Court case decided Kern River must have water flowing to its natural endpoint in wetlands west of Bakersfield. In the past 100% of the Kern River has been taken before it even gets to Bakersfield city limits. There is no requirement for a water buyer to report what they do with the water, so the water taken from the Kern was labeled for "agriculture", even though the Kern Water Bank and others re-sell a large amount of the water.

Is it better to have natural wetlands in the southern San Joaquin or to have green lawns in the San Fernando Valley?

From LA Times: