But the larger war over how California’s limited water resources are used seems far from over. The compromise’s approval is sure to spur new court battles. It could also embolden House Republicans like McCarthy and Devin Nunes, R-Tulare, and conservative think tanks to seek further changes in federal policies.

Environmental groups are expected to sue over new rules which allow federal authorities in charge of water supplies in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to deliver more water to farmers in periods of drought.

The Endangered Species Act has been a potent weapon for environmental groups, which have often succeeded in getting judges to adopt broad interpretations of provisions that have been used to protect the delta smelt and Chinook salmon in Northern California waterways. This thinking is reflected in a lawsuit filed in March by green groups, which say even the strong environmental stances of federal and state regulators under Democratic President Barack Obama and Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown don’t go far enough in providing fresh water to the delta.

Such tactics awaited George W. Bush after he became president in 2001. His administration was stymied in efforts to shift environmental policies by legal action and effective lobbying in Congress. By one tally, environmentalists won 27 of their 38 suits against the two-term president.

Endangered Species Act long a Republican target

But the same attitude seen in Natural Resource Defense Council lawsuits against Democratic administrations — why settle for a good result when more is possible? — could soon animate Republicans, especially those who have chafed at how much control the federal government has over land-use decisions in the West. Nunes in particular has long railed against federal indifference to the concerns and needs of Californians.

The Washington consensus is that Feinstein cut a deal because of the fear that a Trump administration would go much further in revamping interpretations of existing water and endangered species laws. This led her to make a major concession to McCarthy: Allowing the secretary of commerce and the secretary of interior to play a key role in determining in how water is allocated between the Delta and farmers.

That provision alone could turn California water policies upside down.

Trump’s nominee for commerce secretary, billionaire investor Wilbur Ross, doesn’t have high-profile views on land-use issues. His nominee for interior secretary, Montana Rep. Ryan Zinke, is open to the federal government allowing much more of its land to be used for oil and gas drilling, but has spoken of the importance of preserving public lands.

There is also the possibility that the Trump administration could target the Endangered Species Act itself — either through executive orders reinterpreting the law or by encouraging congressional action.

Conservative think tanks have long faulted the species act for far more than denying water to Central Valley farmers. It’s viewed as the California Environmental Quality Act is seen by business groups and conservatives in the Golden State: as a blunt, coercive tool to win land-use battles.

A 2007 report by the Dallas-based National Center for Policy Analysis offers a framework for the sort of policies the Trump administration could pursue.

The most decisive — and most controversial — would simply be for the secretaries of commerce and the interior to make it more difficult to a species to be designated as endangered and easier for a species to be taken off the protected list, reducing the authority now wielded by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Conservatives have long argued that designations of 1,300-plus native species and plants are excessive and arbitrary.

H.R. 3964 by California Congressmen David G. Valadao, CA-21, Devin Nunes, CA-22, and Kevin McCarthy, CA-23, is a comprehensive bill to resolve the water crisis in California, according to the congressmen.

“H.R. 3964 is an unwelcome and divisive intrusion into California’s efforts to manage this severe crisis,” Brown wrote in a letter to the Congressmen. “It would override state laws and protections, and mandate that certain water interests come out ahead of others. It falsely suggests the promise of water relief when that is simply not possible given the scarcity of water supplies.”

H.R. 3964 would undo years of environmental dominance in California’s water priorities.

Brown said the bill would “re-open old water wounds undermining years of progress toward reaching a collaborative long-term solution to our water needs.”

Valadeo, Nunes and McCarthy say the bill would undo a San Joaquin River restoration program, would improve water access for Valley farms. The San Joaquin restoration program to restore flows to the San Joaquin River from Friant Dam to the confluence of Merced River and restore a self-sustaining Chinook salmon fishery.

What Brown could be angry about is the California Department of Water Resources announced in November that the Central Valley would only get five percent of the water it needs in 2014. Valadeo’s office reported Thursday, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Michael Connor upheld Valadao’s position, along with other Central Valley lawmakers, regarding rescheduled water deliveries for Central Valley Project water contractors. The letter to the Bureau urged the Administration to reconsider halting rescheduled water deliveries to San Joaquin Valley farmers. The letter stated strong opposition to the use of rescheduled water to meet other Central Valley Project water delivery needs at the expense of farmers and contractors in the Valley.

In an interview I did in November with Sen. Andy Vidak, R-Hanford, he explained:

“California has had two dry years, the Central Valley is suffering under the San Joaquin River Restoration Program, a federal program to restore flows to the San Joaquin River from Friant Dam to the confluence of Merced River, in order to restore Chinook salmon in the river. “Billions are being spent on dry salmon runs,” Vidak said. “We’re spending $2 million to $3 million per fish!”

“H.R. 3964, the Sacramento–San Joaquin Valley Emergency Water Delivery Act restores water reliability to California communities by codifying the bipartisan Bay-Delta Accord,” Valadeo’s website says. “It also reforms onerous federal laws – such as the Central Valley Project Improvement Act and the San Joaquin River Restoration Settlement Act – that have severely curtailed water deliveries and resulted in hundreds of billions of gallons of badly needed water being flushed into the ocean.” Valadeo represents Kings County and portions of Fresno, Tulare, and Kern Counties, three of the hardest-hit counties in the recession and drought.

“The current California drought is a crisis exacerbated by the failure of government to ensure water flows to our communities and farms,” said Rep. McCarthy. “Today, led by my good friend Rep. David Valadao, the entire California Republican delegation in the House introduced legislation to put families before fish. One more day cannot go by without addressing the shortage of a resource so precious to our economy and wellbeing. It is time, as representatives for the entire state, that Senator Boxer and Senator Feinstein support drought stricken Californians and get behind this legislation.”

Valadeo’s website recently reported House Republicans passed comprehensive water policy reform legislation for California (H.R. 1837) in February 2012. The bill would have mitigated the water crisis now going on in the Central Valley. However, the bill died in the Senate “due to the opposition of California’s Democratic Senators,” Valadeo’s website reported. “No Senate hearings were held, nor were any amendments offered or alternatives proposed. Furthermore, the Senate recently prevented the addition of emergency drought relief provisions for California in the Farm Bill,” the website said.