California Supreme Court weighs reasonableness of water use in Kern River dispute
The California Supreme Court heard arguments on whether water allocations must be judged reasonable, in a case pitting Bakersfield against the conservation group Bring Back the Kern over Kern River flows.
In a hearing before the California Supreme Court, attorneys debated whether the constitutional “reasonable use” requirement should be applied automatically in water-rights cases. Colin Pearce, arguing for the city of Bakersfield, contended that Bring Back the Kern must specify a reasonable water quantity to keep fish healthy, whereas Kevin Bundy, representing the group, argued the appeal is narrowly confined to the lower court’s preliminary injunction and the fish-protection provision of Fish and Game Code Section 5937.
The dispute originates from a 2023 injunction that barred Bakersfield from reducing flows on the Kern River, later reversed by an appeals panel. Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero emphasized the need to balance fish welfare with other water interests, while Justice Leondra Kruger questioned whether reasonableness should be considered absent a party’s claim. Attorneys Ian Fein and Brett Stroud urged deference to legislative definitions and suggested remanding the issue to the lower court. No decision was rendered.
