evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Hetch Hetchy Filtration-Avoidance Watershed Protection (San Francisco, USA)

United States of America · San Francisco · See the United States of America profile · See the San Francisco profile

Evidence: Descriptive / self-reported Top 47% 47/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

San Francisco's water utility keeps about 85% of the city's supply flowing from the pristine Hetch Hetchy Reservoir without filtration — a rare EPA/California waiver sustained through decades of National Park Service watershed protection instead of costly treatment plants.

~85%
Share of SFPUC water supply from Hetch Hetchy Reservoir
~117 billion gallons
Hetch Hetchy Reservoir storage capacity
1934
Water deliveries to San Francisco began
Hetch Hetchy Filtration-Avoidance Watershed Protection (San Francisco, USA)

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC)
Period
{'end': '', 'start': '1934'}
Keywords
municipal water utility, filtration avoidance, watershed protection, National Park Service partnership

Context

Since the O'Shaughnessy Dam was completed in 1923 and water deliveries to San Francisco began in 1934, the city's public utility (SFPUC) has drawn most of its drinking water from the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir, fed by snowmelt from a protected, high-elevation granite watershed inside Yosemite National Park. About 85% of SFPUC's water supply comes from this source.

Activities

Because the water originates in a legally protected wilderness catchment largely free of grazing, logging and development, it meets the bacteriological and turbidity criteria the US EPA and California's drinking water regulator require for a 'filtration avoidance' determination — one of only a handful granted to a major US city. Rather than building and operating a filtration plant for this share of its supply, SFPUC maintains its exemption by funding ongoing watershed protection: security patrols, sanitary surveys carried out on a regular cycle, and a rolling multi-year watershed protection agreement with the National Park Service and US Forest Service covering the Tuolumne River watershed.

Conclusions

The arrangement is not without risk. Because the exemption depends on the watershed's condition remaining pristine, degradation from wildfire, climate change or increased visitor pressure inside Yosemite could force SFPUC to filter this supply after all — a reminder that avoided-cost watershed protection is conditional, not permanent, and requires continuous monitoring investment rather than a one-off payment.

Implementation

Indicative cost
Medium (€50k–€500k) — No specific budget figure disclosed; costs are ongoing watershed patrols, sanitary surveys and NPS/US Forest Service agreement funding rather than a filtration-plant capital cost.
Time to results
Long (> 3 years) — Filtration-avoidance arrangement sustained continuously since dam completion (1923) and water deliveries beginning (1934).
Staffing & skills
SFPUC watershed security patrols, National Park Service and US Forest Service watershed-management partners

Conditions for success

  • Legally protected, largely undeveloped high-elevation watershed inside Yosemite National Park
  • Regular sanitary surveys meeting EPA/California criteria
  • Rolling multi-year watershed protection agreement with NPS and US Forest Service

Common failure modes

  • Wildfire, climate change or increased visitor pressure could degrade watershed condition and force filtration
  • Exemption is conditional and reviewed on an ongoing basis, not permanent

Where it fits

Governance type
municipal utility with federal land-management partnership
Scale
Tuolumne River watershed supplying ~85% of SFPUC's water
Income level
high-income (USA)

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful