Representatives—elected to protect this state’s future—joined in voting to disapprove the rule, choosing politics and profit over ecological survival.
Better Alternatives Exist
Rather than destroy the Delta, California can increase water availability by:
- Expanding wastewater recycling and urban reuse projects.
- Recharging aquifers during wet years for drought storage.
- Improving agricultural efficiency, which still wastes enormous volumes.
- Developing regional desalination and stormwater capture, especially in coastal urban areas.
These are sustainable, drought-resilient solutions that protect both farms and fisheries—without pushing species to extinction or degrading water quality for generations to come.
California Can Still Act—For Now
The longfin smelt remains listed under the California Endangered Species Act, allowing the state to:
- Enforce pumping limits for the State Water Project,
- Require Delta restoration and habitat mitigation,
- Maintain water quality standards for wildlife and human use.
But without federal protection, the pressure on California to weaken its own safeguards will only increase. And when federal pumping operations (like the Central Valley Project) are exempt from ESA rules, state regulations can only do so much.
The Bigger Picture: Why California Must Govern Its Own Water
This vote reflects a deeper problem: California’s water, environment, and future are being decided by a Congress dominated by other states—with different priorities, little understanding of Delta ecosystems, and no accountability to the people who live here.
The representatives who voted to disapprove the longfin smelt rule didn’t just undermine science. They overruled California’s efforts to restore its greatest estuary, and put politics ahead of sustainable water policy. Tragically, some of those votes came from within California itself (see list below) and was introduced by California representative Doug LaMalfa.
If California were an independent nation, this wouldn’t happen. The Delta would be restored, not sacrificed. Salmon runs would be revived, not halted. Water policy would reflect science, sustainability, and local accountability—not lobbying from thousands of miles away.
Until we reclaim that authority, California’s environment will remain vulnerable to decisions made far outside our borders.
Californian representatives voting for the disapproval of the rule:
| REPRESENTATIVE | PARTY | STATE | VOTE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Calvert | Republican | California | YEA |
| Costa | Democratic | California | YEA |
| Fong | Republican | California | YEA |
| Gray | Democratic | California | YEA |
| Issa | Republican | California | YEA |
| Kiley (CA) | Republican | California | YEA |
| Kim | Republican | California | YEA |
| LaMalfa | Republican | California | YEA |
| McClintock | Republican | California | YEA |
| Obernolte | Republican | California | YEA |
| Valadao | Republican | California | YEA |
Learn more about how we can protect California’s water, wildlife, and future at CalVision.org.