From tstokely at att.net Fri Jan 6 08:41:37 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 08:41:37 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard- Trinity River management council approves restoration work, with caveats based on fishing guides' concerns Message-ID: <77EC8661-00F8-4AF2-AF92-F2F402965BA7@att.net> Trinity River management council approves restoration work, with caveats based on fishing guides' concerns Donna Tam/The Times-Standard Posted: 01/06/2012 02:00:10 AM PST Following weeks of tension between Trinity River fishing guides and the Trinity Management Council over scheduled restoration projects, the council has cautiously approved moving forward on a portion of the work. Trinity Management Council Chair Brian Person said the council voted Wednesday to move forward with pursuing the Trinity River Restoration Program's work on two sites, with some caveats. He said staff will review the design and continue working with stakeholders before asking for final approval on one phase of the upper Junction City site. The council also held off on the second phase of another site -- the lower Steiner Flat -- in light of concerns. The phase won't move forward until the review of the first round of projects is completed. Bill Dickens, a member of the Trinity River Guides Association, said the organization was not 100 percent satisfied with the outcome. ?They didn't meet some of our concerns as well as the land owners' (concerns) for gravel injections into the river,? he said, adding that his group will regroup and discuss the council's decision. California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) spokesman Tom Stokely echoed Dickens' concerns and said several land owners expressed ?strong dissatisfaction? and said they have filed claims over the alleged damage to their property. ?There remains great public concern that additional harm will be done to remaining fishing holes and private land from continued spawning gravel placement and use of heavy equipment on the banks of the Trinity River in 2012 and beyond" Stokely said in a statement. The Trinity River Restoration Program, or TRRP, is set up to carry out a series of restoration projects aiming to mange water flows, construct channel rehabilitation sites, add gravel to encourage fish spawning and control fine sediments. Roughly half of the 47 projects are completed. The Trinity River Guides Association and C-WIN have said the program is doing more harm than good and is moving forward on the second phase of projects before the first phase has been properly evaluated. A study on the effects of the first phase is expected this spring. Person said designers met with stakeholders following a December meeting to see if a consensus could be reached. ?They made some significant alterations to the designs of both sites, and we believed we had reached a consensus with the guides that day,? he said. ?It turned out later that there was some confusion there on that position, and the guides expressed that they weren't in a position yet to support the two sites.? As a result, the council split the action of the two sites into several phases in hopes of compromising on some. Person said the program needs to finalize designs before March to meet permitting deadlines. Donna Tam can be reached at 441-0532 or dtam at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jan 6 12:02:24 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 12:02:24 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Project trapping through 03 January 2012 References: <4F06DB66.A226.009F.1@dfg.ca.gov> Message-ID: From: Mary Claire Kier Date: January 6, 2012 11:31:53 AM PST To: Wade Sinnen Subject: Trinity River Project trapping through 03 January 2012 Greetings! Attached please find the latest trapping data from the Trinity River Hatchery. Let me know if you have questions or concerns. Thank you for all the kind, welcoming comments and replies after my inaugural email. Mary Claire Mary Claire Kier DFG - Trinity River Project 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 707/822-5876 - FAX 822-2855 mckier at dfg.ca.gov Trinity River documents can be found at: http://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/documents/ContextDocs.aspx?cat=KlamathTrinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 89088 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jan 6 20:32:41 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 20:32:41 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] CSPA, Winnemem Wintu sue Bureau over CVP contracts References: Message-ID: <88B88CB2-2B4E-46E5-81F7-D86F4AEEE01B@att.net> From: Dan Bacher Date: January 6, 2012 5:21:04 PM PST Subject: CSPA, Winnemem Wintu sue Bureau over CVP contracts http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2012/01/06/cspa-winnemem-wintu-sue-bureau-over-cvp-contracts/ http://www.fishsniffer.com/content/1615-cspa-winnemem-wintu-sue-bureau-over-cvp-contracts.html Aerial photo of Delta fish "salvage" facilities on the Delta courtesy of the Department of Water Resources. Over 11 million fish, including 9 million Sacramento splittail, were "salvaged" in the Delta pumping facilities in 2011. aerial-view-of-tfcf.jpg CSPA, Winnemem Wintu sue Bureau over CVP contracts by Dan Bacher The California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA), North Coast River Alliance, Friends of the River and the Winnemem Wintu Tribe have sued the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation in Federal Court for failing to conduct a full environmental view of interim Central Valley Project (CVP) water delivery contracts. The water is exported from the imperiled Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas, to irrigate drainage-impaired land owned by corporate agribusiness interests on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. "Specifically, the lawsuit challenges the Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for eleven interim renewal contracts for water deliveries to the San Luis Unit, which includes Westlands Water District," according to Bill Jennings, Chairman/Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. The Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA) was passed by Congress and signed into law by President George Bush in 1992 to address the adverse environmental impacts that result for Central Valley Project operations. It made fish and wildlife a purpose of the Central Valley Project for the first time. "The CVPIA requires full environmental review, including an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), before any long-term water service contracts can be renewed by USBR," said Jennings. "However, since passage of the CVPIA, USBR has been sequentially issuing two-year interim renewal contracts to avoid having to conduct a full environmental review of project operations." The CVPIA's goals included the doubling of anadromous fish populations, including Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, white and green sturgeon, striped bass and American shad, by 2002. Of course, that goal was never reached, due to massive water exports to Westlands Water District, declining water quality and bad state and federal fishery management practices. In fact, many fish populations declined even further, as evidenced by the Central Valley fall chinook salmon collapse of 2008 and 2009. The action requests the Court to: 1) find that USBR has acted contrary to law by issuing a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for interim contract renewals; 2) issue an order requiring USBR to withdraw their FONSI until they have complied with the National Environmental Policy Act and the Administrative Procedures Act; and 3) and issue an injunction against further water deliveries until USBR has complied with the law. "It is amazing that the CVPIA 'requires' an EIS, yet the government finds ways around that 'requirement' to keep pumping water while it is responsible for killing the millions of fish that should be protected in a full and complete EIS," said Caleen Sisk-Franco, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, a traditional tribe whose ancestral territory extends from Mount Shasta down the McCloud River watershed. "There should be no more two-year contacts to Westlands or any other water agency until the EIS is completed! Stalling or ignoring the required environmental review, including an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), should be a crime and there should be financial citations attached to the destruction of the fish." The Law Offices of Stephan C. Volker are representing CSPA, North Coast River Alliance, Friends of the River and the Winnemem Wintu Tribe in this litigation against the Bureau. A copy of the complaint is available at: http://calsport.org/news/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/BureauContractsSuit-30Dec2011.pdf. For more informattion, go to http://www.calsport.org. The lawsuit takes place as the Brown and Obama administrations are fast tracking the construction of a peripheral canal through the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to export more water to southern California and corporate agribusiness in the San Joaquin Valley. The Winnemem Wintu, other Tribes, fishing groups, environmental organizations, Delta residents and family farmers oppose the construction of the canal because it will likely lead to the extinction of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, Delta and longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail green sturgeon and other imperiled fish species. The Winnemem Wintu Tribe is now leading an ambitious campaign to reintroduce winter run chinook salmon from New Zealand's Rakaira River to the McCloud River above Lake Shasta. "The salmon are an integral part of our lifeway and of a healthy McCloud River watershed," according to Sisk-Franco. "We believe that when the last salmon is gone, humans will be gone too. Our fight to return the salmon to the McCloud River is no less than a fight to save the Winnemem Wintu Tribe. As salmon people and middle water people we advocate for all aspects of clean water and the restoration of salmon to their natural spawning grounds." (http://www.winnememwintu.us) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: unknown.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 51092 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Mon Jan 9 11:20:58 2012 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 11:20:58 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California river water fetches high profit margins for farmers selling it through transfers Message-ID: <4F0B3E1A.60605@tcrcd.net> http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/08/4168916/water-barons-will-corner-market.html sacbee.com This story is taken from Sacbee / Opinion / Viewpoints Viewpoints: Water barons will corner market in new 'Chinatown' Special to The Bee Published Sunday, Jan. 08, 2012 There is more money in selling water in California than there is in farming. A one-sentence provision inserted in the 2012 budget bill by U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein will allow a handful of powerful San Joaquin Valley water oligarchs to sell federally subsidized agricultural water in a private market for as much as 150 times more than what they pay for it. This relaxation of publicly owned water supplies for private gain strips out protections approved by Congress in 1992. They call them "water transfers," and for the last 15 years California has been quietly edging into a very lucrative privatized water sales market that seeks to expedite the movement of cheap agricultural water from Northern California to thirsty Southern California and Bay Area cities. The cast of characters in this new water wars drama reads like a who's who of California corporate agriculture: . Westlands Water District, west of Fresno, which is the largest irrigation district in the United States and is controlled by a handful of privately owned agribusiness corporations. . Beverly Hills billionaire Stewart Resnick, who runs the privately controlled Kern Water Bank, a 19,900-acre underground reservoir capable of holding more than a million acre-feet of water. The reservoir was created by the state before being taken private. Resnick, a longtime backer of Feinstein, owns Paramount Farms and Roll International, key players in California's billion-dollar private water market. Like derivatives, subprime mortgages and deregulated electricity, the privatization of federally owned water rights is a puzzle palace of complexity. Here are some of the pieces: Winter and spring runoff from Northern California rivers, which flow through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, are crucial to the ecological health of the Delta, San Francisco Bay and the state's fishing industry. The Feinstein legislation allows high water flows in the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers to be diverted to a private water market rather than replenishing the Delta and the Bay. The legislation makes it easier to move federally subsidized $20-an-acre-foot water from growers with federal project water contracts to private interests with water rights. Once in the hands of these buyers, the water can be resold in the open market to the highest bidder. Westlands Water District and others who will benefit from the legislation will not be required to fully compensate the U.S. taxpayers for the public investments in the storage facilities, conveyance systems, electricity to pump the water or the operation and maintenance costs that make these private windfall transactions possible. In short, it socializes the costs and capitalizes the profits, leaving U.S. taxpayers to foot the bill. Sound familiar? The Kern Water Bank was originally owned by the state of California and built to store water in high water years to provide agriculture with water in drought years and to leave more in the Delta. In 1994, Resnick persuaded the state to turn over this invaluable public resource to the Kern County Water Agency. Within a short time the water agency turned over control of the water bank to a handful of local water districts. When the dust settled, Resnick's Paramount Farming controlled more than 50 percent. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation recently admitted that Resnick's Kern Water Bank is on the list of beneficiaries of Feinstein's deregulation measure. In addition, Feinstein's budget rider streamlines environmental review of these privatized water transfers by disguising the environmental impacts of individual transfers. One only needs to remember the "rape of the Owens Valley" and its reincarnation in Roman Polanski's classic movie "Chinatown" to understand the potential environmental impacts of moving water and water rights from one geographical area to another. In anticipation of this Christmas gift to Westlands, the bond-rating agency FitchRating last year noted the benefit to Westlands from deregulating the federal water to allow Westlands to engage in more private water sales: "The WWD (Westlands Water District) potentially has the ability to sell and transfer water rights outside the district should agriculture cease to be economic, as the demand for water in Southern California and the San Francisco Bay Area by users with connectivity to the CVP (federal Central Valley Water Project) is very high." Climate change and global warming studies predict future water shortages for California. Feinstein's deregulation of vital public water paid for by taxpayers will enrich a handful of powerful water oligarchs. The measure will make it possible for a handful of these high rollers to dominate the California water market and squeeze whatever profits they can out of thirsty urban water users, leaving the fish and wildlife at the mercy of so-called free market economics. The Congress must take a closer look. A privatized water supply paid for by U.S. taxpayers but controlled by one person or a handful of people is just plain wrong. /Patricia Schifferle, a former legislative director and consultant, is principal/director for Pacific Advocates. / ? Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sacramento-bee-logo.png Type: image/png Size: 8578 bytes Desc: not available URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Mon Jan 9 11:47:41 2012 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 11:47:41 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California river water fetches high profit margins for farmers selling it through transfers In-Reply-To: <4F0B3E1A.60605@tcrcd.net> References: <4F0B3E1A.60605@tcrcd.net> Message-ID: Nothing new here. Don't look behind the curtain. Keep walking... What are we to expect from Feinslime? The 5th richest senator who has a net worth of $75 million doesn't represent the interest of the state or the people; she knows where her butter is spread. She's got to grease those wheels, you know, so she can stay in power, and represent the wealth elite getting theirs and handing US the bill. It would be nice to get her out of office. She only represents the rich. But that was the plan when they approved the 17th Amendment and took the power of state appointment for senatorial office! 2012/1/9 Mark Dowdle - TCRCD > > http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/08/4168916/water-barons-will-corner-market.html > > [image: sacbee.com] > > This story is taken from Sacbee / Opinion/ > Viewpoints > Viewpoints: Water barons will corner market in new 'Chinatown' Special > to The Bee Published Sunday, Jan. 08, 2012 > > There is more money in selling water in California than there is in > farming. > > A one-sentence provision inserted in the 2012 budget bill by U.S. Sen. > Dianne Feinstein will allow a handful of powerful San Joaquin Valley water > oligarchs to sell federally subsidized agricultural water in a private > market for as much as 150 times more than what they pay for it. > > This relaxation of publicly owned water supplies for private gain strips > out protections approved by Congress in 1992. > > They call them "water transfers," and for the last 15 years California has > been quietly edging into a very lucrative privatized water sales market > that seeks to expedite the movement of cheap agricultural water from > Northern California to thirsty Southern California and Bay Area cities. > > The cast of characters in this new water wars drama reads like a who's who > of California corporate agriculture: > > ? Westlands Water District, west of Fresno, which is the largest > irrigation district in the United States and is controlled by a handful of > privately owned agribusiness corporations. > > ? Beverly Hills billionaire Stewart Resnick, who runs the privately > controlled Kern Water Bank, a 19,900-acre underground reservoir capable of > holding more than a million acre-feet of water. The reservoir was created > by the state before being taken private. Resnick, a longtime backer of > Feinstein, owns Paramount Farms and Roll International, key players in > California's billion-dollar private water market. > > Like derivatives, subprime mortgages and deregulated electricity, the > privatization of federally owned water rights is a puzzle palace of > complexity. Here are some of the pieces: > > Winter and spring runoff from Northern California rivers, which flow > through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, are crucial to the ecological > health of the Delta, San Francisco Bay and the state's fishing industry. > The Feinstein legislation allows high water flows in the Sacramento and San > Joaquin rivers to be diverted to a private water market rather than > replenishing the Delta and the Bay. > > The legislation makes it easier to move federally subsidized > $20-an-acre-foot water from growers with federal project water contracts to > private interests with water rights. Once in the hands of these buyers, the > water can be resold in the open market to the highest bidder. > > Westlands Water District and others who will benefit from the legislation > will not be required to fully compensate the U.S. taxpayers for the public > investments in the storage facilities, conveyance systems, electricity to > pump the water or the operation and maintenance costs that make these > private windfall transactions possible. > > In short, it socializes the costs and capitalizes the profits, leaving > U.S. taxpayers to foot the bill. Sound familiar? > > The Kern Water Bank was originally owned by the state of California and > built to store water in high water years to provide agriculture with water > in drought years and to leave more in the Delta. In 1994, Resnick persuaded > the state to turn over this invaluable public resource to the Kern County > Water Agency. Within a short time the water agency turned over control of > the water bank to a handful of local water districts. > > When the dust settled, Resnick's Paramount Farming controlled more than 50 > percent. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation recently admitted that Resnick's > Kern Water Bank is on the list of beneficiaries of Feinstein's deregulation > measure. > > In addition, Feinstein's budget rider streamlines environmental review of > these privatized water transfers by disguising the environmental impacts of > individual transfers. One only needs to remember the "rape of the Owens > Valley" and its reincarnation in Roman Polanski's classic movie "Chinatown" > to understand the potential environmental impacts of moving water and water > rights from one geographical area to another. > > In anticipation of this Christmas gift to Westlands, the bond-rating > agency FitchRating last year noted the benefit to Westlands from > deregulating the federal water to allow Westlands to engage in more private > water sales: > > "The WWD (Westlands Water District) potentially has the ability to sell > and transfer water rights outside the district should agriculture cease to > be economic, as the demand for water in Southern California and the San > Francisco Bay Area by users with connectivity to the CVP (federal Central > Valley Water Project) is very high." > > Climate change and global warming studies predict future water shortages > for California. Feinstein's deregulation of vital public water paid for by > taxpayers will enrich a handful of powerful water oligarchs. The measure > will make it possible for a handful of these high rollers to dominate the > California water market and squeeze whatever profits they can out of > thirsty urban water users, leaving the fish and wildlife at the mercy of > so-called free market economics. > > The Congress must take a closer look. A privatized water supply paid for > by U.S. taxpayers but controlled by one person or a handful of people is > just plain wrong. > > **** > > *Patricia Schifferle, a former legislative director and consultant, is > principal/director for Pacific Advocates. > * > > ? Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved. > > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sacramento-bee-logo.png Type: image/png Size: 8578 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Tue Jan 10 09:15:29 2012 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 09:15:29 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Public draft of SONCC coho salmon recovery plan now available for review In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4F0C7231.8090706@tcrcd.net> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Public draft of SONCC coho salmon recovery plan now available for review Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 18:10:54 -0800 From: Julie Weeder To: CC: Dear Sir or Madam: The public draft of the SONCC coho salmon recovery plan is now available for review by all interested parties. You can find it here: http://swr.nmfs.noaa.gov/recovery/ Right now, the plan can be downloaded in two parts - Volume 1, which contains the introductory chapters and the appendices, and Volume 2, which contains population profiles which describe smaller areas of the SONCC ESU. The plan will be available to download chapter-by-chapter on this same site starting the week of January 9. The comment period ends March 5, 2012. Instructions for submitting comments can be found in the attached Federal Register notice. Public meetings will occur during the comment period. Information about these meetings will be posted at the web site above. I look forward to receiving your comments on the plan. -- Julie Weeder Recovery Coordinator, NOAA Fisheries, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521. 707-825-5168 , julie.weeder at noaa.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: FR notice SONCC plan.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 48590 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Tue Jan 10 14:23:56 2012 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 14:23:56 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Capital Press: Factions debate state's role in water monitoring Message-ID: <4F0CBA7C.90401@tcrcd.net> http://www.capitalpress.com/content/TH-groundwater-w-photos-infobox-122311 Factions debate state's role in water monitoring 'If you can't have water you can't grow a crop and you can't make a living' By TIM HEARDEN Capital Press CORNING, Calif. -- The debate over what to do about declining ground-water supplies took center stage during a recent water seminar here. In California, 30 percent of total water usage is provided by ground water, making the Golden State the biggest user of ground water in the nation, and 43 percent of the state's residents obtain drinking water from aquifers, said Kelly Staton, a senior engineering geologist for the state Department of Water Resources. Studies show that water tables in the Sacramento Valley dropped an average of 5 feet from 2004 to 2010, although they've gained back about 2 feet since last year, Staton explained. "Compared to 2004, we haven't quite recharged yet," she told about 100 farmers, environmentalists and government officials during an all-day workshop offered by the University of California Cooperative Extension. Environmentalists such as Marty Dunlap of the Chico, Calif.-based Citizens Water Watch wondered aloud whether the aquifers will ever fully recharge. They blame what they see as overuse of wells for endangering the creeks and trees that rely on the aquifers to thrive. "I'm just wondering who's going to step in when ground water is critical in Northern California," Dunlap said. "It seems like nobody is really taking responsibility." The exchanges highlight what may be the next key battleground in California's ongoing water conflicts, as conservationists seek to have ground water regulated as it is in other states. Already, the Environmental Law Foundation and other groups are suing the State Water Resources Control Board and Siskiyou County over well irrigation they say is depleting water for salmon in the Scott River. The suit could affect farmers' use of ground water throughout the state, Siskiyou County Supervisor Marcia Armstrong has said. Tehama County Supervisor Bob Williams, an oat and alfalfa hay producer, said there's a "quiet movement" in the state to have ground water included under California's Public Trust Doctrine, which applies to surface water and migratory wildlife. "There are folks who'd like to see California become like other states where the state has control over all water ... and in dry years can deny usage," Williams said during the workshop. "As a farmer, and I know there are a lot of farmers here, I know if you can't have water you can't grow a crop and you can't make a living. "We need to pay attention, we need to be educated and we need folks to talk to their local leaders and help them understand ... both sides of the issue," he said. Many factors can affect local and regional ground-water levels, including crop or other land-use changes, bloom and harvest seasons, changes in irrigation methods and, of course, precipitation, Staton explained. Ground water will be included in the next version of a program regulating contaminants such as nitrates, which come from agricultural applications, said Ben Letton of the Redding, Calif.-based Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. In addition, some counties have implemented ground-water monitoring ordinances. But the efforts need more teeth to them, asserted Dunlap. "It seems to me that it's not very prudent to wait for an emergency situation to see that counties have the authority to make sure their ecosystems are protected," she said. Online California Department of Water Resources: http://www.water.ca.gov/ State Water Resources Control Board: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/ Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/ rwqcb5/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wjcarl1 at yahoo.com Tue Jan 10 16:09:17 2012 From: wjcarl1 at yahoo.com (Warren Carlson) Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:09:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California In-Reply-To: References: <4F0B3E1A.60605@tcrcd.net> Message-ID: <1326240557.60210.YahooMailRC@web80205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Thank you Joshua and Mark, What a dilemma for liberal-conservationist CA voters !!! If we elect a Republican, we empower someone who vows never to compromise or cost the top One Percent a single dime. Or, vote for Dianne, and give a couple of them billions of those single dimes. Warren Carlson, prof. emeritus, HSU now in Redding ________________________________ From: Joshua Allen Sent: Mon, January 9, 2012 11:47:41 AM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California river water fetches high profit margins for farmers selling it through transfers Nothing new here. Don't look behind the curtain. Keep walking... What are we to expect from Feinslime? The 5th richest senator who has a net worth of $75 million doesn't represent the interest of the state or the people; she knows where her butter is spread. She's got to grease those wheels, you know, so she can stay in power, and represent the wealth elite getting theirs and handing US the bill. It would be nice to get her out of office. She only represents the rich. But that was the plan when they approved the 17th Amendment and took the power of state appointment for senatorial office! 2012/1/9 Mark Dowdle - TCRCD http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/08/4168916/water-barons-will-corner-market.html > > > > > >This story is taken from Sacbee / Opinion / Viewpoints >Viewpoints: Water barons will corner market in new 'Chinatown' >Special to The Bee >Published Sunday, Jan. 08, >2012................................................... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sacramento-bee-logo.png Type: image/png Size: 8578 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jan 11 10:20:06 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 10:20:06 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Restoration Clash Message-ID: Restoration clash http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2012-01-11/Front_Page/Restoration_clash.html After heated meeting TRRP will (mostly) go ahead with modified projects BY AMY GITTELSOHN THE TRINITY JOURNAL Last spring?s high flow release from Lewiston Dam of 11,000 cubic feet per second (12,000 cfs for several hours due to a gauge malfunction) eroded some of Jim and Diane Borruso?s property along the Trinity River in Junction City. Borruso is hopeful that bank stabilization and reopening of a side channel offered as part of the Upper Junction City project will protect the property, but problems shared by other landowners and fishing guides have given him pause. PHIL NELSON | THE TRINITY JOURNAL The Trinity River Restoration Program is moving forward with two downscaled river restoration projects that remain controversial, but there are still hurdles to clear and more opportunity for public comment before groundbreaking. The Trinity Management Council?s decision to proceed with half of the Lower Steiner Flat project and with the Upper Junction City project, with modifications meant to address concerns of river guides, was made at a meeting in Weaverville Jan. 4. Before these decisions were made the TMC heard from several landowners upset about past projects, and the president of the Trinity River Guides Association said consensus with the guides to move forward on the two modified projects had not in fact been reached. The small Trinity Public Utilities District conference room was packed. ?You should stop,? said Dave Wellock, who lives by the Trinity River, ?until you go back and correct all the damage you?ve done.? Gravel placed during the 2010 Trinity House Gulch project moved downstream during the 2011 high spring flow, forming a bar in an unintended location in front of Wellock?s property and forcing him to extend his waterline 75 feet. From the Reading?s Creek Tree Farm in Douglas City, Gail Goodyear said a project on a neighboring property caused three deep pools used by fish to fill with gravel. Removal of excess vegetation and noxious weeds along the river is one project the program should focus on instead, Goodyear said. Another landowner said he was promised revegetation after a bridge replacement, but ?wildflowers? don?t compensate for large trees. TMC Chair Brian Person noted that Wellock has filed a tort claim with the federal Bureau of Reclamation?s regional office to recover his costs and said he will continue to push for a fast resolution. The response was not satisfactory to Wellock, who expressed concerns about high flows taking out the new water system and liability should someone on the river get caught in the system. Person said there will be a written response to Goodyear?s concerns, which are many. The TMC also voted later in the meeting to hire an independent expert to review previous contracts. There were also complaints that meetings for stakeholder input have not been adequately announced. The landowner involved in the Upper Junction City project, Jim Borruso, said he did not find out about a Dec. 19 stakeholder meeting with program staff until it was under way. ?I am a stakeholder,? he said. ?You?re going to be digging up my backyard. Nobody told me about it.? Borruso has yet to sign a contract to allow the work on the property he and his wife purchased in 2003. Borruso told the Journal while they have been supportive of the restoration work he is ?very concerned after listening to the previous homeowners who have had work done on their property.? At the same time, Borruso said he needs two features of the project to prevent erosion of his property after losing ground during the 2011 high spring release from the dam. Some TMC members shared their philosophies. Representing the Hoopa Valley Tribe on the TMC, Mike Orcutt said the Trinity River Record of Decision, signed in 2000, is seen by the tribe as a treaty with the federal government. It has been a major effort to get the program close to full funding of $16 million annually, he said, and given the new congressional environment, ?I think we really need to show success,? Orcutt said. ?We need to work through what we need to work through but we have to show the benefits of this program now as well as in the future.? Person said the high spring release of 11,000 cubic feet per second from Lewiston Dam in a very wet year was a compromise and not enough in itself to restore the river. The Record of Decision also called for mechanical projects to restore complexity and meander of 40 miles of river below the dam, he noted. Person said he has worked in several river basins on diversion systems that have impacted fisheries, and in very few cases has there been the opportunity ?to go back and try to make the river right.? Hearing the concerns of the public that the program is not getting it right is ?very disturbing and almost emotional for me,? he said, adding that it causes him to redouble his efforts to redress what he can, but ?you cannot please everyone with a stake in the river. You cannot do it.? It turns out the guides are not happy, either. Guide Association President Bill Dickens said there was no consensus with the guides to move forward with the two projects. This contradicts an earlier report in The Trinity Journal that was based on comments from another member of the guides? association and Person. In an interview, Dickens told the Journal the association still requests a moratorium on projects until the review of earlier projects is complete. Also, the guides are strongly opposed to injections of spawning gravel, reporting that they have observed where it filled deep pools used by adult fish. The TMC has not made a decision on future gravel injections and is awaiting an analysis by program staff. ?The damage the gravel injection?s doing has caused us to take everything off the table,? Dickens said. DJ Bandrowski, implementation branch chief for the program, said he had thought a consensus had been reached with the guides on the two projects. Person, who attended the stakeholder meeting, said he also had heard that and was ?flabbergasted? to learn otherwise. The Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City projects involve use of heavy equipment to create features such as side channels and alcoves, insertion of wood or rock structures, an island at the Junction City site and sloping floodplains. Although river restoration staff hopes to break ground on the projects by late June, an environmental assessment and the permitting process are still pending. Orcutt expressed doubts about a wood, rock and backfill feature intended to stabilize a bank on the Borruso property. ?This basically somewhat flies in the face of what we?re trying to do,? Orcutt said. ?All these compromises add up.? In addition to preventing the river from meandering at that point, Orcutt also expressed doubts that the structure will provide a secondary benefit of fish habitat. Borruso insists on bank stabilization as part of the project. Representing Trinity County on the TMC, Sup. Roger Jaegel said, ?I would say as part of the adaptive management, taking into consideration private property rights is just part of our job.? ?If we don?t do anything this guy?s property is going to be affected by the flows,? Orcutt said. ?Would you prefer the project didn?t happen?? asked Arnold Whitridge, a mem- ber of the stakeholder group that advises the TMC. After more discussion of the lack of consensus with guides, Jaegel said, ?I think we need to move forward on design team recommendations.? The team has worked hard to compromise and redesign the projects, he said, and ?It can?t go on forever.? ?Evidently we?re not going to please every single person involved,? he said. Wellock said any approval of continuing with new projects should be linked to fixing problems with previous sites, or ?you brush us off.? The TMC did not go for the idea, but unanimously approved implementation of the lower half of the Lower Steiner Flat project as recommended by the program?s design team. The upper half ? which contained more features the guides are concerned about ? was put off but is to be revisited after completion of the review of earlier projects and recommendations are received. The estimated cost of the Upper Junction City project and both phases of the Lower Steiner Flat project is $1.6 million. The TMC also voted 7-1 to direct the design team to further review the Upper Junction City design, including the bank stabilization feature, and come back to the TMC with a recommendation. Orcutt, for the Hoopa Valley Tribe, had sought inclusion of language that the stabilization is a compromise to the Record of Decision and voted no. The TMC also voted to hire an independent expert to review past contracts with landowners and to consider a redress plan. The motion passed 6-0, the tribes abstaining. Opportunity to comment A draft Environmental Assessment for the Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City projects is anticipated to be released Jan. 17 for a 30-day comment period. A public scoping meeting on the two projects is slated for 6 p.m. Jan. 26 at the Douglas City Fire Hall. Trinity Management Council U.S. Bureau of Reclamation ? Brian Person (chair of TMC) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ? Nancy Finley Hoopa Valley Tribe ? Mike Orcutt Yurok Tribe ? Tim Hayden California Resources Agency ? Teresa Connor of Department of Water Resources U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service - Ann Garrett U.S. Forest Service ? Bill Brock Trinity County ? Roger Jaegel * Representatives listed were present for the TMC?s Jan. 4 special meeting. Some are alternates. Quotes ?I think we need to move forward on design team recommendations.? ?Evidently we?re not going to please every single person involved, ?? Sup. Roger Jaegel ?The damage the gravel injection?s doing has caused us to take everything off the table.? ? Guide association President Bill Dickens -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1p1.preview.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8081 bytes Desc: not available URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Thu Jan 12 11:32:21 2012 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:32:21 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Congressman Herger retiring!!!! Message-ID: http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid2755250001 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ggoodyear at hotmail.com Fri Jan 13 09:55:31 2012 From: ggoodyear at hotmail.com (Gail Goodyear) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 17:55:31 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California In-Reply-To: <1326240557.60210.YahooMailRC@web80205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <4F0B3E1A.60605@tcrcd.net>, , <1326240557.60210.YahooMailRC@web80205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Water is hardly a one-party issue. Greed is bi-partisan. Greed is one of the universals of our world. Gail Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:09:17 -0800 From: wjcarl1 at yahoo.com To: trinityjosh at gmail.com; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California Thank you Joshua and Mark, What a dilemma for liberal-conservationist CA voters !!! If we elect a Republican, we empower someone who vows never to compromise or cost the top One Percent a single dime. Or, vote for Dianne, and give a couple of them billions of those single dimes. Warren Carlson, prof. emeritus, HSU now in Redding From: Joshua Allen Sent: Mon, January 9, 2012 11:47:41 AM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California river water fetches high profit margins for farmers selling it through transfers Nothing new here. Don't look behind the curtain. Keep walking... What are we to expect from Feinslime? The 5th richest senator who has a net worth of $75 million doesn't represent the interest of the state or the people; she knows where her butter is spread. She's got to grease those wheels, you know, so she can stay in power, and represent the wealth elite getting theirs and handing US the bill. It would be nice to get her out of office. She only represents the rich. But that was the plan when they approved the 17th Amendment and took the power of state appointment for senatorial office! 2012/1/9 Mark Dowdle - TCRCD http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/08/4168916/water-barons-will-corner-market.html This story is taken from Sacbee / Opinion / Viewpoints Viewpoints: Water barons will corner market in new 'Chinatown' Special to The Bee Published Sunday, Jan. 08, 2012................................................... _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sacramento-bee-logo.png Type: image/png Size: 8578 bytes Desc: not available URL: From truman at jeffnet.org Fri Jan 13 10:17:39 2012 From: truman at jeffnet.org (Patrick Truman) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 10:17:39 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California In-Reply-To: References: <4F0B3E1A.60605@tcrcd.net>, , <1326240557.60210.YahooMailRC@web80205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1AF23619DD41452295FBE65FB83DD948@Bertha> ONE LOVE...ONE WORLD From: Gail Goodyear Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 9:55 AM To: wjcarl1 at yahoo.com ; trinityjosh at gmail.com ; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California Water is hardly a one-party issue. Greed is bi-partisan. Greed is one of the universals of our world. Gail -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:09:17 -0800 From: wjcarl1 at yahoo.com To: trinityjosh at gmail.com; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California Thank you Joshua and Mark, What a dilemma for liberal-conservationist CA voters !!! If we elect a Republican, we empower someone who vows never to compromise or cost the top One Percent a single dime. Or, vote for Dianne, and give a couple of them billions of those single dimes. Warren Carlson, prof. emeritus, HSU now in Redding -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Joshua Allen Sent: Mon, January 9, 2012 11:47:41 AM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California river water fetches high profit margins for farmers selling it through transfers Nothing new here. Don't look behind the curtain. Keep walking... What are we to expect from Feinslime? The 5th richest senator who has a net worth of $75 million doesn't represent the interest of the state or the people; she knows where her butter is spread. She's got to grease those wheels, you know, so she can stay in power, and represent the wealth elite getting theirs and handing US the bill. It would be nice to get her out of office. She only represents the rich. But that was the plan when they approved the 17th Amendment and took the power of state appointment for senatorial office! 2012/1/9 Mark Dowdle - TCRCD http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/08/4168916/water-barons-will-corner-market.html This story is taken from Sacbee / Opinion / Viewpoints Viewpoints: Water barons will corner market in new 'Chinatown' Special to The Bee Published Sunday, Jan. 08, 2012 ................................................... _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1901 / Virus Database: 2109/4740 - Release Date: 01/13/12 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sacramento-bee-logo.png Type: image/png Size: 8578 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mdowdle at tcrcd.net Fri Jan 13 10:40:14 2012 From: mdowdle at tcrcd.net (Mark Dowdle - TCRCD) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 10:40:14 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Restoring steelhead to southern California streams could cost up to $2.1 billion over next century Message-ID: <4F107A8E.6020107@tcrcd.net> Ventura County Star Restoring steelhead to cost up to $2.1 billion over next century Funding would cover 100-year plan By Zeke Barlow Originally published 04:51 p.m., January 12, 2012 Updated 08:28 p.m., January 12, 2012 Restoring endangered steelhead trout to the Southern California rivers and streams where they once swam in abundance will cost as much as $2.1 billion over the next 100 years, according to a new federal report. Along with a financial commitment, a "shift in society attitudes, understanding, priorities and practices" concerning water use will be needed to save the fish that swim between the ocean and rivers, according to the more than 600-page Southern California Steelhead Recovery Plan recently released by the National Marine Fisheries. Beyond the steelhead, people stand to gain from the restoration by increased tourism, job creation and an improved river ecosystem, the plan states. "It is an ecosystem-based approach where we are looking at healthy watersheds that people use for all kinds of reasons," said Mark Capelli, the National Marine Fisheries Service's steelhead recovery coordinator. Bringing the steelhead back, however, is a long, challenging and expensive process that is not guaranteed to work. The recovery plan estimates it will cost $1.7 billion to $2.1 billion over the next 80 to 100 years. About 500 returning adult steelhead exist today, compared with an estimated 45,000 that swam in rivers before World War II. Grainy black-and-white photos show smiling fishermen displaying stringers full of the fish. As Southern California grew, development, flood-control measures, agriculture, ranching, mining, dams and other activity severely depleted steelhead habitat, forcing it onto the endangered species list in 1997. "It will likely take decades to restore these fish to the coastal rivers and streams where they once thrived," said Penny Ruvelas, a fisheries supervisor in Southern California for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. "But this plan is a very significant step in achieving that goal." In Ventura County, at least $459 million will be needed to return steelhead to the nine rivers and creeks where they once flourished. Much of that is to "restore natural channel features" in waterways. The price tag is likely higher, as some waterways that start in Ventura County and drain to Los Angeles are not included in that figure.More than $156 million will be needed for estuary restoration and management along the Santa Clara River. The plan is a guide for steelhead recovery, not a firm blueprint of who should do what. It says only, for example, that better fish passage is needed around the Freeman Diversion and Santa Felicia Dam, both run by the United Water Conservation District on the Santa Clara River. It doesn't spell out how it should happen. Although United Water long fought against modifying the Freeman Diversion, General Manager Mike Solomon said the district now is committed to doing what must be done under the Endangered Species Act, even if it is costly. The district has no choice, he said. "The Endangered Species Act is the law of the land, and it is our responsibility to be in compliance with it," he said. "We will do everything we can do to be in compliance." The district already has spent $3.5 million on studies looking at how to improve fish passage around Santa Felicia Dam, which holds Lake Piru. It recently spent $450,000 more for a study on fish-passage construction. In the coming years, it may spend as much as $30 million for a rock ramp for steelhead at the Freeman Diversion. Water rates have risen 500 percent in the past nine years, in large part because of new environmental regulations, he said. "We are raising prices, and the costs are going up, and we haven't even started building yet," he said. "The federal government does not look at how much it costs to do it. They just say you have to do it. At what point does the cost get too much?" The Casitas Municipal Water District spent $9 million to build a fish ladder on the Ventura River to comply with the Endangered Species Act. Capelli said while $2.1 billion might seem like a lot, it will not come from any one source and will be spread out over 100 years. Also, many of the needed restoration projects are already being done through other groups and activities. Even more challenging than funding the projects may be the needed shift in attitudes toward water and natural resources, he said. But that's already started, too, he said, citing examples such as the city of Ventura, which committed to reuse much of its wastewater instead of releasing it into a nearby estuary. "It is a shift that is being seen in a lot of different areas, not just steelhead recovery," he said. Ron Bottorff, chairman of Friends of the Santa Clara River, which has been pushing for restoration of the river for years, said people have a moral imperative to fix what they broke. "The larger picture is that we are responsible for all these species going under," he said. Humans spend billions on other, frivolous things, he said. By comparison, $2 billion over 100 years to restore waterways in an area as vast as Southern California is not "unreasonable," he said. /On the Net: http://swr.nmfs.noaa.gov/recovery/So_Cal.htm/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cltuts at att.net Fri Jan 13 10:49:54 2012 From: cltuts at att.net (Clark Tuthill) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 10:49:54 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] (no subject) Message-ID: <005601ccd224$2453a960$6cfafc20$@net> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From snowgoose at pulsarco.com Fri Jan 13 11:00:40 2012 From: snowgoose at pulsarco.com (sandydenn@pulsarco.com) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 11:00:40 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California References: <4F0B3E1A.60605@tcrcd.net>, , <1326240557.60210.YahooMailRC@web80205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <0444C27D188C4B969DBB226F2914759A@acer6e395d0925> Perhaps before pasting the "Greed" label on all of these parties, one should become better informed of the costs, regulations, fees and sacrifices made by California agriculturists. It sounds as though all you commentors assume that your food is produced 100% by huge corporate entities living in the lap of luxury, just waiting for the next big paycheck to arrive. We are not all innocence and light as an industry, but many of us are just hard working, hands-on farmers who have found it necessary to "sell" a portion of our allocation to fund the costs of environmentalism, development and "Greed" for idealism. I wouldn't even have responded if you all hadn't jumped onto this bashing band wagon and tend to paint with such a wide brush, figuring you are entitled to your opinion. But please recognize the fact that farmers who are incorporated are not all greedy corporate giants just salivating over the next big "water deal" they can make. Sandy Willard Denn, Hands-on farmer ----- Original Message ----- From: Gail Goodyear To: wjcarl1 at yahoo.com ; trinityjosh at gmail.com ; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 9:55 AM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California Water is hardly a one-party issue. Greed is bi-partisan. Greed is one of the universals of our world. Gail ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:09:17 -0800 From: wjcarl1 at yahoo.com To: trinityjosh at gmail.com; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California Thank you Joshua and Mark, What a dilemma for liberal-conservationist CA voters !!! If we elect a Republican, we empower someone who vows never to compromise or cost the top One Percent a single dime. Or, vote for Dianne, and give a couple of them billions of those single dimes. Warren Carlson, prof. emeritus, HSU now in Redding ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Joshua Allen Sent: Mon, January 9, 2012 11:47:41 AM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California river water fetches high profit margins for farmers selling it through transfers Nothing new here. Don't look behind the curtain. Keep walking... What are we to expect from Feinslime? The 5th richest senator who has a net worth of $75 million doesn't represent the interest of the state or the people; she knows where her butter is spread. She's got to grease those wheels, you know, so she can stay in power, and represent the wealth elite getting theirs and handing US the bill. It would be nice to get her out of office. She only represents the rich. But that was the plan when they approved the 17th Amendment and took the power of state appointment for senatorial office! 2012/1/9 Mark Dowdle - TCRCD http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/08/4168916/water-barons-will-corner-market.html This story is taken from Sacbee / Opinion / Viewpoints Viewpoints: Water barons will corner market in new 'Chinatown' Special to The Bee Published Sunday, Jan. 08, 2012 ................................................... _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sacramento-bee-logo.png Type: image/png Size: 8578 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ema.berol at yahoo.com Fri Jan 13 11:38:17 2012 From: ema.berol at yahoo.com (Emelia Berol) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 11:38:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California In-Reply-To: <0444C27D188C4B969DBB226F2914759A@acer6e395d0925> References: <4F0B3E1A.60605@tcrcd.net>, , <1326240557.60210.YahooMailRC@web80205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <0444C27D188C4B969DBB226F2914759A@acer6e395d0925> Message-ID: <1326483497.88648.YahooMailNeo@web46209.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> I appreciate and agree with your comments, Sandy. Too few people in our society have had any connection to farming or the sources of their food, and the image of farming in California really is tainted by the big subsidized industrial ag world.? My father came from farming background, and had commercial orchards in Sonoma County, 50 acres, and another 150 acres he ran a small herd of beef cattle on ... back in the days before wine became king there... and living in Humboldt County ?one does not have to look far to see how hard our local dairy farmers, beef ranchers, and produce market farmers work.? I think true farmers are under appreciated, and that it is important to distinguish, and this is true of many other industries as well, such as fishing and timber harvesting. There are those who are driven by greed, and there are those who do what they do just to make a decent living, and sometimes just for the love of it. They should not be subjected to the same rules as large-scale industrial resource extractors and producers, nor should one group be given privileged status and advantages over others.? It's a pity that Sacramento Valley farmers can make more money selling their water than the crops they could grown with that water ...? one thing for sure, groups like the Westlands and Kern Water agency should not be allowed to be profiteering middlemen in the delivery of water. That water belongs to the state of California, and should be managed as a public resource, not a free market commodity.? The idea of free markets is a joke, anyway, so long as the Westlands and others get sweet deals from the gov ... it's a form of socialism that only applies to the wealthy.? Emelia ________________________________ From: "sandydenn at pulsarco.com" To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us; trinityjosh at gmail.com; wjcarl1 at yahoo.com; Gail Goodyear Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 11:00 AM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California Perhaps before pasting the "Greed" label on all of these parties, one should become better informed of the costs, regulations, fees and sacrifices made by California agriculturists.? It sounds as though all you commentors assume that your food is produced 100% by huge corporate entities living in the lap of luxury, just waiting for the next big paycheck to arrive.? We are not all innocence and light as an industry, but many of us are just hard working, hands-on farmers who have found it necessary to "sell"?a portion of our allocation to fund the costs of environmentalism, development and "Greed" for idealism.?I wouldn't even have?responded if you all hadn't jumped onto this bashing band wagon and?tend to paint with such a wide brush, figuring you are entitled to your opinion.? But please recognize the fact that farmers who are incorporated are not all greedy corporate giants just salivating over the next big?"water deal"? they can make.? Sandy Willard Denn, Hands-on farmer ? ----- Original Message ----- >From: Gail Goodyear >To: wjcarl1 at yahoo.com ; trinityjosh at gmail.com ; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 9:55 AM >Subject: Re: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California > > >Water is hardly a one-party issue. Greed is bi-partisan. >? >Greed is one of the universals of our world. >? >Gail >? > > >________________________________ > Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:09:17 -0800 >From: wjcarl1 at yahoo.com >To: trinityjosh at gmail.com; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California > > >Thank you Joshua and Mark, What a dilemma for liberal-conservationist CA voters !!! If we elect a Republican, we empower someone who vows never to compromise or cost the top One Percent a single dime. Or, vote for Dianne, and give a couple of them billions of those single dimes. ?? Warren Carlson, prof. emeritus, HSU now in Redding > > > > >________________________________ > From: Joshua Allen > >Sent: Mon, January 9, 2012 11:47:41 AM >Subject: Re: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California river water fetches high profit margins for farmers selling it through transfers > >Nothing new here. Don't look behind?the?curtain. Keep walking... > > >What are we to expect from Feinslime? The 5th richest senator who has a net worth of $75 million doesn't represent the interest of?the?state or?the?people; she knows where her butter is spread. She's got to grease those wheels, you know, so she can stay in power, and represent the wealth elite getting theirs and handing US?the?bill.? > > >It would be nice to get her out of office. She only represents?the?rich. But that was?the?plan when they approved?the?17th Amendment and took the power of state appointment for?senatorial?office! > > >2012/1/9 Mark Dowdle - TCRCD > >http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/08/4168916/water-barons-will-corner-market.html >> >> >> >> >> >>This story is taken from Sacbee / Opinion / Viewpoints >> >>Viewpoints: Water barons will corner market in new 'Chinatown' >>Special to The Bee >>Published Sunday, Jan. 08, 2012................................................... > >_______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity >________________________________ > _______________________________________________ >env-trinity mailing list >env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sacramento-bee-logo.png Type: image/png Size: 8578 bytes Desc: not available URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Fri Jan 13 11:25:48 2012 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 11:25:48 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Beware of privatized water - Sacramento Bee 1/13/11 In-Reply-To: <0444C27D188C4B969DBB226F2914759A@acer6e395d0925> References: <4F0B3E1A.60605@tcrcd.net>, , <1326240557.60210.YahooMailRC@web80205.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <0444C27D188C4B969DBB226F2914759A@acer6e395d0925> Message-ID: <208C6934-74F7-4B5F-8AD1-803CC707C4B5@fishsniffer.com> http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/13/4184247/letters-to-the-editor.html Beware of privatized water Re "Water barons will corner market in new 'Chinatown'" (Viewpoints, Jan. 8): Patricia Schifferle's article exposes the disgusting corruption and "pay to play" policies that infest California water politics. Sen. Dianne Feinstein's provision in the 2012 budget bill allows a handful of agribusiness interests to sell subsidized federal water in a private water market for up to 150 times what they pay for it. Schifferle makes a superb comparison of the privatization of federal water rights to the derivatives, subprime mortgages and deregulated electricity that led to the economic collapse and Wall Street bailouts. Feinstein is promoting privatization that will benefit only the 1 percent at the expense of the 99 percent. ? Dan Bacher, Sacramento -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From truman at jeffnet.org Fri Jan 13 12:02:11 2012 From: truman at jeffnet.org (Patrick Truman) Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 12:02:11 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California In-Reply-To: <1326483497.88648.YahooMailNeo@web46209.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> References: <4F0B3E1A.60605@tcrcd.net>, , <1326240557.60210.YahooMailRC@web80205.mail.mud.yahoo.com><0444C27D188C4B969DBB226F2914759A@acer6e395d0925> <1326483497.88648.YahooMailNeo@web46209.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1ABD67E52D66484899C8F170611B01DD@Bertha> Emelia: and do not forget the farm subsidies received under the commodities title of the farm bill by large profitable corporations, another form of socialism, and mostly received by people who call President Obama a nazi and a socialist. true hypocrisy at its best. I recommend the new book by Tom Mueller: Extra Virginity, the Sublime and Scandalous World of Olive Oil From: Emelia Berol Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 11:38 AM To: mailto:snowgoose at pulsarco.com ; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us ; trinityjosh at gmail.com ; wjcarl1 at yahoo.com ; Gail Goodyear Subject: Re: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California I appreciate and agree with your comments, Sandy. Too few people in our society have had any connection to farming or the sources of their food, and the image of farming in California really is tainted by the big subsidized industrial ag world. My father came from farming background, and had commercial orchards in Sonoma County, 50 acres, and another 150 acres he ran a small herd of beef cattle on ... back in the days before wine became king there... and living in Humboldt County one does not have to look far to see how hard our local dairy farmers, beef ranchers, and produce market farmers work. I think true farmers are under appreciated, and that it is important to distinguish, and this is true of many other industries as well, such as fishing and timber harvesting. There are those who are driven by greed, and there are those who do what they do just to make a decent living, and sometimes just for the love of it. They should not be subjected to the same rules as large-scale industrial resource extractors and producers, nor should one group be given privileged status and advantages over others. It's a pity that Sacramento Valley farmers can make more money selling their water than the crops they could grown with that water ... one thing for sure, groups like the Westlands and Kern Water agency should not be allowed to be profiteering middlemen in the delivery of water. That water belongs to the state of California, and should be managed as a public resource, not a free market commodity. The idea of free markets is a joke, anyway, so long as the Westlands and others get sweet deals from the gov ... it's a form of socialism that only applies to the wealthy. Emelia -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "sandydenn at pulsarco.com" To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us; trinityjosh at gmail.com; wjcarl1 at yahoo.com; Gail Goodyear Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 11:00 AM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California Perhaps before pasting the "Greed" label on all of these parties, one should become better informed of the costs, regulations, fees and sacrifices made by California agriculturists. It sounds as though all you commentors assume that your food is produced 100% by huge corporate entities living in the lap of luxury, just waiting for the next big paycheck to arrive. We are not all innocence and light as an industry, but many of us are just hard working, hands-on farmers who have found it necessary to "sell" a portion of our allocation to fund the costs of environmentalism, development and "Greed" for idealism. I wouldn't even have responded if you all hadn't jumped onto this bashing band wagon and tend to paint with such a wide brush, figuring you are entitled to your opinion. But please recognize the fact that farmers who are incorporated are not all greedy corporate giants just salivating over the next big "water deal" they can make. Sandy Willard Denn, Hands-on farmer ----- Original Message ----- From: Gail Goodyear To: wjcarl1 at yahoo.com ; trinityjosh at gmail.com ; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Sent: Friday, January 13, 2012 9:55 AM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California Water is hardly a one-party issue. Greed is bi-partisan. Greed is one of the universals of our world. Gail ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:09:17 -0800 From: wjcarl1 at yahoo.com To: trinityjosh at gmail.com; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California Thank you Joshua and Mark, What a dilemma for liberal-conservationist CA voters !!! If we elect a Republican, we empower someone who vows never to compromise or cost the top One Percent a single dime. Or, vote for Dianne, and give a couple of them billions of those single dimes. Warren Carlson, prof. emeritus, HSU now in Redding ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Joshua Allen Sent: Mon, January 9, 2012 11:47:41 AM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] SacBee Viewpoint: Northern California river water fetches high profit margins for farmers selling it through transfers Nothing new here. Don't look behind the curtain. Keep walking... What are we to expect from Feinslime? The 5th richest senator who has a net worth of $75 million doesn't represent the interest of the state or the people; she knows where her butter is spread. She's got to grease those wheels, you know, so she can stay in power, and represent the wealth elite getting theirs and handing US the bill. It would be nice to get her out of office. She only represents the rich. But that was the plan when they approved the 17th Amendment and took the power of state appointment for senatorial office! 2012/1/9 Mark Dowdle - TCRCD http://www.sacbee.com/2012/01/08/4168916/water-barons-will-corner-market.html This story is taken from Sacbee / Opinion / Viewpoints Viewpoints: Water barons will corner market in new 'Chinatown' Special to The Bee Published Sunday, Jan. 08, 2012 ................................................... _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1901 / Virus Database: 2109/4740 - Release Date: 01/13/12 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sacramento-bee-logo.png Type: image/png Size: 8578 bytes Desc: not available URL: From truman at jeffnet.org Sat Jan 14 10:32:25 2012 From: truman at jeffnet.org (Patrick Truman) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2012 10:32:25 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Coolest Little Town Message-ID: please cast your vote for Weaverville http://www.budgettravel.com/contest/americas-coolest-small-towns-2012%2C11/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Sat Jan 14 11:40:27 2012 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2012 11:40:27 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Congressman Herger retiring!!!! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: LaMalfa will be running for Herger's office: http://www.knvn.com/content/localnews/story/La-Malfa-Declares-Candidacy-for-Congress/E0FIWovJZUuYikV9I5aOYg.cspx?rss=2224 http://www.corning-observer.com/news/herger-11138-politico-gop.html On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Joshua Allen wrote: > http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid2755250001 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From truman at jeffnet.org Sat Jan 14 12:10:29 2012 From: truman at jeffnet.org (Patrick Truman) Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2012 12:10:29 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Congressman Herger retiring!!!! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9878ED65AC7040918604A5AB6F0FE2D2@Bertha> not in his district, we have an open seat in Trinity county... From: Joshua Allen Sent: Saturday, January 14, 2012 11:40 AM To: Trinity List Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Congressman Herger retiring!!!! LaMalfa will be running for Herger's office: http://www.knvn.com/content/localnews/story/La-Malfa-Declares-Candidacy-for-Congress/E0FIWovJZUuYikV9I5aOYg.cspx?rss=2224 http://www.corning-observer.com/news/herger-11138-politico-gop.html On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Joshua Allen wrote: http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid2755250001 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1901 / Virus Database: 2109/4742 - Release Date: 01/14/12 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Jan 16 12:02:33 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 12:02:33 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Eureka Times Standard- Restricted access to Tish Tang stirs up concerns Message-ID: <6D7A718B-19A1-4006-84FD-CD385CE57ECC@att.net> Restricted access to Tish Tang stirs up concerns Donna Tam/The Times-Standard Posted: 01/16/2012 02:31:52 AM PST http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_19751634 Click photo to enlarge The Hoopa Valley Tribe plans to create a permit program for fishermen using Trinity River access points on the reservation after posted signs and locked gates in the area caused a flurry of concern from members and nonmembers alike. Tribal representatives are meeting this week to discuss the possible details of the program, Chairman Leonard Masten said. The chairman's office asked the tribe's forestry department to close gates and post no trespassing signs on the Tish Tang access road in early December. Soon after, fishing guides and tribal members raised concerns over the restricted access of non-tribal members. The Hoopa Valley Tribe has sovereign authority over its territory. ?It's one of those kinds of things that kind of got carried away,? Masten said. After a meeting last Wednesday, the tribe released a statement clarifying its position. ?In recent years the tribe has been confronted with increasingly disrespectful and destructive conduct by users of tribal lands and resources,? the tribe said in its statement. ?This includes repeated incidents of illegal dumping, theft of resources, habitat destruction, contamination of lands and waterways, and other public offenses. In response to what has reached an emergency level, action has been taken to restrict access via posting of designated roads and river access locations, together with the installation of gates in some instances.? The full statement is available below the story. Masten said the tribe is planning more enforcement efforts by the forestry department and tribal police. ?It's more about education than anything else,? he said. Vice Chairman Byron Nelson said details are being worked out to clarify access after the initial reaction from the community raised several questions, including whether non-tribal spouses could accompany tribal members to the area. ?I think there was concern with the way it was posted. The council wasn't apprised of what was going on out of the chairman's office,? he said, adding that the council is in agreement over the need for something to be done to protect the tribe's natural resources. George Frey, a lands and minerals specialist for the U.S. Forest Service, oversees the commercial permits issued for Trinity River access points on Forest Service land. The agency receives a percentage of each guide's earnings each year as part of its permit program. While Frey said he couldn't speak to the situation on tribal lands, he said he hasn't seen instances of guides trashing Forest Service land. ?It's their bread and butter and they take care of it,? Frey said. The closed access points means guides can enter the river on the Forest Service's land at access points like Hawkins Bar, Sandy Bar, Big Rock and Kimtu, but they can't exit on the reservation's land as they would normally do. River guide John Klar said he's glad to see there is some movement to come up with a permit program. ?I think it's a step in a positive direction,? the Fortuna resident said. ?At least we're getting somewhere instead of just signs and gates. Hopefully, it comes to a pretty amiable resolution for everyone.? Nelson said the recent action to close access points may be a good way to get the conversation started. ?This is something that probably we had neglected ourselves -- to try and get these things down into more clear policy and actually starting the permit process,? he said. ?We've talked so many years about issuing a fishing license and the regulations we can do.? Complete statement from Hoopa Valley Tribe regarding restricted access: The Hoopa Valley Tribe is a federally recognized Indian Tribe with sovereign authority over its territory, including all lands within the boundaries of the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation. This authority includes both the right and responsibility to manage and regulate these lands for the benefit of the tribe and to meet our sacred duty to our aboriginal territory. In recent years the tribe has been confronted with increasingly disrespectful and destructive conduct by users of tribal lands and resources. This includes repeated incidents of illegal dumping, theft of resources, habitat destruction, contamination of lands and waterways, and other public offenses. In response to what has reached an emergency level, action has been taken to restrict access via posting of designated roads and river access locations, together with the installation of gates in some instances. The issues involved in addressing the problems that have required this action are broad and, in many respects, complex. The Hoopa Valley Tribe is engaged in ongoing initiatives to address these issues and to implement regulatory systems that will allow respectful access to tribal lands and waterways, by tribal members and ultimately nonmembers as well. Relative to gated river access, on an immediate basis the Hoopa Tribal Forestry Department is coordinating tribal initiates to finalize regulatory processes that may allow for permitted access. Be assured, the Hoopa Valley Tribe takes these issues very seriously and is engaged in a comprehensive effort to address them. As an example, our tribal fisheries department is coordinating tribal initiatives to negotiate with the state of California to implement tribal fishing licenses as one possibility for facilitating access of nonmembers to waterways within the reservation. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 20120116__local_tish_tang_VIEWER.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 5852 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Jan 16 19:46:04 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 19:46:04 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River meeting by CA Advisory Committee on Salmon and Steelhead Trout Message-ID: <4969D8DA-D47E-4754-90B3-4B457C268CBE@att.net> http://www.dfg.ca.gov/news/pubnotice/ California Advisory Committee on Salmon and Steelhead Trout Special Meeting: Trinity River Restoration Program January 20, 2012 9:30 a.m. - 3:30 p.m. California Department Fish and Game, Northern Region Office 601 Locust Street Redding, CA 96001 Phonein Meeting Sites: CDFG Coastal Watershed Planning and Assessment, 1455 Sandy Prairie Ct., Fortuna, CA U.S. Forest Service Office Conference Room, 1711 S. Main St., Yreka, CA AGENDA1 Welcome and Opening Comments. Budget move to eliminate CAC, NOAA budget cuts Background to Trinity River Mainstem Restoration Project Moratorium Watershed Restoration/Trinity funding breakdown- Trinity Management Council voting rules and membership Autofish Marking at Trinity River Hatchery Hatchery Production LUNCH 12:00-1:00 Independent Review Panels CVP Operations/Trinity River flows/Temperatures/Trinity Reservoir Bay-Delta Conservation Plan/Delta export issues Trinity River access for fishing Legislative Report: Bills in Progress Other watersheds Planning for First Quarter Meeting with Fisheries Forum Public Comments ADJOURN 1 Public Comments will be taken at the beginning and end of the meeting. Comment time will normally be 3 minutes, and may be limited at the discretion of the Chair. For information or reasonable accommodation contact: Kevin Shaffer, 830 S Street, Sacramento, CA 95811, (916) 327-8841, kshaffer at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From MCKIER at dfg.ca.gov Tue Jan 17 07:41:33 2012 From: MCKIER at dfg.ca.gov (Mary Claire Kier) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 07:41:33 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Project trapping summary through 10 January 2012 Message-ID: <4F1525EB.A226.009F.1@dfg.ca.gov> Good Morning! Attached please find the latest trapping data from the Trinity River Hatchery. It looks like we're going to get a slug of rain and/or snow the next couple of days so we may see some bigger numbers next week... Email me with questions or concerns (I'm away from my phone a lot). Mary Claire Mary Claire Kier DFG - Trinity River Project 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 707/822-5876 - FAX 822-2855 mckier at dfg.ca.gov Trinity River documents can be found at: http://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/documents/ContextDocs.aspx?cat=KlamathTrinity -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 89600 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jan 17 14:19:00 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 14:19:00 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Guest Column Oregon LIve- Klamath tribes: Respect our Rights and our Expertise Message-ID: <6A8C25EA-B125-4DAE-92BA-DFC4862F9CEF@att.net> http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2012/01/klamath_tribes_respect_our_rig.html Klamath tribes: Respect our Rights and our Expertise Published: Saturday, January 14, 2012, 11:54 AM By Guest Columnist By Don Gentry The Klamath Tribes lost our c'iyaal's (salmon) and meYas (steelhead) to dam construction nearly a century ago. But now, Congress has an historic opportunity to pass landmark legislation that restores our fisheries, creates jobs, and promotes economic and ecological sustainability for Klamath Basin communities -- tribes, farmers, ranchers, fishermen, and conservationists. Thousands of salmon line the shores of the Klamath River in September of 2002. The fish kill was thought to be caused by a low warm river as the salmon tried to make it upstream for spawning season. Bruce Ely/The Oregonian The Klamath Basin Economic Restoration Act represents the type of bi-partisan regional economic development plan Congress should support. We are joined in our support for the legislation by many respected conservation organizations and sportsmen groups. We applaud Senator Merkley's leadership, and urge Senator Wyden and Representative Walden to join in moving the bill through Congress expeditiously. The Klamath Basin agreements that the bill would implement are really an innovation: after decades of fighting and suing each other over scarce water, groups in the Basin, including not just the Klamath Tribes but other tribes, farmers, ranchers, fishing families and conservation groups have developed a collaborative approach to managing the water. But innovation always comes with detractors. In a recent Oregonian opinion article WaterWatch claimed that tribal rights are "trampled" by this legislation. In fact, opposing the legislation opposes returning salmon and steelhead to our homelands. WaterWatch is the one trampling on tribal treaty rights here, not the legislation. Equally important are the science and conservation issues. The legislation marks a fundamental improvement in resource management. It moves beyond regulation-based litigation that narrowly addresses symptoms to collaboration that addresses root causes of environmental problems, for the first time ever in the Klamath. Some major actions include: Removing four Klamath River dams, re-opening hundreds of miles of habitat to salmon and steelhead, and restoring their access to the largest concentration of cold water in the entire basin. Limiting withdrawal of water for the Klamath Irrigation Project to already-negotiated, reasonable amounts, getting water to fish when they need it most, and protecting against excessive groundwater use. Eliminating toxic algae blooms that poison the river. Improving river temperature and flow regimes from conditions experienced over the past 50 years, restoring more natural patterns. Implementing integrated and collaborative ecosystem restoration, monitoring, water management, nutrient reduction, and salmon reintroduction strategies, designed to restore functional river, wetland and riparian ecosystems needed to recover fish populations and eliminate environmental conflict. An effective Drought Plan, which in extreme conditions will increase in-stream water for fish by up to 150,000 acre feet. Strategic, voluntary reductions in diversions above Upper Klamath Lake, which will significantly increase tributary inflows. Increasing the amount and reliability of water supplies for National Wildlife Refuge wetlands, which now often go dry. No entity has come up with an alternative that is as comprehensive or effective. Litigation, the preferred tool of most detractors on both the left and the right, simply cannot deliver the multi-faceted solutions that Klamath problems require. The Klamath Tribes negotiated a Treaty with the United States more than 100 years ago to permanently preserve natural resources that have been central to our subsistence and cultural integrity for thousands of years. Nobody wants thriving fish and wildlife populations more than we do. We helped build the legislation, structured around bi-partisan agreement with farmers and ranchers and based in years of scientific and legal analysis. We have been in the trenches for decades on these issues, employing knowledgeable, effective scientists and attorneys whose work helped make the legislation possible. Groups like WaterWatch should respect our expertise, judgment, and sovereignty in such matters -- paternalistic expressions of concern for tribal rights are not appreciated. We urge our congressional leaders to follow the path of collaboration we helped to blaze. Don Gentry is is vice chairman of the Klamath Tribes. ? 2012 OregonLive.com. All rights reserved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: logo_olive_print.gif Type: image/gif Size: 2891 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1826675.png Type: image/png Size: 6447 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 10239882-large.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 36357 bytes Desc: not available URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Wed Jan 18 11:05:58 2012 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 11:05:58 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Vote Weaverville the coolest small town in America for Budget Travel! Message-ID: Readers nominated a record 647 towns this year ? and now we?ve narrowed that list down to just 10 standout communities across the country. Read all about them, and then vote for your favorite! You can vote once daily, so be sure to get all your votes in before the contest closes on January 31st. Weaverville is currently 2nd on the list with 23.1%, which is only 0.7% behind Hammondsport, NY. Vote now! Think of the much needed tourist $$$ this could bring to the county. http://www.budgettravel.com/contest/americas-coolest-small-towns-2012,11/ Weaverville, CA *(Population: 3,807) *Coursing rivers, craggy mountains, vibrant wilderness?Weaverville?s setting on the outskirts of California?s Shasta-Trinity National Forest sells itself. It owns a nice slice of history, too: Unlike many gold-rush towns, Chinese laborers in Weaverville in the mid-1800s were able to cultivate a strong and supportive local community here. The result is a town that, even today, comfortably spans cultures. There are strains of Victorian America in antique residences such as the 1865 five-room Whitmore Inn while the spirit of the frontier flavors the menu of the Old West?styled La Grange Caf?. For a touch of California bohemia, try the fair-trade coffee and organic tea served at Mamma Llama Eatery. Anchoring it all is a strong history of Taoist tradition exemplified by the Joss House?the state?s oldest continuously used Chinese temple, where the faithful have worshipped since 1874. Religious and cultural tolerance combined with 2 million acres of wild country? Sounds like heaven on earth?a description that wouldn?t be out of place in the works of the writer James Hilton, who compared Weaverville to a mythical paradise of his own creation: a little place called Shangri-La. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jan 18 14:00:09 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 14:00:09 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Snow closes 299 at Oregon Mountain Message-ID: http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2012-01-18/Front_Page/Snow_closes_299_at_Oregon_Mountain.html Snow closes 299 at Oregon Mountain This just in from Caltrans, 1:40 p.m. Wednesday, Jan. 18: Highway 299 is CLOSED in both directions at Oregon Mountain, west of Weaverville. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jan 18 16:47:17 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 16:47:17 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com-Hwy 299 open again Message-ID: UPDATED: Westbound Highway 299 opened in Trinity County Posted January 18, 2012 at 2:05 p.m., updated January 18, 2012 at 2:05 p.m. Westbound State Route 299 is open after a fallen tree had blocked the road around 2 p.m. today. The California Department of Transportation closed State Route 299 in both directions at Oregon Mountain, west of Weaverville, but officials said at 3:10 p.m. that the westbound Highway 299 is now open. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jan 19 07:18:41 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 07:18:41 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: CAC MEETING CANCELLED for JAN 20 Friday References: Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: From: Vivian Helliwell Date: January 19, 2012 7:14:15 AM PST To: Tom Stokely , Mike Orcutt , GAYLAND TAYLOR , , , pcfwwra , Curtis Knight , Nica Knite , Kevin Shaffer , , Peggy Wilzbach , Gary Flosi , "Thomas J. Weseloh" , Brian Johnson , Stafford Lehr , Kim Howlett , jimmy , "Schrock, Robin M" , , Curtis Milliron , Wade Sinnen Cc: , Debbie Weaver , Subject: CAC MEETING CANCELLED for JAN 20 Friday The CAC meeting planned for January 20, Friday, in Redding HAS BEEN CANCELLED for bad travelling weather. Please notify anyone else you know of that was planning to come, or notify me and I will do so. Vivian Helliwell,Chair California Advisory Committee on Salmon and Steelhead (CAC) (707) 445-1976 wk (707) 443-9168 hm (707) 953-0095 cell -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From BGutermuth at usbr.gov Sat Jan 21 08:51:07 2012 From: BGutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F. Brandt) Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 09:51:07 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] TRRP public scoping meeting for 2012 Channel Rehabilitation Projects: Jan 26 at 6 pm at the Douglas City fire hall Message-ID: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF72AAB2D68EF@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Dear Trinity River Enthusiasts - The Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP), including the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (federal co-lead agencies), and the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board - state lead agency), invite you to attend a meeting to learn about planned 2012 construction at the Lower Steiner Flat (LSF) and Upper Junction City (UJC) Channel Rehabilitation sites, and to provide your input. The meeting will begin at 6 pm on January 26, 2012 at the Douglas City fire hall, in Douglas City, CA. Project information will be presented and comments on the scope of project will be accepted. There has been a lot of discussion about our river restoration activities lately and we have modified some of our proposed 2012 construction activities in response to comments. Please come out to hear a presentation on proposed 2012 Channel Rehabilitation work and to provide your input. In early February we plan to follow up the meeting with release of an environmental document (an Environmental Assessment/Initial Study: EA/IS) that details the projects in writing and meets federal and state environmental laws. The EA/IS will then be available for a 30 day comment period. If you can't make the meeting, the document will have provide project details for your reading at home. I attach an ad, from next week's Trinity Journal, that includes a little more detail. Please call if you have questions. Hope to see you there! Brandt Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Scientist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S Main St Weaverville, CA 96093 530.623.1806 (voice) 530.623.5944 (fax) www.trrp.net AD from Next Week's Trinity Journal - w/out logos Public Meeting for the Proposed Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City Rehabilitation Sites 6:00 pm January 26, 2012 at Douglas City FIrehall The Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP), including the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (federal co-lead agencies), and the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board - state lead agency), invite you to attend a meeting to learn about planned 2012 construction at the Lower Steiner Flat (LSF) and Upper Junction City (UJC) Channel Rehabilitation sites, and to provide your input. The meeting will begin at 6 pm on January 26, 2012 at the Douglas City fire hall, in Douglas City, CA. Project information will be presented and comments on the scope of project will be accepted. The LSF site is located on the mainstem Trinity River three miles downstream from Douglas City and the UJC site is located in Upper Junction City upstream of where Dutch Creek Road crosses the river. Together the sites make up the Proposed Project which the TRRP plans to construct this year to increase salmon and steelhead habitat downstream of Lewiston Dam, as described in the December 19, 2000, Record of Decision for the Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration Environmental Impact Statement. The Proposed Project is planned to enhance aquatic habitat quality and complexity via construction of slow water refuge habitats, reconnection of the floodplain with the river, and placement of in-river geomorphic and habitat features. In 2009, the Regional Water Board acted as lead agency for a Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR) and site specific Environmental Assessment/Environmental Impact Report (EA/EIR) (State Clearinghouse number 2008032110) for channel rehabilitation and sediment management activities for the remaining Phase 1 and Phase 2 sites in order to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Regional Water Board certified the environmental documents on August 25, 2009 (WDID No. 1A09062WNTR). Under California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15177, after a Master EIR has been prepared and certified, subsequent projects which the lead agency determines as being within the scope of the Master EIR will be subject to only limited environmental review. The preparation of a new environmental document and new written findings will not be required if, based on a review of the initial study (IS) prepared for the subsequent project (e.g., the Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City sites EA/IS), the lead agency determines, on the basis of written findings, that no additional significant environmental effect will result from the proposal, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives may be required, and that the project is within the scope of the Master EIR. An EA/IS for the "Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Sites: Lower Steiner Flat (River Mile 91.3 to 90.2) and Upper Junction City (River Mile 79.8 to 80.4)" which meets CEQA and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements, will be available in early February for a 30 day public review period. The Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City EA/IS (and the MEIR), which explains and analyzes project environmental impacts, will be available on the TRRP website: www.trrp.net or may be reviewed at the Trinity County library at 211 Main Street in Weaverville or at the TRRP office at 1313 S Main Street (by Top's Grocery) in Weaverville. The "Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Sites: Lower Steiner Flat (River Mile 91.3 to 90.2) and Upper Junction City (River Mile 79.8 to 80.4) EA/IS," will contain project specific information required to apply for enrollment under the General Permit R1-2010-0028 for Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation activities which the Regional Water Board will consider in making its determination and approval decision. For further information or to receive a copy of the EA/IS, please contact Mr. Brandt Gutermuth, Bureau of Reclamation, at 623-1806. Comments may be sent to: Mr. Brandt Gutermuth, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, Weaverville, CA 96093, or e-mail bgutermuth at mp.usbr.gov. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: DisplayAd TRRP LSF_UJCMtg26Jan2012V2.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 37754 bytes Desc: DisplayAd TRRP LSF_UJCMtg26Jan2012V2.pdf URL: From bhill at igc.org Sun Jan 22 09:37:03 2012 From: bhill at igc.org (Brian Hill) Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 09:37:03 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] =?iso-8859-1?q?Legal_guru_Fred_Grant_will_speak_in_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?Redding=3B_federal_=27coordination=27_to_be_covered?= =?iso-8859-1?q?_at_meetings_=C2=BB_Record_Searchlight_Mobile?= Message-ID: <001001ccd92c$8731ad70$95950850$@org> http://m.redding.com/news/2012/jan/21/legal-guru-will-speak/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jan 24 09:45:45 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 09:45:45 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Appointment to TAMWG Message-ID: <077DF883-8580-4D2C-B051-AB5ADE0CC4AE@att.net> All, I received my appointment to the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) in the mail yesterday in a letter dated January 13, 2012. I am hopeful that other nominees have received similar appointment letters. The TAMWG charter is still good until January 11, 2013. See http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/reports/tamwg/2011/CharterJanuary142011.pdf. I look forward to working with all of the good people on the TAMWG, TMC, TRRP staff and the public to make the Trinity River Restoration Program the best it can be and a success. Sincerely, Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Stokely TAMWG Salazar Appointment Letter.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 179538 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- From snowgoose at pulsarco.com Tue Jan 24 11:42:01 2012 From: snowgoose at pulsarco.com (sandydenn@pulsarco.com) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 11:42:01 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Appointment to TAMWG References: <077DF883-8580-4D2C-B051-AB5ADE0CC4AE@att.net> Message-ID: <7DD051FAB06247A98072BEBB21925C4A@acer6e395d0925> Glad to have you aboard Tom.....I also received my letter. Sandy Denn ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Stokely" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 9:45 AM Subject: [env-trinity] Appointment to TAMWG All, I received my appointment to the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) in the mail yesterday in a letter dated January 13, 2012. I am hopeful that other nominees have received similar appointment letters. The TAMWG charter is still good until January 11, 2013. See http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/reports/tamwg/2011/CharterJanuary142011.pdf. I look forward to working with all of the good people on the TAMWG, TMC, TRRP staff and the public to make the Trinity River Restoration Program the best it can be and a success. Sincerely, Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > From tstokely at att.net Tue Jan 24 12:52:49 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 12:52:49 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- Access Hoopa Message-ID: <8FB1ECC5-865C-4DF1-8B0F-40A77925A4BA@att.net> Access Hoopa http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2012/01/access-hoopa/ The Telescope illegal dumpsite is one of many on the reservation leading officials to consider gating reservation roads. / TRT file photo. Tribe Discusses Options to Protect Land By Allie Hostler, Two Rivers Tribune The Hoopa Valley Tribe is discussing options to protect its land and resources from continued degradation. After posting no trespassing signs and locking a gate at the Tish Tang river access point, tribal representatives were inundated with calls from concerned river users, mostly fishing guides who were caught off guard about the closure. ?I?m concerned about the way this happened,? Hoopa Valley Tribal Vice Chairman, Byron Nelson said. ?A lot of other things are involved that were not considered.? Tribal Forestry Director, Darin Jarnaghan was asked by the Tribal Chairman, Leonard Masten, to create the signs and post them at eight river access locations throughout the reservation. The signs went up over a month ago and they remain up despite some councilmembers? concerns that they were not notified about the closure. During a meeting last week amongst the Tribe?s natural resources staff and councilmembers, it was decided that an informal committee be formed to discuss short and long term solutions. Jarnaghan is taking the lead on short term solutions and the Director of the Fisheries Program, Mike Orcutt is taking the lead on long-term solutions for recreational fishing on the reservation. A meeting is scheduled this week to continue the discussion. The problems are not limited to river access areas, but also include the mountainous areas where garbage dumping habitually occurs and tribal resources are exploited by non-tribal members. ?The gating of arterial roads has been a last resort to a costly continuous effort to curtail illegal dumping within reservation boundaries,? said Ken Norton, Director of the Hoopa Valley Tribal Environmental Protection Agency (TEPA). ?It?s very simple: when access is restricted, illegal dumping and its associated health hazards are eliminated.? TEPA has already gated five reservation roads at Telescope, Powerline, Deerhorn, Hostler Creek and Soctish Creek. Norton said that because of their site specific characteristics, the gates on Deerhorn and Telescope roads have had the most positive effects. Deerhorn is located on the outskirts of the reservation and is seldom patrolled, making it a prime location for illegal dumpers. Telescope Road has a dumpsite that was cleaned by TEPA a total of four times. They?ve cleaned household chemicals, hypodermic needles, refrigerators, car batteries and animal carcasses at the Telescope site. Norton said EPA funds have been exhausted to clean the site with each cleaning costing as much as $30,000. The problems vary from vandalism, garbage dumping, illegal firewood cutting and poaching by non-tribal members. Also, TEPA recently received $15,500, to complete phase one cleanup of an illegal marijuana grow in the Mill Creek drainage. Norton said they will need to manually carry out things like fertilizers, pesticides, plastics, litter and gasoline from the grow site that was busted in 2010. They must also ensure the items are properly disposed of. Another grow site in the Supply Creek drainage produced larger scale damage to the resources themselves. ?They terraced an entire mountainside,? Hoopa Valley Tribal Police Chief, Bob Kane said. ?There?s a whole other layer of cost to this.? Although the Tribe?s staff does not recommend gating the arterial roads of the reservation, such as Supply Creek, or Dowd Road, some do recommend gating the smaller roads in an effort to reduce abuse. Each gate would cost about $2,500 to purchase and install. Part of the long-term solution discussed was to identify funding to employ full-time compliance, or resource officers. Councilmember, Ryan Jackson said there is already funding being received by the Tribe for that purpose, however there is currently no resource officer employed. Councilmember Joseph LeMieux formerly worked as a resource officer for the Tribe, patrolling more than 500 miles of roads on a regular basis. LeMieux said he is a strong supporter of having more resource officers patrolling the reservation. Tribal Attorney, Mary Jane Risling asked about the tribe?s solid waste coalition that is currently not active. An effort to revive that coalition was suggested by Risling. Carl Smith from the Hoopa Wildland Fire Department said that if gates are installed the fire department needs full access, preferably with a master key system they could equip their fire engines and vehicles with. They also need the gates to be wide enough to fit equipment through, as large heavy equipment is often used when battling forest fires. Willow Creek based fishing guide, Ed Duggan suggests a permit structure be developed for river access. He says fishing guides are accustomed to paying about $100 for a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) permit and $95 for a USFS permit. ?We?re willing to pay for a tribal permit. Something around $25-$50 for an annual permit.? He explained that a BLM permit grants them access to about 40 miles of river, and a USFS permit grants them access to over 300 miles of river. A tribal permit would allow access to 12 miles of river. Below is a complete statement issued by the Hoopa Tribe last week: The Hoopa Valley Tribe is a federally recognized Indian Tribe with sovereign authority over its territory, including all lands within the boundaries of the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation. This authority includes both the right and responsibility to manage and regulate these lands for the benefit of the tribe and to meet our sacred duty to our aboriginal territory. In recent years the tribe has been confronted with increasingly disrespectful and destructive conduct by users of tribal lands and resources. This includes repeated incidents of illegal dumping, theft of resources, habitat destruction, contamination of lands and waterways, and other public offenses. In response to what has reached an emergency level, action has been taken to restrict access via posting of designated roads and river access locations, together with the installation of gates in some instances. The issues involved in addressing the problems that have required this action are broad and, in many respects, complex. The Hoopa Valley Tribe is engaged in ongoing initiatives to address these issues and to implement regulatory systems that will allow respectful access to tribal lands and waterways, by tribal members and ultimately nonmembers as well. Relative to gated river access, on an immediate basis the Hoopa Tribal Forestry Department is coordinating tribal initiatives to finalize regulatory processes that may allow for permitted access. Be assured, the Hoopa Valley Tribe takes these issues very seriously and is engaged in a comprehensive effort to address them. As an example, our tribal fisheries department is coordinating tribal initiatives to negotiate with the state of California to implement tribal fishing licenses as one possibility for facilitating access of nonmembers to waterways within the reservation. ### -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1803accesstrespass1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 303003 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jan 24 16:30:58 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 16:30:58 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Guide Association Letter to TMC/TRRP References: Message-ID: <7457F168-E1C9-4940-A823-5A68F111736B@att.net> From: Michael Caranci Date: January 24, 2012 3:57:37 PM PST To: BPerson at usbr.gov Cc: nancy_finley at fws.gov, joe_polos at fws.gov, Ann.Garrett at noaa.gov, Seth.Naman at noaa.gov, wbrock at fs.fed.us, sheywood at fs.fed.us, rjaegel at trinitycounty.org, judyp at tds.net, Dave at yuroktribe.nsn.us, thayden at yuroktribe.nsn.us, director at hoopa-nsn.gov, Chairman at hoopa-nsn.us, dreck at usbr.gov.Curtis, Cmilliro at dfg.ca.gov, connor at water.ca.gov, Bill Dickens , "Liam Gogan (TrinRvOut)" , Bob Norman , Ed Duggan , Eric Wiseman , Indian Creek Lodge , Paul Catanese , SCOTT STRATTON , Steve Townzen , travis michel , Tom Stokely , Arnold Whitridge Subject: Re: TRGA Letter Mr. Person, Attached please find a written response from the Trinity River Guide Association; our intent was to formally mail the letter, but in lieu of the upcoming January 26 we wanted to ensure that our public, official opinion on the current project designs be available to all parties concerned. Thank you for your time, Trinity River Guide Association Bill Dickens, President Board of Directors: Liam Gogan Michael Caranci Travis Michel Steve Townzen E.B. Duggan Paul Catanese Bob Norman Scott Stratton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TMC-TRGALetterJanuary2012.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 285316 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From snowgoose at pulsarco.com Wed Jan 25 11:27:21 2012 From: snowgoose at pulsarco.com (sandydenn@pulsarco.com) Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 11:27:21 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Guide Association Letter to TMC/TRRP References: <7457F168-E1C9-4940-A823-5A68F111736B@att.net> Message-ID: <7935A2E1C3A24B6385983CFAA6389876@acer6e395d0925> Appreciate getting this ----- Original Message ----- From: Tom Stokely To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 4:30 PM Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Guide Association Letter to TMC/TRRP From: Michael Caranci Date: January 24, 2012 3:57:37 PM PST To: BPerson at usbr.gov Cc: nancy_finley at fws.gov, joe_polos at fws.gov, Ann.Garrett at noaa.gov, Seth.Naman at noaa.gov, wbrock at fs.fed.us, sheywood at fs.fed.us, rjaegel at trinitycounty.org, judyp at tds.net, Dave at yuroktribe.nsn.us, thayden at yuroktribe.nsn.us, director at hoopa-nsn.gov, Chairman at hoopa-nsn.us, dreck at usbr.gov.Curtis, Cmilliro at dfg.ca.gov, connor at water.ca.gov, Bill Dickens , "Liam Gogan (TrinRvOut)" , Bob Norman , Ed Duggan , Eric Wiseman , Indian Creek Lodge , Paul Catanese , SCOTT STRATTON , Steve Townzen , travis michel , Tom Stokely , Arnold Whitridge Subject: Re: TRGA Letter Mr. Person, Attached please find a written response from the Trinity River Guide Association; our intent was to formally mail the letter, but in lieu of the upcoming January 26 we wanted to ensure that our public, official opinion on the current project designs be available to all parties concerned. Thank you for your time, Trinity River Guide Association Bill Dickens, President Board of Directors: Liam Gogan Michael Caranci Travis Michel Steve Townzen E.B. Duggan Paul Catanese Bob Norman Scott Stratton ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Michael Caranci Date: January 24, 2012 3:57:37 PM PST To: BPerson at usbr.gov Cc: nancy_finley at fws.gov, joe_polos at fws.gov, Ann.Garrett at noaa.gov, Seth.Naman at noaa.gov, wbrock at fs.fed.us, sheywood at fs.fed.us, rjaegel at trinitycounty.org, judyp at tds.net, Dave at yuroktribe.nsn.us, thayden at yuroktribe.nsn.us, director at hoopa-nsn.gov, Chairman at hoopa-nsn.us, dreck at usbr.gov.Curtis, Cmilliro at dfg.ca.gov, connor at water.ca.gov, Bill Dickens , "Liam Gogan (TrinRvOut)" , Bob Norman , Ed Duggan , Eric Wiseman , Indian Creek Lodge , Paul Catanese , SCOTT STRATTON , Steve Townzen , travis michel , Tom Stokely , Arnold Whitridge Subject: Re: TRGA Letter Mr. Person, Attached please find a written response from the Trinity River Guide Association; our intent was to formally mail the letter, but in lieu of the upcoming January 26 we wanted to ensure that our public, official opinion on the current project designs be available to all parties concerned. Thank you for your time, Trinity River Guide Association Bill Dickens, President Board of Directors: Liam Gogan Michael Caranci Travis Michel Steve Townzen E.B. Duggan Paul Catanese Bob Norman Scott Stratton ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jan 26 10:22:34 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 10:22:34 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard- Klamath draft report released Message-ID: Klamath draft report released; Thompson: 'The time for Congress to act is now' http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_19816586?source=rss Thadeus Greenson/The Times-Standard Posted: 01/25/2012 02:19:34 AM PST A draft report released Tuesday by the U.S. Department of the Interior says a landmark agreement to remove dams in the Klamath Basin will restore salmon and sustain irrigation for farmers in Southern Oregon and Northern California. The findings seem to support a bill recently introduced by Sen. Jeff Merkeley, D-Oregon, and North Coast Congressman Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena, that would authorize the Interior Department to decide whether to remove the four Klamath River dams. Thompson issued a statement on Tuesday urging his colleagues in Congress to act on the bill, which dam-removal proponents claim is being held hostage by the partisan rancor that is enveloping the Capitol. ?The synthesis of studies released today scientifically confirms that the agreements in place represent the best way forward for the Klamath River Basin and its communities,? Thompson said in the release. ?Years of scientific and technical studies have concluded that the dam removals will not only benefit our river basin by restoring fish and wildlife habitats, it will strengthen our economy by creating thousands of jobs. The time for Congress to act is now.? Under the removal agreement -- which necessitated compromise from dam owner PacifiCorp, fishermen, farmers, environmentalists and tribes, many of which had spent years in conflict -- the parties were tasked with providing a comprehensive environmental and economic analysis of the impacts Advertisement of removing the four Klamath River dams. The report released Tuesday came as a part of that process. ?The science and analysis presented in these reports are vital to making an informed and sound decision on the Klamath River dam removal,? Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said in a press release. The draft report -- which largely repeats previously released findings -- states that dam removal would improve salmonid fish populations in the long term and create 1,400 construction jobs during the year it would take to remove the dams. In more good news for proponents of dam removal, the report also puts the estimated cost of dam removal at $291.6 million in 2020 dollars, well shy of the $450 million cost cap outlined in the historic removal agreement signed by more than two dozen groups in February 2010. But the report also includes some kernels for those opposed to the dam removal agreement, noting that removal would potentially increase flooding risks, cut electricity production and decrease property values and recreational opportunities at the four reservoirs currently sitting behind the dams slated for removal. Overall, the report is good news, said Karuk Tribe spokesman Craig Tucker. ?It's another affirmation that implementing our agreements is good for fish, good for farms, good for the economy and good for America,? Tucker said. It appears the agreement's biggest obstacle is Congress. The interior secretary is responsible for deciding whether dam removal is in the public's best interest by March 31, but he can't make the determination until Congress passes legislation clearing the way. While Thompson and Merkeley have introduced the legislation -- which carries 18 co-sponsors -- it has seen little movement as Congress remains gripped by partisan gridlock. ?We're frustrated by Congress' inability to take care of issues,? Tucker said, adding that the lack of legislative progress has nothing to do with Thompson, who Tucker said has been a leader on the issue. ?Folks that work in the beltway say they've never seen gridlock of this type.? If Congress fails to act in time to meet the March 31 deadline outlined in the dam removal agreement, many seem to feel the deal would be dead. However, Tucker said Tuesday he doesn't see that as an insurmountable obstacle, saying all stakeholders would ?absolutely? return to the table to work out an extension. ?Just because we're in a tough Congressional environment, doesn't mean we're not going to keep pushing forward,? Tucker said. ?We think we have a bipartisan solution to one of the West's biggest water woes.? While the agreement may have bipartisan support, it is not universal. Representatives of the Hoopa Valley Tribe, which has argued the project's environmental reports are inadequate and generally been a detractor of the agreement, were not immediately available for comment Tuesday. In a message left for the Times-Standard shortly before deadline, fisheries biologist Pat Higgins said the hypothetical number of jobs created by dam removal would be a short-term stimulus, while the potential damage to the Klamath River ecosystem by the dam removal agreement would be long standing. ?Getting the dams out is good but the Klamath Dam Removal Agreement that goes with it is very bad -- it doesn't do enough to clean up the pollution and it doesn't leave enough water for fish,? said Higgins, a fisheries consultant for the Resighini Rancheria, a tribe located in Del Norte County. One thing working in the agreement's favor, Tucker said, is the $37 million sitting in a trust fund, accruing interest, with more money being added monthly to fund the removal project. PacifiCorp's 550,000 Oregon customers have been paying an extra 2 percent per month on their electric bills since the fall to fund the removal project, and the company started charging its California customers the fee earlier this month. Tucker said stakeholders will focus their energy on lobbying Oregon Congressman Greg Walden, R-Hood River, and Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., to support the project. ?We need to get them to step up to the plate and help us with this,? Tucker said, adding that the two lawmakers have not yet voiced either support for or opposition to the project. ?We're going to keep appealing to them. We think they're key players in this.? On the web: To view the full report and the individual studies, visit www.klamathrestoration.gov. Thadeus Greenson can be reached at 441-0509 or tgreenson at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jan 26 12:01:50 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2012 12:01:50 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com- Coho salmon face lofty recovery goals; Siskiyou County calls rates 'unfair, unrealistic' Message-ID: <3F6EF4AF-C68A-42CC-A481-A6FFEA21735D@att.net> http://www.redding.com/news/2012/jan/25/salmon-face-lofty-recovery-goals/?print=1 Coho salmon face lofty recovery goals; Siskiyou County calls rates 'unfair, unrealistic' By Ryan Sabalow Wednesday, January 25, 2012 Federal fisheries biologists say threatened coho salmon need to return to the Scott River in Siskiyou County at rates more than four times higher than ever recorded. The federal fisheries goals, released this month in a draft plan that calls for sweeping coho habitat restoration efforts in two states, have drawn condemnation from Siskiyou County officials and the leaders of the county's resources conservation groups. They say the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's coho recovery models create "unfair and unrealistic" standards that could be used to place even more restrictions on farmers' irrigation use in a region already embroiled in a bitter dispute with regulators and environmental groups over the state- and federally protected fish. Ric Costales, Siskiyou County's natural resource policy specialist, said the lofty coho recovery goals will force already tense and frustrated farmers to completely balk at participating in any more voluntary habitat restoration efforts. "This is just completely unrealistic," Costales said. "When you set a range like that, why should anyone even try? Why should a rancher even go to meetings any more? Nobody's going to do anything out of the goodness of their hearts. It's killing the (coho) restoration efforts." Irma Lagomarsino, NOAA's fisheries services supervisor for Northern California, said the draft recovery plan for coho in Northern California and southern Oregon was based on peer-reviewed scientific analysis and study. "Yes, we realize it's an ambitious goal, but it has a scientific foundation for it," Lagomarsino said. "It's the best (model) we can get." The coho recovery plan identifies agriculture as a "very high" threat to threatened coho salmon on the Scott and Shasta rivers. The plan calls for cutbacks on Scott and Shasta farmers' stream water use as well as establishing statewide groundwater permitting programs. There's also litany of habitat restoration efforts including planting more trees along streams, adding gravel to the streambeds to improve salmon spawning areas, limiting road run off and removing barriers for passing fish. On the Shasta, the plan also calls for finding ways to increase the amount of cool water coming from below Dwinnell Dam, the barrier that blocks the river and forms Lake Shastina north of Weed. But at least two people involved in coho habitat restoration in Siskiyou County say the science behind the plan is suspect. Sari Sommarstrom, executive director of the Scott River Water Trust, a nonprofit group that reimburses farmers for not using stream water to irrigation, said the models NOAA use don't make sense. She said the plan says the Scott and the Shasta River have higher coho-rearing potential than cooler, colder streams closer to the Pacific. Sommarstrom said it's "unfair and unrealistic" to assume warmer inland streams would be able to rear more fish. She said the numbers NOAA hopes to have return to the Scott also are unattainable. NOAA says 8,800 fish should return to the Scott in order to have a viable coho population not threatened with extinction. But Sommarstrom say the most fish recorded on the river was in the 1960s when state biologists estimated some 2,000 had returned from the Pacific Ocean to spawn. In 2008, the coho run on the Scott reached abysmally low numbers, when a mere 62 adult coho returned. The year before, some 1,622 had returned. Similarly, NOAA's scientists say 8,700 coho should return to the Shasta to ensure that stream's coho are no longer threatened. Adriane Garayalde, district administrator for the Shasta Valley Resource Conservation District, said 400 was the largest number of coho return to that stream in recent years. She declined to provide estimates on historical numbers, saying the figures weren't reliable. Sommarstrom, Garayalde and Costales say the problem lies in how NOAA classified potential coho habitat. The scientists described much of the region's small seasonal tributaries as "intrinsic potential habitat," or areas that could potentially host numbers of spawning fish. "It's all the blue lines out even to places where there's no running water," Garayalde said, referring to the blue-shaded salmon habitat on NOAA's maps. "That's the biggest concern. We're trying to get a better handle on how the model was made." Lagomarsino said the 25-year recovery plan is a draft and even if implemented in its current form, it could change over time as more information becomes available. She called it a "living document." The public is invited to attend a meeting next month in Yreka to voice their concerns about the plan. They can also submit comments on NOAA's website. She said the recovery plan also isn't a binding legal document for enforcement or regulatory efforts, though the scientific analysis could be used in the future to draft regulations. "The plan sort of sets the stage and provides the context of the work" that needs to be done to improve coho runs, she said. "It can be intimidating, the recovery plan, but it is voluntary." ? 2012 Scripps Newspaper Group ? Online -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: header_print.gif Type: image/gif Size: 5276 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sing_logo.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1020 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Feb 1 08:22:28 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 08:22:28 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- No gravel will be added in '12 Message-ID: <7C94E204-BD75-4FFD-8C42-E0DF358489F7@att.net> TRRP: No gravel will be added in ?12 http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2012-02-01/Front_Page/TRRP_No_gravel_will_be_added_in_12.html BY AMY GITTELSOHN THE TRINITY JOURNAL Answering a question of great concern to fishing guides, Trinity River Restoration Program staff said Thursday there will be no high flow addition of gravel to the Trinity River in 2012. Gravel augmentation this year has been opposed by the Trinity River Guides Association, which says the gravel meant to aid fish spawning has filled deep pools in the river used by adult fish. The restoration program has two channel manipulation projects planned for 2012 ? the Upper Junction City project and half of the Lower Steiner Flat project in Douglas City. The projects have been scaled down but still include side channels and wood structures in the river, alcoves, an island, a bar using large rock, a wood structure to protect a landowner?s bank from high flows and provide fish habitat, and other features. Although river restoration staff hopes to break ground on the projects by late June, an environmental assessment (EA) and the permitting process are still pending with a draft EA expected to be released for public comment in early February. The restoration program?s plans were shared during a public scoping meeting held Thursday at the Douglas City Fire Hall. From the program, environmental specialist Brandt Gutermuth said, ?This year there will be no high-flow addition of gravel.? The Trinity River Guide Association strongly opposes addition of gravel to the river until an analysis is complete and public comment received. Prior to Thursday?s meeting, the association sent out a letter clarifying its position on the 2012 projects. The letter states that the association supports the first phase of the Lower Steiner Flat project, with modifications that were presented to them. They tentatively support the Upper Junction City project, though they express concerns about some of the features. However, ?If gravel is planned for augmentation at any of the sites for 2012, or if it is scheduled for injection during a high flow event, the TRGA will withdraw its support for the aforementioned projects,? the letter states. In his presentation, Gutermuth noted that the 2000 Trinity River Record of Decision (ROD) called for higher river flows, addition of gravel, control of fine sediments entering the river and infrastructure modification to make the higher flows possible. Fifteen years of flows of 150 cubic feet per second after Trinity and Lewiston dams were constructed left the river with no connection with its floodplain that otherwise would provide habitat and nutrition for fish, he said. Explaining why the program has done some things not called for in the ROD ? such as creating logjams and many more side channels than the ROD envisioned ? Gutermuth said early monitoring has shown fish are not using earlier sites such as Hocker Flat in the Junction City area as much as had been hoped. In addition to the low flows, mining may have contributed to elevating the floodplain, he said. In attempting to create habitat faster, he said, ?The projects are quite a bit bigger than originally envisioned.? Trinity County Sup. Debra Chapman asked why the second phase of projects is going forward when the analysis of the first phase has not been completed. ?We picked a couple of projects where we think the impacts will be wholly beneficial in those areas,? Gutermuth said, pointing out that they include no addition of small, mobile gravel. He noted that fish live only four years, so ?the time frame is pretty short to recover those species.? In Lewiston, the Sven Olbertson project site with side channels and wood logjams added is seen as a success by program staff. ?In Lewiston the second we moved off the site the fish were there,? Gutermuth said. ?We?re still waiting in Hocker Flat.? Gail Goodyear, whose family owns property along the river, said the work on the river has been, ?much more invasive than was originally planned.? And Jim Smith pointed out that early pre-dam pictures of the river show no side channels or large woody debris. Gutermuth agreed but said the river is different now, giving the example that the river is kept artificially high in the summer because spring chinook salmon are no longer able to get to tributaries above the dams. Also from the restoration program, implementation branch chief DJ Bandrowski said the program staff is attentive to the concerns of river guides, landowners and others. However, the program?s executive director, Robin Schrock, said the program cannot just do what people want. Science and peer review must also be come into it, she said. On the topic of gravel injections, she said data from a bathymetric survey looking at riverbed changes has not been completed. Program staff was reluctant to approve more gravel injections until they can see those models, she said. The water year determination also plays a part, as gravel augmentation is not called for in very dry years ? and this year may be dry. There were questions about access to the river during construction. Bandrowski said BLM?s Primitive Campground will be closed. The river will remain navigable by boat the entire time, he said. He made no promises about a popular boat launching area for the fishing guides, but there was discussion about the possibility of having itopenbefore7am.ifthatcanbedone safely. Improvement of the ramp is to be part of the project. Aesthetic concerns were also expressed. ?These engineered logjams on a scenic river look like World War I trenches or bunkers,? said Rich Lorenz of Douglas City. Gutermuth responded that vegetation will grow on the logjams which have dirt on them, and Bandrowski said the logjams can protect openings to side channels from erosion and provide complexity that fish like. ?I agree I think we can make them look a little more natural,? he said. Averil Carmona of Douglas City said, ?Those tons of gravel you dumped in didn?t stay in Junction City and didn?t stay in Lewiston.? She asked if the impacts upstream and downstream of the projects have been considered. Bandrowski said the gravel injections are being evaluated, and it?s looking as if it did not move much farther than 1,500 feet. Gravel already in the system moves as well during high flows, he noted. Studies that will shed more light on the results of the projects and last year?s high spring flow release of 11,000 cfs are still pending. Those studies include 40 miles of lidar using lasers to get elevations and contours, an assessment by the U.S. Geological Survey and bathymetry using sonar to map changes underwater. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Wed Feb 1 08:38:02 2012 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 08:38:02 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- No gravel will be added in '12 In-Reply-To: <7C94E204-BD75-4FFD-8C42-E0DF358489F7@att.net> References: <7C94E204-BD75-4FFD-8C42-E0DF358489F7@att.net> Message-ID: <000c01cce0ff$ddc30690$994913b0$@suddenlink.net> 'sort of gives new meaning to 'adaptive mgt', doesn't it? From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2012 8:22 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- No gravel will be added in '12 TRRP: No gravel will be added in '12 http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2012-02-01/Front_Page/TRRP_No_gravel_will _be_added_in_12.html BY AMY GITTELSOHN THE TRINITY JOURNAL Answering a question of great concern to fishing guides, Trinity River Restoration Program staff said Thursday there will be no high flow addition of gravel to the Trinity River in 2012. Gravel augmentation this year has been opposed by the Trinity River Guides Association, which says the gravel meant to aid fish spawning has filled deep pools in the river used by adult fish. The restoration program has two channel manipulation projects planned for 2012 - the Upper Junction City project and half of the Lower Steiner Flat project in Douglas City. The projects have been scaled down but still include side channels and wood structures in the river, alcoves, an island, a bar using large rock, a wood structure to protect a landowner's bank from high flows and provide fish habitat, and other features. Although river restoration staff hopes to break ground on the projects by late June, an environmental assessment (EA) and the permitting process are still pending with a draft EA expected to be released for public comment in early February. The restoration program's plans were shared during a public scoping meeting held Thursday at the Douglas City Fire Hall. >From the program, environmental specialist Brandt Gutermuth said, "This year there will be no high-flow addition of gravel." The Trinity River Guide Association strongly opposes addition of gravel to the river until an analysis is complete and public comment received. Prior to Thursday's meeting, the association sent out a letter clarifying its position on the 2012 projects. The letter states that the association supports the first phase of the Lower Steiner Flat project, with modifications that were presented to them. They tentatively support the Upper Junction City project, though they express concerns about some of the features. However, "If gravel is planned for augmentation at any of the sites for 2012, or if it is scheduled for injection during a high flow event, the TRGA will withdraw its support for the aforementioned projects," the letter states. In his presentation, Gutermuth noted that the 2000 Trinity River Record of Decision (ROD) called for higher river flows, addition of gravel, control of fine sediments entering the river and infrastructure modification to make the higher flows possible. Fifteen years of flows of 150 cubic feet per second after Trinity and Lewiston dams were constructed left the river with no connection with its floodplain that otherwise would provide habitat and nutrition for fish, he said. Explaining why the program has done some things not called for in the ROD - such as creating logjams and many more side channels than the ROD envisioned - Gutermuth said early monitoring has shown fish are not using earlier sites such as Hocker Flat in the Junction City area as much as had been hoped. In addition to the low flows, mining may have contributed to elevating the floodplain, he said. In attempting to create habitat faster, he said, "The projects are quite a bit bigger than originally envisioned." Trinity County Sup. Debra Chapman asked why the second phase of projects is going forward when the analysis of the first phase has not been completed. "We picked a couple of projects where we think the impacts will be wholly beneficial in those areas," Gutermuth said, pointing out that they include no addition of small, mobile gravel. He noted that fish live only four years, so "the time frame is pretty short to recover those species." In Lewiston, the Sven Olbertson project site with side channels and wood logjams added is seen as a success by program staff. "In Lewiston the second we moved off the site the fish were there," Gutermuth said. "We're still waiting in Hocker Flat." Gail Goodyear, whose family owns property along the river, said the work on the river has been, "much more invasive than was originally planned." And Jim Smith pointed out that early pre-dam pictures of the river show no side channels or large woody debris. Gutermuth agreed but said the river is different now, giving the example that the river is kept artificially high in the summer because spring chinook salmon are no longer able to get to tributaries above the dams. Also from the restoration program, implementation branch chief DJ Bandrowski said the program staff is attentive to the concerns of river guides, landowners and others. However, the program's executive director, Robin Schrock, said the program cannot just do what people want. Science and peer review must also be come into it, she said. On the topic of gravel injections, she said data from a bathymetric survey looking at riverbed changes has not been completed. Program staff was reluctant to approve more gravel injections until they can see those models, she said. The water year determination also plays a part, as gravel augmentation is not called for in very dry years - and this year may be dry. There were questions about access to the river during construction. Bandrowski said BLM's Primitive Campground will be closed. The river will remain navigable by boat the entire time, he said. He made no promises about a popular boat launching area for the fishing guides, but there was discussion about the possibility of having itopenbefore7am.ifthatcanbedone safely. Improvement of the ramp is to be part of the project. Aesthetic concerns were also expressed. "These engineered logjams on a scenic river look like World War I trenches or bunkers," said Rich Lorenz of Douglas City. Gutermuth responded that vegetation will grow on the logjams which have dirt on them, and Bandrowski said the logjams can protect openings to side channels from erosion and provide complexity that fish like. "I agree I think we can make them look a little more natural," he said. Averil Carmona of Douglas City said, "Those tons of gravel you dumped in didn't stay in Junction City and didn't stay in Lewiston." She asked if the impacts upstream and downstream of the projects have been considered. Bandrowski said the gravel injections are being evaluated, and it's looking as if it did not move much farther than 1,500 feet. Gravel already in the system moves as well during high flows, he noted. Studies that will shed more light on the results of the projects and last year's high spring flow release of 11,000 cfs are still pending. Those studies include 40 miles of lidar using lasers to get elevations and contours, an assessment by the U.S. Geological Survey and bathymetry using sonar to map changes underwater. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Feb 2 14:53:41 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 14:53:41 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard- Conservation groups file intent to sue national fisheries Message-ID: http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_19875580 Conservation groups file intent to sue national fisheries The Times-Standard Posted: 02/02/2012 01:59:11 AM PST Conservation groups filed an intent to sue the National Marine Fisheries Service on Wednesday, alleging that the agency is taking too long to decide whether the upper Klamath River chinook salmon should be protected under the federal Endangered Species Act. In response to a Jan. 28, 2011, petition from the groups, the Fisheries Service determined in April 2011 that the salmon may warrant protection and began a status review that was supposed to be completed within one year of the petition, according to a joint press release from the groups. The groups allege the Fisheries Service failed to complete the review within the one-year time frame. The Center for Biological Diversity, Oregon Wild, Environmental Protection Information Center and The Larch Company filed the notice of intent. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From MCKIER at dfg.ca.gov Mon Feb 6 08:45:12 2012 From: MCKIER at dfg.ca.gov (Mary Claire Kier) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2012 08:45:12 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] TRH trapping summary through Julian week 5 Message-ID: <4F2F92DA.A226.009F.1@dfg.ca.gov> Greetings! Sorry for the delay on the information, we've been a bit back-logged on our data. I know you're likely all doing it already, but think SNOW! Mary Claire Mary Claire Kier DFG - Trinity River Project 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 707/822-5876 - FAX 822-2855 mckier at dfg.ca.gov Trinity River documents can be found at: http://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/documents/ContextDocs.aspx?cat=KlamathTrinity -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 90112 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Feb 7 10:41:42 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2012 10:41:42 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com- Report backs $1 billion plan to raise dam; Some relocation is necessary, but agriculture, wildlife benefit Message-ID: <81DB3BF0-8502-4DD2-A120-94222581431D@att.net> http://www.redding.com/news/2012/feb/06/report-backs-1-billion-plan-to-raise-dam-raising/?print=1 Report backs $1 billion plan to raise dam; Some relocation is necessary, but agriculture, wildlife benefit By Damon Arthur Monday, February 6, 2012 A draft report released Monday by federal officials says a $1.07 billion plan to raise Shasta Dam by 18? feet is feasible and economically justifiable. Raising the dam would increase the lake's storage about 14 percent, benefitting agricultural and municipal water users in the state, according to the Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation draft feasibility report. Raising the dam also would benefit salmon and steelhead trout that migrate up the Sacramento River by providing a more reliable supply of cold water for spawning, the feasibility report says. But some roads, buildings and businesses around the lake would be inundated by the higher lake level, said Pete Lucero, a spokesman for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the agency that prepared the report. Lucero said some of the resorts on the lake would have to be relocated, but he did not know which ones. The higher lake level would not affect Interstate 5 nor any of the I-5 bridges across portions of the lake, he said, and some of the secondary roads around the lake could be inundated by higher water. Raising the dam height 18 ? feet would actually increase the depth of the lake 20 feet, the report said. "Although higher dam raises are technically feasible, 18 ? feet is the largest dam raise that would avoid extensive and costly relocations, including moving the Pit River Bridge and Interstate 5," the report said. With a higher dam and the lake full, water levels would be just 4 feet from the bottom of the Pit River Bridge, the report said. Matt Doyle, general manager of Lake Shasta Caverns, said that if the lake level were raised 18? feet, a building used to sell tickets and snacks, as well as some of the roadway on the property, would be covered by water. Despite the potential effect on the business, Doyle said he was not against raising the dam. "We've supported the dam raising, just as long as recreation is recognized," Doyle said. But recreation is recognized as one of the secondary objectives of raising the dam, along with hydropower, Sacramento River Delta water quality, flood control and improving the ecosystem around the lake. Lucero said it is far from a done deal that the dam would be raised. He said the feasibility report issued Monday is just in draft form and another environmental analysis on increasing the dam height is only in "preliminary draft" form. "We have a long way to go, bottom line," Lucero said. Bureau officials have been studying raising the dam since 1999. Work on the current feasibility study started in 2005. The report says there are still unresolved issues, including whether or not raising the lake level would violate federal law that says the McCloud River "should be maintained in its free-flowing condition, and its wild trout fishery protected." The report also says that the Winnemem band of the Wintu Indians has raised concerns that raising the lake level would flood sites that are culturally and religiously important to the tribe. The study also looked at the feasibility of raising the dam 6? feet and 12? feet. But the report concludes the 18?-foot increase would be the most economically, technically and environmentally feasible. ***********************' See Reclamation's news release at: http://www.usbr.gov/newsroom/newsrelease/detail.cfm?RecordID=39163 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: header_print.gif Type: image/gif Size: 5276 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Feb 13 14:34:12 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:34:12 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com- Gravel break could aid Trinity River; More fish may approach anglers' lines Message-ID: http://www.redding.com/news/2012/feb/13/gravel-break-could-aid-trinity-river/ Gravel break could aid Trinity River; More fish may approach anglers' lines By Damon Arthur Monday, February 13, 2012 To Travis Michel, gravel, or lack of it, means a lot to Trinity County. The Lewiston fishing guide was "ecstatic" when he heard that the Trinity Management Council decided to stop adding gravel to the Trinity River for the remainder of the year. He maintains officials with the Trinity River Restoration Project have been putting too much gravel in the river the past few years, which is hurting business for fishing guides ? and Trinity County's economy. The gravel was put in the river to improve the channel for salmon and steelhead by creating more spawning areas. But Michel and other river guides say there is too much gravel, and it has filled in deep holes where adult fish live. The gravel also makes the river shallow and wide and crowds adult fish, as well as the anglers that go after them, into fewer and fewer fishing holes, Michel said. Since 2003, officials have added 72,000 cubic-yards of gravel to the river, said Robin Schrock, executive director of the project. That is enough gravel to fill about 4,500 16-cubic-yard gravel trucks. Schrock said gravel is an important part of the work to improve conditions for fish in the river. However, there is more than enough gravel in the river, she said. "Recent rehabilitation projects have included the addition of enough gravel that the total quantity added over the past several years was slightly greater than the recommended average target for annual additions ... " Schrock said. Since 2003 the restoration project has been adding gravel, clearing brush from stream banks, doing erosion control and other work on the river. Schrock has said about $36 million has been spent on the river. Michel isn't the only fishing guide complaining the river is stuffed too full of gravel. "They put in so much gravel last year and the year before that it was all over and it filled in all the holes the fish were living in and fish were all congregating up by the dam," said fishing guide Ed Duggan of Willow Creek. Michel said he wants to see a "happy medium" that balances the needs of spawning and younger fish and the need for deep holes for adults. Michel said the amount of gravel in the river affects not only his livelihood, but others in the community. Most of the anglers he takes out on the river come from out of town, buy gas in Trinity County, eat at local restaurants and stay in area hotels, he said. Steelhead fishing is important to the Trinity County economy because it brings anglers to the area during the winter, when the normal tourist season is over, Michel said. And there were a lot of fish in the river this past season. From October through December, 22,314 fall-run Chinook salmon and 4,002 steelhead were counted in the Trinity River near Lewiston, according to the state Department of Fish and Game. During the same period a year earlier 11,908 salmon and 2,037 steelhead were counted. ? 2012 Scripps Newspaper Group ? Online -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: header_print.gif Type: image/gif Size: 5276 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sing_logo.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1020 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Feb 14 08:20:14 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 08:20:14 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SAVE THE DATE: 2013 Trinity River Restoration Program Science Symposium References: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF73D211416F3@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Message-ID: <6B7A4AEE-F334-4676-8108-5AA22E4267BA@att.net> Begin forwarded message: From: "Jackson, Deanna L" Date: February 14, 2012 7:41:35 AM PST To: Subject: SAVE THE DATE: 2013 Trinity River Restoration Program Science Symposium Good Morning, The third Trinity River Restoration Program Science Symposium will be held in Weaverville, California, during the week of January 7, 2013. The event will be a forum for strategic planning for the Trinity River based on the outcomes of the Phase I Review and other timely results from 2012 studies. The symposium will serve as a foundation for improving the quality of future management decisions based on up-to-date scientific findings. More detailed information on the symposium will be shared in the coming months. Robin M. Schrock Executive Director Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street Weaverville, CA 96093 TEL: (530) 623-1800 FAX: (530) 623-5944 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Feb 15 11:19:07 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 11:19:07 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal-Board rejects incomplete planning grant application Message-ID: <4AF1B4BA-81B3-4680-8F0C-96C73A612232@att.net> Board rejects incomplete planning grant application http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2012-02-15/News/Board_rejects_incomplete_planning_grant_applicatio.html BY SALLY MORRIS THE TRINITY JOURNAL Though Trinity County continues searching for the funds needed to update its general plan, the Board of Supervisors last week voted 4-1 to reject a proposed $1 million Sustainable Communities Planning Grant application under California?s Proposition 84 that the Planning Department was preparing to submit. A group of audience members urged caution, fearing the grant may be tied to a United Nations? global environmental strategy known as Agenda 21 that they claimed seeks to abolish private property and human rights through local planning law. But that?s not why supervisors voted it down ? that was because they did not have a completed application in front of them spelling out what the county?s future obligations would be. The state?s deadline to submit the paperwork was this week. The county was unsuccessful in a previous application for planning grant funds awarded under the Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2006 (Proposition 84). Since December, the Planning Department has been working on a revised application designed to be more competitive, focusing on Trinity County?s specific need to develop policies addressing marijuana cultivation impacts including water diversions, pollution from pesticides and fertilizers, indiscriminate killing of wildlife, habitat degradation and negative impacts on recreational activities. Planning Director Rick Tippett said the grant would require the county to commit to promoting state land use policies intended to protect and enhance the county?s natural resources in an effort to ? as feasible ? reduce greenhouse gas emissions. He said the state would not dictate how the county?s plan is updated, but only that certain issues are addressed in what would be an open process filled with opportunities for local, public input. Much of the county?s existing general plan is 20 or 30 years out of date and Tippett said ?we need a contemporary framework for today?s realities. We are in constant battle over what isn?t said in our general plan. We have a lot of common practices in place, but nowhere in writing.? He said that if the county were successful in its application for $1 million, it would likely be expected to contribute 25 to 30 percent of the cost itself through matching funds or in-kind staff services. He projected a three-year timeframe to complete a general plan update that would focus immediately on completing an updated housing element, followed by updated safety and land use elements. Sup. Judy Morris said it?s a general plan ?that gives each county local control over what they want to see. It?s not the state telling us.? County Counsel Derek Cole agreed, saying it is the ultimate ?home rule document to guide what our growth will look like. The decision body is the Board of Supervisors ? not some national or international body that will make the decision.? Audience members were not convinced and urged the board to avoid taking funds from anything that refers to ?sustainable communities? claiming that is one of several catch phrases for Agenda 21, a global policy on sustainable development issued at the UN Earth Summit in 1992. Earlier in the day, several members of the Trinity County Tea Party Patriots group spoke against Agenda 21 during the board?s public comment period and they stayed for the general plan discussion. Some agreed with the importance of updating the general plan, but argued the county doesn?t have $300,000 to contribute in matching funds to secure the proposed grant. It was suggested there are people in the community who would volunteer to help get it done if it would benefit the county through economic development and growth, jobs and increased property values. Herk Shriner of Weaverville urged the board to look for one-time funds through the sale of property to help fund the effort, but to steer clear of anything labeled ?sustainable development? that he said is code for Agenda 21. ?They want to remove dams and create a wildlife corridor out of Trinity County in the most insidious design by any group I?ve ever seen. It will reduce the rural population by 80 percent,? he said, adding ?I know it sounds drastic, but cities and counties all over are passing resolutions banning any and all planning implementation that relies on the receipt of loans or grants from organizations supplied by the United Nations.? Diane Richards of Hayfork said, ?We don?t want anyone telling us what to do with our land. Timber harvest is considered unsustainable in Agenda 21 and they want to reduce the population, restrict the water and group us all into small little clusters. We are a resource county and if you let our county fall to this type of planning, somebody intends to change all our zoning laws here to be like the rest of the state.? Sup. Wendy Otto said she would not support the grant application due to the lack of a completed version for the board?s review. Board Chairman Roger Jaegel objected to the board being handed a resolution of support that it doesn?t have the option of changing, noting many of the documents the county would have to abide by were not provided for the board to review. ?We?ve been down this road, trying for 16 years to get the general plan updated, but this process was flawed,? Otto said. ?This discussion should have come to us before the application was due next week.? Sup. Judy Pflueger said she?s concerned that some of the requirements contained in the grant language ?mean one thing in Malibu and something else up here. We should have been able to read it ourselves.? Tippett said that with grants, ?you don?t take the money until you take the money and the turnaround time is usually short. It takes two or three weeks just to figure out what they need and then there is little time to get it together.? County Counsel Derek Cole, County Administrative Officer David Edmonds and Sup. Judy Morris all voiced concern about getting the general plan update done so there are guiding development policies in place when the economy recovers. ?If our general plan is found deficient, we could have a judgment that stops all development from going forward,? Cole said. ?I have done that research and we could be facing some really significant consequences. If the board denies this application, I hope it does so knowing of other funding opportunities.? Sup. Debra Chapman voted to let the application go forward saying it isn?t well understood how many potential funding opportunities the county is missing because of its outdated general plan, but Morris said she had to ?regrettably? join the others in voting down the grant application because of the process. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Feb 15 11:27:04 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 11:27:04 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal letter to editor- Softer river restoration needed Message-ID: <3EC30E5F-1716-4548-A8BD-A65A6C5A0BDF@att.net> Softer river restoration needed http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2012-02-08/Opinion/Softer_river_restoration_needed.html FROM J. MARSHALL DOUGLAS CITY The Trinity River Restoration Program public meeting in Douglas City showed landowners all along the river stand together with recreational river users and the fishing guides in voicing opinions against heavyhanded mechanical restoration. Work that is far removed from the natural function of the river is not supported. That voices of stakeholders from many perspectives are saying the same things is important ? take notice. Gravel augmentation has been stopped for 2012. Let?s hope that money budgeted is used on other Record of Decision work, such as using the gravel on roads for watershed improvement. Robin Schrock, TRRP executive director, says to landowners, ?Don?t you believe the scientists?? To this overreaching comment we say, ?No, we know intuitively log jams, huge numbers of logs and gravel dumping are wrong.? And we say, ?Don?t you believe nature heals itself? Liken river work to a bodily injury: clean the wound and let it heal naturally.? Restoration work needs to look like the Trinity when floods and drought cleared the river edge of vegetation. Using restoration methods fashionable on other rivers is not OK. Trinity County has many unique microclimates ? anyone here for long knows what works in one draw or canyon or flat doesn?t work in another. The science for each section of the river has many variables and the research designs need to reflect the high number of variables and interactions. Will the research reports released later in 2012 reflect this intricacy of the research designs that was needed to evaluate TRRP work? Please TRRP, and Trinity Management Council and Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group, stop plans to use engineered log jams and dropping root wads of trees not native to the river edge. Halt gravel augmentation beyond 2012. Apply for money to dredge the gravel that has filled the deep holes necessary for adult fish habitat. Expand work that includes all facets of ROD. Take a softer approach to mechanical restoration by removing vegetation, particularly noxious weeds, and lower banks where silt has accumulated in excess vegetation. And work for more water in the river that reflects pre-dam flows. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Feb 16 11:11:05 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 11:11:05 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle Editorial- California Republicans' brazen water grab Message-ID: <5670D33A-1F0D-4F7A-B008-C27E2404BE7E@att.net> California Republicans' brazen water grab Thursday, February 16, 2012 House Republicans are poised to pass legislation that would usurp California's ability to manage its own water supply, harm the San Francisco Bay Estuary ecosystem and drive California's salmon to extinction. Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Alpaugh (Tulare County), wrote the bill to reverse the way water is allocated in California. It essentially ensures water supplies for farmers by taking it from the state's native salmon, trout and other fisheries. Beyond that, it: -- Undermines water conservation efforts. -- Dries up a 40-mile stretch of the San Joaquin River - the state's second largest - by ending the restoration project that saw salmon returning two years ago for the first time in more than 60 years. -- Ends the Bay Delta Conservation Plan process but does nothing to address the problems of water supply and quality the plan seeks to address. In short, it promotes the agribusiness interests of Nunes' district over other interests and upends the collaborative efforts to distribute California's limited water supply fairly. Northern California water interests had objected to an earlier version because it required them to make up the water for the fish that Nunes' would deliver to San Joaquin Valley farms. The new version exempts them from providing water for fish, so they are on board. Democrat Rep. Jerry McNerney, who represents both San Joaquin Valley farmers and the delta, says this: "To steal water from one community to benefit another is unconscionable." We agree. The House should reject this brazen water grab. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/02/16/EDTP1N811L.DTL This article appeared on page A - 13 of the San Francisco Chronicle -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From truman at jeffnet.org Thu Feb 16 11:37:00 2012 From: truman at jeffnet.org (Patrick Truman) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 11:37:00 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle Editorial- California Republicans'brazen water grab In-Reply-To: <5670D33A-1F0D-4F7A-B008-C27E2404BE7E@att.net> References: <5670D33A-1F0D-4F7A-B008-C27E2404BE7E@att.net> Message-ID: is anyone really surprised? this is like a schoolyard pissing contest among adolescent republicans, to see can be the more egregious corporate hack, knowing it will never pass the Senate. truly a sad day in America... From: Tom Stokely Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:11 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle Editorial- California Republicans'brazen water grab California Republicans' brazen water grab Thursday, February 16, 2012 House Republicans are poised to pass legislation that would usurp California's ability to manage its own water supply, harm the San Francisco Bay Estuary ecosystem and drive California's salmon to extinction. Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Alpaugh (Tulare County), wrote the bill to reverse the way water is allocated in California. It essentially ensures water supplies for farmers by taking it from the state's native salmon, trout and other fisheries. Beyond that, it: -- Undermines water conservation efforts. -- Dries up a 40-mile stretch of the San Joaquin River - the state's second largest - by ending the restoration project that saw salmon returning two years ago for the first time in more than 60 years. -- Ends the Bay Delta Conservation Plan process but does nothing to address the problems of water supply and quality the plan seeks to address. In short, it promotes the agribusiness interests of Nunes' district over other interests and upends the collaborative efforts to distribute California's limited water supply fairly. Northern California water interests had objected to an earlier version because it required them to make up the water for the fish that Nunes' would deliver to San Joaquin Valley farms. The new version exempts them from providing water for fish, so they are on board. Democrat Rep. Jerry McNerney, who represents both San Joaquin Valley farmers and the delta, says this: "To steal water from one community to benefit another is unconscionable." We agree. The House should reject this brazen water grab. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/02/16/EDTP1N811L.DTL This article appeared on page A - 13 of the San Francisco Chronicle -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2112/4813 - Release Date: 02/16/12 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From snowgoose at pulsarco.com Thu Feb 16 11:37:19 2012 From: snowgoose at pulsarco.com (sandydenn@pulsarco.com) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 11:37:19 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle Editorial- California Republicans'brazen water grab References: <5670D33A-1F0D-4F7A-B008-C27E2404BE7E@att.net> Message-ID: Not ALL northern California water interests are "on board" with this legislation. I really resent when writers will lump folks together just to make their own point. There are those in Northern California who might lump all environmental or fishing groups into one mind set, but then there are those who approach things from what I consider a more "mature" position and realize that individual groups should be assesed individually, some are realistic and open to conversation, some are not. Issues should be addressed the same manner. It would be great if some of these editorial writers would afford the same courtesy. But thanks for sharing, it just convinces me that there needs to be a lot more real world education done, and less academic idealism promoted! ----- Original Message ----- From: Tom Stokely To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:11 AM Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle Editorial- California Republicans'brazen water grab California Republicans' brazen water grab Thursday, February 16, 2012 House Republicans are poised to pass legislation that would usurp California's ability to manage its own water supply, harm the San Francisco Bay Estuary ecosystem and drive California's salmon to extinction. Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Alpaugh (Tulare County), wrote the bill to reverse the way water is allocated in California. It essentially ensures water supplies for farmers by taking it from the state's native salmon, trout and other fisheries. Beyond that, it: -- Undermines water conservation efforts. -- Dries up a 40-mile stretch of the San Joaquin River - the state's second largest - by ending the restoration project that saw salmon returning two years ago for the first time in more than 60 years. -- Ends the Bay Delta Conservation Plan process but does nothing to address the problems of water supply and quality the plan seeks to address. In short, it promotes the agribusiness interests of Nunes' district over other interests and upends the collaborative efforts to distribute California's limited water supply fairly. Northern California water interests had objected to an earlier version because it required them to make up the water for the fish that Nunes' would deliver to San Joaquin Valley farms. The new version exempts them from providing water for fish, so they are on board. Democrat Rep. Jerry McNerney, who represents both San Joaquin Valley farmers and the delta, says this: "To steal water from one community to benefit another is unconscionable." We agree. The House should reject this brazen water grab. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/02/16/EDTP1N811L.DTL This article appeared on page A - 13 of the San Francisco Chronicle ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From campaign at mbaysav.org Thu Feb 16 12:13:25 2012 From: campaign at mbaysav.org (Deirdre Des Jardins) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 12:13:25 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle Editorial- California Republicans'brazen water grab In-Reply-To: References: <5670D33A-1F0D-4F7A-B008-C27E2404BE7E@att.net> Message-ID: <4F3D6365.9060704@mbaysav.org> The bill raises an interesting legal question in that it is fundamentally at odds with California's constitution, which mandates that all uses of water be "reasonable and beneficial." This is the basis of the permits for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to operate facilities in the state. It is not at all clear that the federal government can take away this fundamental oversight by the state over waters within its boundaries. Since the bill also takes away the ability of the State Water Resources Control board to mandate balancing flows, it is likely that it would just result in a suspension of the permits for the Delta-Mendota and Friant water users, which would then wend its way through the courts. On 2/16/2012 11:37 AM, sandydenn at pulsarco.com wrote: > Not ALL northern California water interests are "on board" with this > legislation. I really resent when writers will lump folks together > just to make their own point. There are those in Northern California > who might lump all environmental or fishing groups into one mind set, > but then there are those who approach things from what I consider a > more "mature" position and realize that individual groups should be > assesed individually, some are realistic and open to conversation, > some are not. Issues should be addressed the same manner. It would be > great if some of these editorial writers would afford the same > courtesy. But thanks for sharing, it just convinces me that there > needs to be a lot more real world education done, and less academic > idealism promoted! > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* Tom Stokely > *To:* env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > > *Sent:* Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:11 AM > *Subject:* [env-trinity] SF Chronicle Editorial- California > Republicans'brazen water grab > > > California Republicans' brazen water grab > > > Thursday, February 16, 2012 > > House Republicans are poised to pass legislation that would usurp > California's ability to manage its own water supply, harm the San > Francisco Bay Estuary ecosystem and drive California's salmon to > extinction. > > Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Alpaugh (Tulare County), wrote the bill to > reverse the way water is allocated in California. It essentially > ensures water supplies for farmers by taking it from the state's > native salmon, trout and other fisheries. > > Beyond that, it: > > -- Undermines water conservation efforts. > > -- Dries up a 40-mile stretch of the San Joaquin River - the > state's second largest - by ending the restoration project that > saw salmon returning two years ago for the first time in more than > 60 years. > > -- Ends the Bay Delta Conservation Plan process but does nothing > to address the problems of water supply and quality the plan seeks > to address. > > In short, it promotes the agribusiness interests of Nunes' > district over other interests and upends the collaborative efforts > to distribute California's limited water supply fairly. > > Northern California water interests had objected to an earlier > version because it required them to make up the water for the fish > that Nunes' would deliver to San Joaquin Valley farms. The new > version exempts them from providing water for fish, so they are on > board. > > Democrat Rep. Jerry McNerney, who represents both San Joaquin > Valley farmers and the delta, says this: "To steal water from one > community to benefit another is unconscionable." > > We agree. The House should reject this brazen water grab. > > http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/02/16/EDTP1N811L.DTL > > > This article appeared on page *A - 13* of the San Francisco Chronicle > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Thu Feb 16 12:47:48 2012 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 12:47:48 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Rep. McNerney, Delta advocates denounce Nunes bill as water grab In-Reply-To: <4F3D6365.9060704@mbaysav.org> References: <5670D33A-1F0D-4F7A-B008-C27E2404BE7E@att.net> <4F3D6365.9060704@mbaysav.org> Message-ID: <529C25F4-2AA4-4C37-9995-C9DB5ACC97FC@fishsniffer.com> http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2012/02/15/rep-mcnerney-delta- advocates-denounce-nunes-bill-as-water-grab/ ?Congressman Nunes? HR 1837 is specifically designed for a full on water grab from the Delta," said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta. Photo of Representative Devin Nunes courtesy of Nunes' office. ? img1.png Rep. McNerney, Delta advocates denounce Nunes bill as water grab by Dan Bacher The water wars ramped up on Tuesday, February 14 with the announcement of the markup of federal legislation designed to divert more Delta water to corporate agribusiness and to sabotage the historic San Joaquin River Restoration Agreement. Representative Devin Nunes (CA-21) said the House Natural Resources Committee has scheduled a markup for H.R. 1837, the "Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act," a bill that Representative Jerry McNerney and Delta advocates denounced as a "water grab" conceived behind closed doors. "I am pleased that after four years of inaction by Democratic super- majorities in Congress, we are now ? under Republican leadership - able to move forward with a solution to California?s government- imposed drought,? claimed Nunes. "This legislation is a comprehensive regional solution to water shortages that have been caused by failed government policies, not actual shortages of water. We have crafted a good bill that not only restores the flow of water but will ultimately make unnecessary the construction of a $12 billion canal to bypass the Bay-Delta," he concluded. The markup for HR 1837 will take place on Thursday, February 16, 2012 and consideration by the full House is expected in the coming weeks. Representative Jerry McNerney (D-11) reacted to the pending committee markup of H.R. 1837 by blasting the bill for being "yet another example of a water scheme created behind closed doors and without the input of the Delta communities." "Any legislation that will forever affect the Delta must include the input of the people who reside there and rely on a healthy Delta for their livelihoods," said McNerney. "This bill is deeply-flawed, and it will rob the Delta of clean water and reduce the quality of the water that remains. To steal water from one community to benefit another is unconscionable and would have disastrous consequences for the Delta communities," he noted. "This is yet another example of how greedy water exporters and their allies will stop at nothing to achieve their goals with total disregard for the disastrous consequences for the Delta," said McNerney. "I will continue to call for fair solutions that include the input of all stakeholders, and to stand with the families, farmers, and small business owners who rely on the Delta for their economic security." Restore the Delta also denounced the bill. ?Congressman Nunes? HR 1837 is specifically designed for a full on water grab from the Delta," said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta. "It not only over rides the public trust as defined in the California Constitution and state water laws, it seeks to promote a large corporate agribusiness economy, all at the expense of Delta family farmers." "If you want any striped bass in the Bay/Delta or anywhere else in California, or any other anadromous fisheries for that matter, you had get in touch with your Congressional Representative because H.R. Bill 1837 is out to kill the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA) and its fisheries restoration objectives, as well as sucking Northern California dry," according to Mike McKenzie of the Allied Fishing Groups. "This is a classic example of self-serving greed by Southern San Joaquin Valley corporate agribusiness." You can read the bill at: http://thomas.gov/home/gpoxmlc112/ h1837_ih.xml. Nunes announced the legislation's mark-up as the Obama and Brown administrations are fast-tracking the construction of the peripheral canal or tunnel to export more water to southern California and corporate agribusiness interests on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. The construction of the peripheral canal would likely result in the extinction of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, Delta and longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail, green sturgeon and southern resident killer whales (that feed on salmon). On the same day, the S.F. Chronicle published an article entitled "Bay Delta Conservation Plan is best option" by Natural Resources Secretary John Laird. Laird claimed,"This robust public stakeholder process was developed to hear all sides and understand issues." (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/02/15/ EDTP1N81IT.DTL) In fact, officials in the water contractor-dominated process have gone out of their way to exclude Delta residents, recreational and commercial fishermen, California Indian Tribes, family farmers, grassroots conservationists and environmental justice communities from the BDCP "Management Committee" and to marginalize opposition to plans to build the peripheral canal. Between the assault on the Delta and fish populations by the Brown and Obama administrations through the BDCP process, on one hand, and by Devin Nunes and Congressional Republicans through HR 1837, on the other hand, advocates of the Delta and fish restoration really got their work cut out for them in 2012! Below are excerpts from the language of HR 1837: SEC. 108. COMPLIANCE WITH ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT OF 1973. (a) Compliance- (1) IN GENERAL- All requirements of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) shall be considered to be fully met for the protection and conservation of the species listed pursuant to the Act for the operations of the Central Valley Project and the California State Water Project, if the Central Valley Project and the California State Water Project are operated in a manner consistent with the `Principles for Agreement on the Bay-Delta Standards Between the State of California and the Federal Government' dated December 15, 1994. (2) BIOLOGICAL OPINIONS AND MODIFICATION- The Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce shall issue biological opinions for coordinated operations of the Central Valley Project and the California State Water Project that are no more restrictive than provisions of the `Principles for Agreement on the Bay-Delta Standards Between the State of California and the Federal Government' dated December 15, 1994. Such biological opinions may be modified only with the consent of the signatories to the `Principles for Agreement on the Bay-Delta Standards Between the State of California and the Federal Government' dated December 15, 1994. (b) Preemption of State Law- (1) STATE LAW PREEMPTION- Neither the State of California, an agency of the State, nor any political subdivision of the State shall adopt or enforce any requirement for the protection or conservation of any species listed under the Endangered Species Act for the operations of the Central Valley Project or the California State Water Project that is more restrictive than the requirements of this section. Any provision of California State law that authorizes the imposition of conditions or restrictions on the operations of the Central Valley Project or the California State Water Project for the protection or conservation of a species that is more restrictive than this section is preempted. (2) NATIVE SPECIES PROTECTION- Any restriction imposed under California law on the take or harvest of any nonnative or introduced aquatic or terrestrial species that preys upon a native fish species that occupies the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and their tributaries or the Sacramento-San Joaquin Rivers Delta shall be void and is preempted. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: img1.png Type: image/png Size: 41414 bytes Desc: not available URL: From t.schlosser at msaj.com Thu Feb 16 17:24:21 2012 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Tom Schlosser) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 17:24:21 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Iron Gate: If the dam is removed, the fish hatchery would be closed Message-ID: <4F3DAC45.6000801@msaj.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Thu Feb 16 17:45:33 2012 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 20:45:33 -0500 (EST) Subject: [env-trinity] Iron Gate: If the dam is removed, the fish hatchery would b... Message-ID: <27ced.44f2f48e.3c6f0b3c@aol.com> In a message dated 2/16/2012 5:24:33 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, t.schlosser at msaj.com writes: The Biological Assessment on the Preferred Action of Interior's EIS on Klamath points out that total chinook returns to the river will decline substantially after PacifiCorp stops replacing the IGH output. See e.g., pages 214-15 of _this._ (http://klamathrestoration.gov/sites/klamathrestoration.gov/files/Klamath%20BA_%20Final%20_10-03-11.pdf) PacifiCorp is obligated to replace IGH chinook output for 8 years after removal of IGD but no party has agreed to fund or provide replacement production after that. _http://www.heraldandnews.com/news/article_cdf4af6e-586b-11e1-8b2e-0019bb296 3f4.html_ (http://www.heraldandnews.com/news/article_cdf4af6e-586b-11e1-8b2e-0019bb2963f4.html) Colleagues... The Biological Assessment appears to be incorrect on this point. The projected increase in chinook runs size after dam removal and KBRA benefits is not "hatchery dependent" because it was assumed that, after stabilizing reintroduced populations, that Iron Gate Hatchery would close. Here is my reply to Tom Schlosser noting this problem from another forum: ******* Interesting, but [your assumption that fish numbers would decline after dam removal] is based on some false reasoning. You should be aware that the DEIS Salmon Production Model was run with the assumption of NO Iron Gate Hatchery production at all, to be conservative... and still comes up with the 83% production increase you cite, at least for fall chinook. The note [above] is not in fact based on that fact, so you are assuming a double subtraction that cannot mathematically be made. In addition, hatchery fish have notoriously lower survival rates in the natural environment than wild fish as they have become "hatchery dependent" even on the genetic level. There have been (literally) hundreds of studies verifying this phenomenon, and the Klamath Iron Gate Hatchery is no exception. Genetic drift to make a fish more genetically fitted to hatchery life, but less fitted to life in the wild, has been demonstrated to occur (at least with steelhead, but no reason to think it is not broadly applicable to their cousins) within just one or two generations! In addition, hatchery fish are typically released at sizes larger than native wild fish (since they are well fed their whole lives in the tanks), and so predate on the wild smolt stocks -- hence, any introduced hatchery stocks can in fact REDUCE productivity of the wild stocks, resulting in a partial cancellation of any additional hatchery benefits in terms of sheer escapement numbers. In some studies, such as in the Alsea River, the more hatchery fish were introduced the LESS the ultimate adult escapement from that brood year -- in other words, there was a negative correlation! This is apparently because the larger hatchery juveniles simply ate up many of the wild juveniles in the short-term, but themselves had much lower overall survival rates over their entire lifecycle in the long-term -- so more of them just flat out died in the ocean and from larger predators than would have occurred had there been no hatchery "supplementation" to begin with. You can check with the authors of the Chinook Production Model for verification of how the modeling was done, i.e., without assuming any hatchery production as a conservative assumption. As to the other flaws in assuming that hatchery supplementation can replace a healthy wild stock with impunity, there are literally hundreds of such studies in the literature that any salmon biologist would help you locate, though it would take some legwork. As is usually the case with biology, its all a LOT more complex than at first cut. But by and large, your juxtaposition of the two statements below and your conclusion from that that the end result of dam removal will be FEWER salmon in the river because of the loss of IGH production is simply not true so far as I am aware of the science and modeling done. PS: The adult hatchery fish returns to the Iron Gate Hatchery in 2009, I am told, was 12,263 adult chinook. This is far below the 53,400 number as estimated IGH returns on which the note below was based. If, then, the dam removal and re-established above-dams fall chinook runs had instead been in place that year (for comparison), an estimated 41,000 would have been coming in with an IGH loss of only 12,263 -- a net GAIN of over 28,700 adult spawners! This is of course also simplistically assuming a one-to-one replacement, without any negative hatchery-wild interactions. So you see, it all depends on how and what you count, what your baselines are, and what data-years you are averaging from -- and what hatchery-wild interactions you count and how you count them, or simply ignore. Hatchery programs also are expensive (and subject increasing to state budget cuts) and sometimes just flat out fail, from disease or human error. So relying on hatchery production always carries its own risks. These too have to be considered. -- Glen Spain And in a later email exchange in which Tom asked for some citations to the fact that the Chinook Model was run without reference to any hatchery impacts, I responded as follows: In a message dated 2/9/2012 9:05:00 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, t.schlosser at msaj.com writes: I agree with many of your generalizations about hatcheries. Can you point me to where it is made clear that the DEIS modeling assumes no IGH production. Tom... Surely.... One can start here: "Anticipated removal of the dams, combined with restoration of aquatic habitats as anticipated in the KBRA, is predicted to increase the median annual production of adult Chinook salmon, in the absence of hatcheries, by an average of 83 percent for the years after dam removal (see Figure 4.1-25). The Chinook salmon ocean commercial and sport harvests are forecasted to increase by an average of 50 percent, the inriver tribal harvest would increase by an average of 59 percent, and the in-river recreational fishery would increase by an average of 9 percent in those years following dam removal (2021 to 2061)." SDOR pg. 86 of text (emphasis on key phrase added) Then looking to the Source Document, which is: Forecasting the response of Klamath Basin Chinook populations to dam removal and restoration of anadromy versus no action ---- Noble Hendrix (2011) "ABSTRACT: Two alternative actions are being evaluated in the Klamath Basin: 1) a No Action Alternative (NAA) and 2) removal of four mainstem dams (Iron Gate, Copco I, Copco II, and J.C. Boyle) and initiation of habitat restoration in the Klamath Basin under a Dam Removal Alternative (DRA). The decision process regarding which action to implement requires annual forecasts of abundance with uncertainty under each of the two alternatives from 2012 to 2061. I forecasted escapement for both alternatives by constructing a life-cycle model (Evaluation of Dam Removal and Restoration of Anadromy, EDRRA) composed of: 1) a stock recruitment relationship between spawners and age 3 in the ocean, which is when they are vulnerable to the fishery, and 2) a fishery model that calculates harvest, maturation, and escapement. To develop stage 1 of the model under NAA, I estimated the historical stock recruitment relationship in the Klamath River below Iron Gate Dam in a Bayesian framework. To develop stage 1 of the model under DRA, I used the predictive spawner recruitment relationships in Liermann et al. (2010) to forecast recruitment to age 3 from tributaries to Upper Klamath Lake, which is the site of active reintroduction of anadromy. I also modified the spawner recruit relationship under DRA to include additional spawning capacity between Iron Gate Dam and Keno Dam. In order to facilitate the comparison of the two alternatives, I used paired Monte Carlo simulations to forecast the levels of escapement and harvest under NAA and DRA. Median escapements and harvest were higher in DRA relative to NAA with a high degree of overlap in 95% confidence intervals due to uncertainty in stock-recruitment dynamics. Still, there was a 0.75 probability of higher annual escapement and a 0.7 probability of higher annual harvest by performing DRA relative to NAA, despite uncertainty in the abundance forecasts. The median increase in escapement in the absence of fishing was 81.4% (95% symmetric probability interval [95%CrI]: -59.9%, 881.4%), the median increase in ocean harvest was 46.5% (95%CrI: -68.7, 1495.2%), and the median increase in tribal harvest was 54.8% (95%CrI: -71.0%, 1841.0%) by performing DRA relative to NAA (estimates provided for model runs after 2033 when portion of the population in the tributaries to UKL are assumed to be established and Iron Gate Hatchery production has ceased)." (emphasis added) And to get even deeper into the methodology of the Chinook abundance model: "I also calculated the percentage increase in abundance for each paired iteration as (DRA ? NAA)/NAA * 100%, which provided a quantitative estimate of the difference in abundance. There were three periods that could have different relative levels of abundance under DRA versus NAA: the period between model initiation and dam removal (2012- 2020); the period after dam removal but with active reintroduction in the tributaries to UKL (2021-2032); and the final period when the population in the tributaries to UKL are assumed to be established and Iron Gate Hatchery production has ceased (2032-2061). (Hendrix, (2011), pg. 17 -- emphasis added) I will spare you all the equations.... I can digest Bayesian functions but they do give me indigestion unless I follow them with a quick glass of wine (grinning). But from the above it is pretty clear that the Chinook production estimate modeling for the DRA scenario was all done without reference to any IGH fish as a potentially confusing factor in the final time frames, i.e., after dam removal. ============================================= Glen H. Spain, NW Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 O:(541)689-2000 -- Fax:(541)689-2500 Email: fish1ifr at aol.com Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ema.berol at yahoo.com Thu Feb 16 20:06:54 2012 From: ema.berol at yahoo.com (Emelia Berol) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 20:06:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle Editorial- California Republicans'brazen water grab In-Reply-To: <4F3D6365.9060704@mbaysav.org> References: <5670D33A-1F0D-4F7A-B008-C27E2404BE7E@att.net> <4F3D6365.9060704@mbaysav.org> Message-ID: <1329451614.6266.YahooMailNeo@web46211.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Excellent comment, thank you. I agree. The state can permit away some of its rights, which it essentially has done each time it permits the Bureau to take over management of some state waters, but it has the right NOT to, and this really takes the cake ...? ________________________________ From: Deirdre Des Jardins To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 12:13 PM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle Editorial- California Republicans'brazen water grab The bill raises an interesting legal question in that it is fundamentally at odds with California's constitution, which mandates that all uses of water be "reasonable and beneficial." This is the basis of the permits for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to operate facilities in the state.?? It is not at all clear that the federal government can take away this fundamental oversight by the state over waters within its boundaries. Since the bill also takes away the ability of the State Water Resources Control board to mandate balancing flows, it is likely that it would just result in a suspension of the permits for the Delta-Mendota and Friant water users, which would then wend its way through the courts. On 2/16/2012 11:37 AM, sandydenn at pulsarco.com wrote: >Not ALL northern California water interests are "on board" with this legislation.? I really resent when writers will lump folks together just to make their own point.? There are those in Northern California who might lump all environmental or fishing groups into one mind set, but then there are those who approach things from what I consider a more "mature" position and realize that individual groups should be assesed individually, some are realistic and open to conversation, some are not.?Issues should be addressed the same manner.? It would be great if some of these editorial writers would afford the same courtesy.?? But thanks for sharing, it just convinces me that there needs to be a lot more real world education done, and less academic idealism promoted! >----- Original Message ----- >>From: Tom Stokely >>To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >>Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 11:11 AM >>Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle Editorial- California Republicans'brazen water grab >> >>California Republicans' brazen water grab >> >> >>Thursday, February 16, 2012House Republicans are poised to pass legislation that would usurp California's ability to manage its own water supply, harm the San Francisco Bay Estuary ecosystem and drive California's salmon to extinction. >>Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Alpaugh (Tulare County), wrote the bill to reverse the way water is allocated in California. It essentially ensures water supplies for farmers by taking it from the state's native salmon, trout and other fisheries. >>Beyond that, it: >>-- Undermines water conservation efforts. >>-- Dries up a 40-mile stretch of the San Joaquin River - the state's second largest - by ending the restoration project that saw salmon returning two years ago for the first time in more than 60 years. >>-- Ends the Bay Delta Conservation Plan process but does nothing to address the problems of water supply and quality the plan seeks to address. >>In short, it promotes the agribusiness interests of Nunes' district over other interests and upends the collaborative efforts to distribute California's limited water supply fairly. >>Northern California water interests had objected to an earlier version because it required them to make up the water for the fish that Nunes' would deliver to San Joaquin Valley farms. The new version exempts them from providing water for fish, so they are on board. >>Democrat Rep. Jerry McNerney, who represents both San Joaquin Valley farmers and the delta, says this: "To steal water from one community to benefit another is unconscionable." >>We agree. The House should reject this brazen water grab. >>http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/02/16/EDTP1N811L.DTL? >>This article appeared on page?A - 13?of the San?Francisco?Chronicle >>________________________________ >> _______________________________________________ >>env-trinity mailing list >>env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >>http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity >> > > >_______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From MCKIER at dfg.ca.gov Fri Feb 17 08:46:01 2012 From: MCKIER at dfg.ca.gov (Mary Claire Kier) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 08:46:01 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Hatchery trapping summary through JW7 Message-ID: <4F3E138A.A226.009F.1@dfg.ca.gov> Good Morning! Attached please find the latest numbers from TRH. Keep up the good thoughts for rain, more rain and snow...looks like we are in for some this weekend... Mary Claire Mary Claire Kier DFG - Trinity River Project 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 707/822-5876 - FAX 822-2855 mckier at dfg.ca.gov Trinity River documents can be found at: http://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/documents/ContextDocs.aspx?cat=KlamathTrinity -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 90624 bytes Desc: not available URL: From BGutermuth at usbr.gov Fri Feb 17 17:17:00 2012 From: BGutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F. Brandt) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 18:17:00 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City Channel Rehabilitation Sites: Environmental document Available! Message-ID: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF73D219BC549@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Dear Trinity River Enthusiasts, Agency Reviewers, and Interested Parties, The Draft Environmental Document for the Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City Channel Rehabilitation Sites, which together make up the Trinity River Restoration Program's Proposed Channel Rehabilitation Project for 2012, is available at: http://www.trrp.net/?p=3734 Please submit your comments by March 20, 2012. Best Regards, Brandt Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Scientist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S Main St Weaverville, CA 96093 530.623.1806 (voice) 530.623.5944 (fax) www.trrp.net A more formal description is included below. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City Site Draft Environmental Document Available for Public Review and Comment Through March 20, 2012 The Draft Environmental Assessment/Initial Study (EA/IS) for the Lower Steiner Flat (River Mile 90.2-91.3) and Upper Junction City (River Mile 79.8-80.4) Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation sites is now available for public review and comment. The Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP), with federal co-lead agencies, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, and with the California State lead agency, the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, is working together to inform the public about this proposed Trinity River restoration project. The Project EA/IS, which is required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), is available for public review and comment through March 20, 2012. The Lower Steiner Flat site is located on the mainstem Trinity River three miles downstream from Douglas City. The Upper Junction City site is located in Junction City upstream of where Dutch Creek Road crosses the Trinity River. Together these sites comprise the Proposed Project which the TRRP plans to construct this year to increase salmon and steelhead habitat downstream of Lewiston Dam, as described in the December 19, 2000, Record of Decision for the Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration Environmental Impact Statement. The Proposed Project is planned to enhance aquatic habitat quality and complexity via construction of slow water fish nursery habitats, reconnection of the floodplain with the river, and placement of in-river structures to react with flow and habitat features. The Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City EA/IS, and the Master Environmental Impact Report - the Programmatic Environmental Review document for TRRP proposed channel rehabilitation and sediment management actions, together explain and analyze environmental impacts of the project. These documents are available on the TRRP website: http://www.trrp.net/ The Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City EA/IS is available on the Bureau of Reclamation's Mid-Pacific website at: http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=8963. In Weaverville, the EA/IS may be reviewed at: 1.) the Trinity County Library at 211 Main Street; 2.) the TRRP office at 1313 S. Main Street (next to Top's Super Grocery); or 3.) the Trinity County Resource Conservation District at 1 Horseshoe Lane (off HWY 3). In Redding the EA/IS may be reviewed at the Bureau of Land Management office at 355 Hemsted Lane. In 2009, the Regional Water Board acted as lead agency for a Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR) and site specific Environmental Assessment/Environmental Impact Report (EA/EIR) (State Clearinghouse number 2008032110) for channel rehabilitation and sediment management activities for the remaining Phase 1 and Phase 2 sites in order to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Regional Water Board certified the environmental documents on August 25, 2009 (WDID No. 1A09062WNTR). Under California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15177, after a Master EIR has been prepared and certified, subsequent projects which the lead agency determines as being within the scope of the Master EIR will be subject to only limited environmental review. The preparation of a new environmental document and new written findings will not be required if, based on a review of the initial study (IS) prepared for the subsequent project (e.g., the Lower Steiner Flat Upper Junction City EA/IS), the lead agency determines, on the basis of written findings, that no additional significant environmental effect will result from the proposal, no new additional mitigation measures or alternatives may be required, and that the project is within the scope of the Master EIR. The Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City Sites EA/IS contains project specific information required to apply for enrollment under the General Permit R1-2010-0028 for Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation activities which the Regional Water Board will consider in making its determination and approval decision. If you would like to receive a copy of the EA/IS, please contact Mr. Brandt Gutermuth, Bureau of Reclamation, at 623-1806. Comments may be sent to: Mr. Gutermuth, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, Weaverville, CA 96093, or e-mail bgutermuth at usbr.gov. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Feb 20 14:09:25 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:09:25 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Proposed Suction Dredge Regulations Revised, Now Open to Public Comment References: Message-ID: <98AD014F-9EC0-4965-B687-5691D0189589@att.net> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: DFG News Date: Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:49 PM Subject: Proposed Suction Dredge Regulations Revised, Now Open to Public Comment To: DFG News California Department of Fish and Game News Release February 17, 2012 Media Contacts: Mark Stopher, DFG Executive Office, (530) 225-2275 Kirsten Macintyre, DFG Communications, (916) 322-8988 Proposed Suction Dredge Regulations Revised, Now Open to Public Comment The Department of Fish and Game (DFG) has revised its proposed regulations governing suction dredge mining in California under the Fish and Game Code. The revised version is now available for review at www.dfg.ca.gov/suctiondredge, and DFG will be accepting public comment on the new draft through 5 p.m. on Monday, March 5, 2012. Written comments can be submitted by e-mail to dfgsuctiondredge at dfg.ca.gov, or by regular mail to: Mark Stopher, Senior Policy Advisor California Department of Fish and Game 601 Locust Street Redding, CA 96001 DFG regulates suction dredge mining throughout California pursuant to Fish and Game Code section 5653, et seq. Existing law prohibits DFG from issuing suction dredge permits, and suction dredging is currently prohibited until June 30, 2016. On Feb. 28, 2011, DFG released proposed regulations and a related Environmental Impact Report for public review. The original public review period ran from February 2011 through May 10, 2011, and DFG has worked ever since to review comments and related information submitted by the public. DFG subsequently determined that revisions to the earlier proposed regulations were appropriate. Compared to the previously proposed regulations, the revised regulations provide for more efficient permit management and account for further evaluation of species distributions and life histories. They also include further actions to ensure that authorized suction dredging is not deleterious to fish. Printed copies of the revised regulations are also available for public review at the following DFG offices: ? 601 Locust Street, Redding ? 1701 Nimbus Road, Suite A, Rancho Cordova ? 1807 13th Street, Suite 104, Office of Communications, Sacramento ? 7329 Silverado Trail, Napa ? 1234 E. Shaw Avenue, Fresno ? 3883 Ruffin Road, San Diego ? 4665 Lampson Avenue, Suite J, Los Alamitos ? 3602 Inland Empire Blvd., Suite C-220, Ontario ? 20 Lower Ragsdale Drive, Suite 100, Monterey The original version of the proposed regulations is still available on the DFG website, along with the revised version now under public review. ### Please do not reply to this e-mail; DFGNews at dfg.ca.gov is for outgoing messages only and is not checked for incoming mail. For questions about this News Release, contact the individual(s) listed above. Thank you. Subscribe to DFG News via e-mail or RSS feed. Go to www.dfg.ca.gov/news. Follow us on Facebook at www.facebook.com/CaliforniaDFG. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Feb 21 15:07:43 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 15:07:43 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Management Council Letters to Trinity River Guides and TAMWG Message-ID: <58A8C987-105C-4392-9919-1E6302F02FD1@att.net> All, You can view letters from Brian Person, Chairman of the Trinity Management Council dated February 17, 2012 to the Trinity River Guides Association and the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group at the following website: http://www.c-win.org/content/trinity-river-press-room-c-win-and-trinity-guides-ask-moratorium-trinity-river-mainstem-proj Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From tstokely at att.net Wed Feb 22 14:55:23 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 14:55:23 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Reclamation Releases Draft Environmental Document for Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Efforts References: <834155356af34f2e86b8efd3565986c8@usbr.gov> Message-ID: <0465E873-B680-44F9-9E8A-20E8CCA00F7D@att.net> From: "Fernando Ponce" Date: February 22, 2012 1:46:41 PM PST To: tstokely at att.net Subject: Reclamation Releases Draft Environmental Document for Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Efforts Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, CA MP-12-024 Media Contact: Pete Lucero, 916-978-5100, plucero at usbr.gov For Release On: February 22, 2012 Reclamation Releases Draft Environmental Document for Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Efforts As part of the Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP), the Bureau of Reclamation has released for public review a Draft Environmental Assessment/Initial Study (EA/IS) for the rehabilitation of two Trinity River channel sites: Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City. Federal co-lead agencies, Reclamation and the Bureau of Land Management, and the California State lead agency, the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, are working together to inform the public about this proposed TRRP restoration project. Together, work at these sites comprises the proposed project (Project) which the TRRP plans to develop this year to increase salmon and steelhead habitat downstream of Lewiston Dam, as described in the December 19, 2000, Record of Decision for the Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration Environmental Impact Statement. The project is designed to enhance aquatic habitat through construction of slow water rearing habitat for juvenile salmon and steelhead, reconnection of the floodplain with the river and placement of in-river habitat features. The Lower Steiner Flat site is located on the mainstem Trinity River three miles downstream from Douglas City; the Upper Junction City site is located in Junction City, upstream of the point at which Dutch Creek Road crosses the river. The Draft EA/IS was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and National Environmental Policy Act requirements and is available on the TRRP website http://www.trrp.net/ and http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=8963. The Draft EA/IS may be reviewed in Weaverville at the Trinity County library on 211 Main Street; the TRRP office located on 1313 S Main Street; and the Trinity County Resource Conservation District at Horseshoe Square. The Draft EA/IS may also be viewed at the Bureau of Land Management office at 355 Hemsted Drive, Redding, Calif. For additional information or to request a copy of the Draft EA/IS please contact Brandt Gutermuth, Bureau of Reclamation, at 530-623-1806. Comments must be received by close of business Tuesday, March 20, 2012, and should be sent to Mr. Gutermuth, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, Weaverville, CA 96093 or bgutermuth at usbr.gov. # # # Reclamation is the largest wholesale water supplier and the second largest producer of hydroelectric power in the United States, with operations and facilities in the 17 Western States. Its facilities also provide substantial flood control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. Visit our website at http://www.usbr.gov. If you would rather not receive future communications from Bureau of Reclamation, let us know by clicking here. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver Federal Center, Alameda & Kipling Street PO Box 25007, Denver, CO 80225 United States -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Feb 23 08:59:13 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 08:59:13 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Klamath Herald and News- Following the money: The Klamath dams are a massive investment Message-ID: http://www.heraldandnews.com/news/article_dccd670a-5d21-11e1-bb18-0019bb2963f4.html Following the money: The Klamath dams are a massive investment By JOEL ASCHBRENNER H&N Staff Reporter | Posted: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 9:00 am There's bound to be plenty of politics involved with management of the Klamath River, because there are hundreds of millions of dollars involved. There are millions involved in infrastructure, millions involved in resources, millions in jobs, millions in property taxes. As reporters traveled down the river and back late last year for this series, the money and the politics were ever present. Klamath River dams and hydropower plants, all totaled, represent a massive investment. PacifiCorp's dams were built between 1903 and 1962. The hydroelectric plants, operating at maximum potential, could produce enough electricity to power 70,000 homes. They also provide permanent jobs, property tax revenue and recreational opportunities, opponents of dam removal say. But those same dams and plants have impacts that never were accurately measured and mitigated, say proponents of removal. The dams cripple multi-million-dollar coastal fisheries and historic tribal fisheries, and removing them would create thousands of temporary jobs, they say. Additionally, PacifiCorp officials say removing the dams would be more cost-effective than relicensing them, which would require adding fish ladders and screens. Here's a look at the economy of the Klamath River dams: Power can be replaced, officials say PacifiCorp operates seven dams on the Klamath River system. The six hydroelectric dams have a generating capacity of 169 megawatts, but, on average, produce about half that much, depending on demand for power and availability of water to send through powerhouses, said Pacific Power regional community manager Toby Freeman. Only the Link River and Keno dams are operated to manage water levels - both provide irrigation water for the Klamath Reclamation Project. The other dams are managed specifically to produce hydroelectric power. The Klamath River project represents less than 2 percent of PacifiCorp's energy portfolio. By comparison, PacifiCorp's Lewis River hydroelectric developments can produce up to 510 megawatts at full capacity, nearly 5 percent of the company's power generating potential, Freeman said. Four of the Klamath River Dams - J.C. Boyle, Copco No. 1 and No. 2, and Iron Gate - are proposed for removal under the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement and the related Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement. To relicense the dams, PacifiCorp would have to add fish ladders, which would reduce their generating capacity by about 25 percent by diverting more water away from powerhouses, said PacifiCorp spokesman Bob Gravely. Replacing the Klamath River dams' renewable energy won't be difficult, PacifiCorp officials say. The company has developed nearly 1,600 megawatts of new wind energy in the past five years. Removal would eliminate and create jobs Dam removal would eliminate dozens of jobs at the dams and their powerhouses, but would create thousands more construction and restoration jobs, according to a draft environmental impact study. According to the study, dam removal would eliminate 49 PacifiCorp jobs and 18 recreational jobs. About 1,400 temporary construction jobs and 4,600 other jobs would be created during 15 years of restoration projects. Dam removal supporters champion the plan to restore the free-flowing river as a job creator, while opponents say replacing permanent jobs in the private sector with federally funded temporary jobs is a net loss. Klamath, Siskiyou could lose tax revenue Klamath and Siskiyou counties stand to lose property tax dollars with the removal of the four dams. In Klamath County, the J.C. Boyle Dam is valued at $17.8 million and generates about $530,000 a year for local taxing districts, said county assessor Rafael Hernandez. Siskiyou County, home to three of the dams, would lose about $1 million a year from its approximately $27 million discretionary fund if the dams come out, said county supervisor Jim Cook. "That would be a huge hit," he said. Included in the KBRA are means to mitigate some of the losses, though in lopsided fashion. The agreement includes $3.2 million for Klamath County taxing districts over 20 years to make up for decreased property values due to the reduction of water deliveries on the Klamath Reclamation Project. Similar funding for Siskiyou County is not guaranteed. A California water bond measure would provide Siskiyou County with $20 million to supplement lost property tax revenue from the dams and up to $250 million to pay for dam removal. But the $11 billion Safe, Clean and Reliable Water Supply Act could be delayed from the November ballot, downsized or scrapped all together due to concerns over the costs, Cook said. "We'd just as soon the dams not come out, rather than they buy us out somehow," he said. Fisheries would benefit from removal The Klamath River dams cost fisheries millions every year, dam removal proponents say. Glen Spain, northwest regional director for the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, advocates removing the dams. The dams block anadromous fish (species such as salmon that can pass from salt to fresh water) from migrating to spawning habitat upstream and disrupt the river's natural flow, he said. And, he said, the reservoirs behind the dams hold warm, algae-laden water that is detrimental to fish. Today, the Pacific salmon fishery fed by the Klamath River is a $100 million to $150 million industry. It was once the third largest salmon producing river in the continental U.S., but degraded water quality changed that, Spain said. Klamath River fall chinook salmon populations are 10 percent of their historical populations and coho salmon are down to 2 percent, he said. Spain said the health of Klamath River salmon affects fishermen from Monterey, Calif., to the Columbia River. "Whether we have fish or we don't; whether we have jobs or we don't; whether we pay our mortgages or we don't all depends on the health of the Klamath River," he said. But dam removal opponents say taking the dams out could do more harm than good to fisheries. Some speculate that breaching the dams will send a wall of dirty, sediment-laden water downstream, wiping out fish habitat, such as the beds of coarse gravel critical for spawning. An environmental impact study about dam removal released in September stated there is an estimated 13.4 million cubic yards of sediment behind the Klamath River dams, much of which would remain on the banks if the dams were removed. Upriver, the Klamath Tribes have had no access to migrating steelhead and salmon populations since 1918, when Copco No. 1 was built. The Tribes were guaranteed the right to harvest the fish in the treaty of 1864, said Don Gentry, vice chair of the Klamath Tribes. "The loss of historic salmon and steelhead runs in the Upper Klamath Basin was particularly devastating to the Klamath, Modoc and Yahooskin people, who relied upon the fish as significant food sources, vital to the traditional economy of the Klamath Tribes," Gentry said in an email. It's widely debated if and how many fish would migrate as far upstream as Upper Klamath Lake if the dams were removed. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From MCKIER at dfg.ca.gov Fri Feb 24 08:43:20 2012 From: MCKIER at dfg.ca.gov (Mary Claire Kier) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 08:43:20 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] TRH trapping summary through 21 Feb 2012 Message-ID: <4F474D68.A226.009F.1@dfg.ca.gov> Good morning! Attached find the TRH trapping summary through 21 Feb 2012. Mary Claire Mary Claire Kier DFG - Trinity River Project 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 707/822-5876 - FAX 822-2855 mckier at dfg.ca.gov Trinity River documents can be found at: http://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/documents/ContextDocs.aspx?cat=KlamathTrinity -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 92672 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Feb 24 09:10:09 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 09:10:09 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com- Limits planned for suction dredging; gold miners upset Message-ID: <63537B23-8E10-4F7E-9010-85253D4B6641@att.net> http://www.redding.com/news/2012/feb/23/limits-planned-for-suction-dredging/ Limits planned for suction dredging; gold miners upset By Damon Arthur Thursday, February 23, 2012 Under a new set of rules proposed by the state Department of Fish and Game, the agency would reduce the number of gold miners' suction dredging permits it issues annually statewide from 4,000 to 1,500 and prohibit dredging on more than 20 north state streams. The regulation is one of many proposed changes to statewide regulations that the DFG has proposed to comply with court orders and recent state laws. Chip Hess, who owns the Miner's Cache in Redding, said the regulations are hurting businesses and families. "We have hundreds of families in the north state that make a living or supplement their incomes from mining," Hess said. "First they shut the lumber industry down. Now they're basically shutting the mining industry down," he said. The DFG took public comments on a first round of proposed regulations last year. Based on those comments, the agency made further changes in the proposed suction dredging regulations. It is taking public comment on the newest proposals until March 5. Other new regulations include a provision that after a suction dredge is removed from a stream, it would have to be either decontaminated or kept out of the water for two weeks before putting it back in another stream. Two dredges could not be operated within 500 feet of each other on a stream. And dredging could only occur from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. In Shasta County, seven additional streams would be closed to all suction dredging: Battle Creek, North Fork Battle Creek, Beegum Creek, Old Cow Creek from the mainstem upstream to Old Cow Creek Meadows, Rock Creek and Screwdriver Creek. Seventeen streams in Siskiyou County would be closed to all suction dredging. Four Tehama County streams would be closed year-round, and five Trinity County streams would be closed. The closures would be moot for the next several years, as a statewide moratorium has been in place since 2008 and doesn't expire until 2016. Hess said that since the moratorium went into effect, miners have been panning for gold and have been "high-banking," in which they look for gold on or near the banks of streams State fish and game officials say there are numerous negative effects on fish and wildlife from suction dredging, including damaging salmon and trout redds (nests). The dredging also kicks up mercury from the bottom of some streams, said Mark Stopher, a DFG senior policy adviser. Mercury was used in gold mining during the California's Gold Rush during the 1850s, he said. Many of the regulations proposed last year and this year were required to bring suction dredging into compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Stopher said. The environmental impact report on suction dredging also requires other regulations and changes that are outside the scope of the DFG's authority, Stopher said. For example the state has to develop suction dredging fees, but only the Legislature can set up fees, Stopher said. And the effects on water quality from mercury has to be addressed by the state Water Quality Control Board, he said. Also, noise impacts from the dredges would have to be addressed by another agency, Stopher said. Revised regulations To view a copy of the revised suction dredging regulations, go to www.dfg.ca.gov/suctiondredge. Copies of the regulations are also available at the state Department of Fish and Games office in Redding, 601 Locust St. Comments on the regulations may be submitted by email to dfgsuctiondredge at dfg.ca.gov. Comments may be mailed to Mark Stopher, senior policy adviser, California Department of Fish and Game, 601 Locust St., Redding, CA 96001. Comments will be accepted until 5 p.m. March 5. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: header_print.gif Type: image/gif Size: 5276 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sing_logo.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1020 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Feb 25 09:15:08 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2012 09:15:08 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com- Re-election not in supervisors' plans; Pair served in Trinity County Message-ID: Otto wants to spend time with her husband. Jaegel seeks to enjoy more time with his family. http://www.redding.com/news/2012/feb/24/re-election-not-in-supervisors-plans/ A pair of two-term Trinity County supervisors, Roger Jaegel and Wendy Otto, won't be running for re-election. Jaegel, 67, said his reasons for stepping down are simple enough. "I want to spend more time with my kids and grandkids and do some traveling and finally retire," he said this week. "I'm getting up there, you know?" Jaegel, a retired U.S. Forest Service employee who lives in Hayfork, said he's proud of his time on the five-member board. He said it was especially rewarding to work with land managers to come up with more thinning projects to cut back on wildfire danger and create biomass. Although that work is far from complete, it was nonetheless time to step down, he said. Another ongoing issue is the hugely contentious debate over marijuana growing. Jaegel said the growing "just got out of control" amid the state's inability to provide local governments direction on how to manage medical marijuana growers. "I think I always tried to do what was best for the people of Trinity County," Jaegel said. "I think in today's political world and climate, two terms is enough." Otto, 52, also lives in Hayfork but in a neighboring district. She said her reason for leaving also was simple ? she wants to spend time with her new husband. In 2004, her husband, Robert Reiss, died and she was appointed by then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to fill his seat. She was married to Greg Otto in 2010. "The job is a bit demanding, and I found out the hard way how short life is when my husband died," she said. Otto said she's most proud of her work in completing her husband's project to get cellphone towers installed in southern Trinity County. She also helped lead the charge to get safety improvements on the road to Hyampom, she said. She said the county's ongoing efforts to regulate growers has left both sides a little unhappy ? something she thinks is good because it means everyone had to compromise. "While it has been a painful process ? that's in capital letters: a PAINFUL PROCESS ? I think we'll come out on the other side having protected everyone's needs without everyone absolutely getting their own way," she said. Otto and Jaegel said they'll continue working as diligently as they have been until their terms expire at the end of the year. It's unclear whether anyone in Trinity County has announced they'll run for the two seats. Trinity County elections officials this week didn't respond to repeated messages. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 401852_t160.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 10714 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 921584_t160.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 11117 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Feb 28 07:56:51 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 07:56:51 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard- Klamath dam removal delayed; parties hope for hearings this spring Message-ID: <850F5F76-980A-41BF-B737-5B206AB5D5EE@att.net> Click photo to enlarge Klamath dam removal delayed; parties hope for hearings this spring The parties to the Klamath dams removal agreements are optimistic that plans are still on track despite the lack of action in Congress on essential legislation. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar announced Monday that he will not make a decision on the removal by March 31, as originally planned. Craig Tucker -- a spokesman for the Karuk Tribe, one of the parties to the agreement -- said this will not deter the parties or delay the dam removal, which is scheduled for 2020. ?This is a bump in the road; this isn't the end of the line,? Tucker said. ?All the parties remain committed to seeing this through.? Congress has not enacted the legislation necessary to authorize a secretarial determination under the terms of Klamath dam agreements. Salazar was expected to decide whether the removal of four dams -- owned by energy company PacifiCorp -- on the Klamath River would be in the public's interest and advance the restoration of salmon and steelhead fisheries in the Klamath Basin. ?The Department of the Interior, working with our partners at NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) and the U.S. Forest Service, has upheld our commitments in these agreements that are so important to strengthening the health and prosperity of those that depend on the Klamath River for their way of life,? Salazar said in a press release. ?I am proud of the work of our team of experts who have completed more than 50 new studies and reports that are providing significant new information on the potential effects of Klamath River dam removal as part of a transparent, science-based process.? The U.S. Department of the Interior has been completing peer-reviewed scientific and technical studies and an environmental analysis during the past year to inform Salazar for the determination -- a condition of the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement, or KHSA, and the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, or KBRA. The legislation, the Klamath Basin Economic Restoration Act, was introduced in the Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives in November. In addition to the determination, the agreement requires California and Oregon to identify a funding source, and the secretary's office must conduct additional studies on the costs, benefits and liabilities associated with dam removal. The final version of the study is expected to be released this spring. According to a release, the parties to the agreements met on Friday with Salazar's staff and Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Mike Connor in San Francisco to discuss the next steps. Tucker said the parties agreed that the delay wouldn't violate the agreement. ?We urge Congress to hold hearings as soon as possible so we can educate people and get all the facts on the table and keep moving this forward,? he said. Tucker added that the need for the agreements is underscored by the looming drought this year. ?If we had implemented these agreements, we would have had a game plan for this year,? he said. Patrick Higgins -- a fisheries consultant for the Resighini Rancheria, a tribe located in Del Norte County that is not a party to the agreements -- said the delay does not surprise him. A vocal opponent of the agreements, Higgins said he doesn't see the current Congress passing the key legislation, considering the political pressure from some irrigators to stop the act. ?The possibility of passing this in future congresses is equally bleak,? he said. Higgins said that without the legislation, the KHSA is in trouble, and it would be best to allow the PacifiCorp relicensing process to move forward through the California State Water Resources Control Board. The board delayed a clean water certification process in light of the agreements. Tucker said the delay does not change the KHSA's terms. ?We tried to build an agreement with some flexibility with some hurdles just like this,? he said. Under the terms of the KHSA, the secretary agreed to use ?best efforts? to make a decision by March 31. PacifiCorp spokesman Bob Gravely said the company is hopeful that the water board will continue to delay the clean water certification process. The company is expected to go before the board this spring for its yearly review. ?We're disappointed that Congress hasn't acted, but March 31 has also been a target date rather than a fixed deadline,? Gravely said. ?So from our point of view, nothing really changes for this. We're still committed to the settlement.? The company has continued to collect a dam removal surcharge from its customers in Oregon and California to help pay for the project. Nearly $30 million has been collected so far, Gravely said. While the bulk of its customers are in Oregon, PacifiCorp began charging its California customers in January. Most of PacifiCorp's California customers are in Siskiyou County, but it also serves Crescent City and other areas closer to the coast, he said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Feb 28 08:00:40 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 08:00:40 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard- NOAA issues Klamath dam coho conservation permit; PacifiCorp to pay $510,000 annually for projects Message-ID: <038F1F65-B0F0-4028-A8DB-D4E2148F896F@att.net> http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_20060168 NOAA issues Klamath dam coho conservation permit; PacifiCorp to pay $510,000 annually for projects PacifiCorp says its ongoing conservation efforts reflect the energy company's dedication to the Klamath dams removal project. The recent approval of its coho salmon habitation conservation plan may highlight these efforts. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Marine Fisheries Service issued an incidental take permit Friday, putting into place a conservation strategy that will be in effect until the dams are removed. Coho salmon are protected under the federal Endangered Species Act, and the permit regulates any potential harm to coho with habitat conversation measures. Irma Lagomarsino, NOAA fisheries service supervisor for Northern California, said measures include projects that improve the complexity of the coho habitat by adding woody debris to streams to improve their survival rates in swift-moving waters. PacifiCorp spokesman Bob Gravely said Monday that the plan does not directly relate to the dam removal but allows the company to have a permanent plan in place. The plan was an interim measure required by the Klamath dams removal agreements, which were agreed upon by multiple parties in 2008. ?This is great news for us,? Gravely said. ?It settles this issue for the interim period.? Lagomarsino said the permit is for 10 years, but if the dams come down, the permit would be moot. The plan was developed over the last two years and has been subject to environmental review and public comment through the fisheries service, according to NOAA. ?We're really excited that PacifiCorp is providing species conservation for the coho in the Klamath,? Lagomarsino said Monday. ?A lot of hard work went into working with them, and we applaud them for stepping up and doing this.? Under the terms of the permit, PacifiCorp will work with the fisheries service, the California Department of Fish and Game and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to identify, select, and implement conservation projects. PacifiCorp will contribute $510,000 annually to fund projects to enhance coho conservation in the Klamath River below Iron Gate dam -- the lowest dam on the river. According to NOAA, the company has already contributed $2.5 million in funding to benefit the coho since 2009. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Vina_Frye at fws.gov Tue Feb 28 09:30:37 2012 From: Vina_Frye at fws.gov (Vina_Frye at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 09:30:37 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group March 22, 2012 Message-ID: Hi Folks, The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group is scheduled to meet on March 22, 2012. The discussion topics are listed in the notice. [Federal Register Volume 77, Number 36 (Thursday, February 23, 2012)] [Notices] [Pages 10766-10767] >From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [ www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 2012-4169] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-FHC-2012-N039; FXFR1334088TWG0W4-123-FF08EACT00] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of meeting. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) affords stakeholders the opportunity to give policy, management, and technical input concerning Trinity River (California) restoration efforts to the Trinity Management Council (TMC). The TMC interprets and recommends policy, coordinates and reviews management actions, and provides organizational budget oversight. This notice announces a TAMWG meeting, which is open to the public. DATES: TAMWG will meet from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Thursday, March 22, 2012. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Weaverville Victorian Inn, 2051 Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meeting Information: Nancy J. Finley, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521; telephone: (707) 822-7201. Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) Information: Robin Schrock, Executive Director, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093; telephone: (530) 623-1800; email: rschrock at usbr.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), this notice announces a meeting of the TAMWG. The meeting will include discussion of the following topics: Designated Federal Officer (DFO) updates, Election new chair and vice chair, FACA 101, Executive Director's report, TMC chair report, Flow scheduling. Completion of the agenda is dependent on the amount of time each item takes. The meeting could end early if the agenda has been completed. [[Page 10767]] Dated: February 16, 2012. Nancy Finley, Field Supervisor, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, Arcata, CA. [FR Doc. 2012-4169 Filed 2-22-12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P Vina Frye U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata FWO 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone: (707) 822-7201 Fax: (707) 822-8411 vina_frye at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From moira at onramp113.com Tue Feb 28 09:56:27 2012 From: moira at onramp113.com (Moira Burke) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 09:56:27 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Hooray! Garamendi's excellent op ed: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/02/28/4295919/water-bill-in-congress-promotes.html In-Reply-To: <038F1F65-B0F0-4028-A8DB-D4E2148F896F@att.net> References: <038F1F65-B0F0-4028-A8DB-D4E2148F896F@att.net> Message-ID: <789C5F47-A159-4651-AA26-42C1BA56F7F5@onramp113.com> Viewpoints: Water bill in Congress promotes division, destroys state consensus Share By Rep. John Garamendi, D-Walnut Grove Special to The Bee Published: Tuesday, Feb. 28, 2012 - 12:00 am | Page 11A Last Modified: Tuesday, Feb. 28, 2012 - 9:25 am As early as Wednesday, Congress is voting on a dangerous bill that would turn upside down 150 years of California water law. House Resolution 1837, the so-called San Joaquin Water Reliability Act, removes all environmental protections for the Delta and Central Valley rivers while allowing destructive exports of water from the Delta to politically connected San Joaquin Valley farmers. As President Bill Clinton's former deputy interior secretary and as a member of the House Natural Resources Committee, I am intimately familiar with California water policy. During discussion of HR 1837 in committee, I offered a series of amendments that would have made this legislation better, but all my amendments were rejected. We need to bring this bill back to the drawing board. That's why I'm doing all I can to stop this bill, partnering with farmers, fishermen, outdoor enthusiasts and conservationists to tell Congress to stop HR 1837. This legislation is opposed by the state of California, Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, local governments, and editorial boards across the state. And the list of opposition is growing. Water storage and water recycling are important components of water policy, and they're lacking in HR 1837. This bill threatens thousands of jobs for salmon fishermen and Delta farmers. These workers have already suffered from the creeping salt water from the bay caused by excessive pumping of Delta water. While agribusinesses in parts of the San Joaquin Valley claim to be suffering from an absence of water, the facts tell a different story. Farmers in these areas pay some of the lowest rates despite their distance from water sources. Unemployment in these parts of the state has been a chronic issue even in wet years. Recent job losses have been mainly caused by the collapse of the construction and housing sector after the financial crisis. In addition, even at the height of the financial crisis and drought,California farmers were able to post record sales. In addition to a blatant water grab, HR 1837 also creates sweeping exemptions from federal laws protecting our water and pre-emptively prohibits state lawmakers from striking a consensus-driven compromise. It would be more accurate to call HR 1837 the State Water Rights Repeal Act. This bill also destroys California's 2009 comprehensive water package by isolating the Delta. The state's dual goals of water supply reliability and ecosystem restoration cannot be met if this bill becomes law. It's possible to craft a balanced approach that satisfies the needs of everyone in California. HR 1837 isn't a balanced approach, however. If it were implemented, it would destroy waterways throughout Northern California, and it would take away California's ability to control our own water destiny. Now is not the time to reignite the California water wars of the past. Now is not the time to pit Californians against each other for short-term gain. There is a more constructive way forward for California. We must focus on responsible, science-based water management, with conservation, storage and recycling playing a prominent role ? balancing our water needs and creating jobs across the Golden State. Instead of threatening the Delta and river communities throughout Northern California, I hope my colleagues in Congress will come back to the negotiating table. We can improve water access for Central Valley farmers without throwing out more than a century of water law. We can unite as Californians and invest in American-made water recycling and storage, from the Delta to the Bay Area to the Central Valley and farther south. We can create thousands of jobs throughout the state without destroying thousands of jobs in the Delta. We can embrace consensus instead of fostering division. Rep. John Garamendi, D-Walnut Grove, is a member of the House Natural Resources Committee. Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/02/28/4295919/water-bill-in-congress-promotes.html#storylink=cpy M o i r a B u r k e -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t.schlosser at msaj.com Thu Mar 1 11:19:15 2012 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Tom Schlosser) Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 11:19:15 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Klamath Agreement Parties Stall Restoration In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4F4FCBB3.8050504@msaj.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Mar 1 17:56:57 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 17:56:57 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com Editorial: Editorial: Dam-busting drive smashes integrity too Message-ID: <5764B01E-D88A-4AF4-81D2-DEFB01625681@att.net> There are lots of comments on both of these articles.. Editorial: Dam-busting drive smashes integrity too http://www.redding.com/news/2012/mar/01/editorial-dam-busting-drive-smashes-integrity/ It's based on this article: UPDATED: Fired federal adviser files whistle-blower complaint over Klamath dam removal Professor says information was manipulated to support removal http://www.redding.com/news/2012/feb/28/klamath-river-dams-fired-federal-adviser-files/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Mar 1 18:01:36 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 18:01:36 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com- Decision on dam removal delayed Message-ID: <9ECF298A-FB5C-4F25-9DD2-40BCCBD0661D@att.net> Decision on dam removal delayed By Ryan Sabalow http://www.redding.com/news/2012/feb/27/KLAMATHDAMS/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Mar 4 08:38:22 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 08:38:22 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard; Humboldt, Hoopa ask for more water to avoid possible fish kill Message-ID: <0E946161-3BDB-4DA9-8A7B-A25D68319E95@att.net> http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_20099526 By Donna Tam Humboldt County officials and the Hoopa Valley Tribe are saying a fish kill on the Klamath is possible this year if the government doesn't release more water from the Trinity River. The Hoopa Valley Tribal Council sent a letter to the U.S. Department of the Interior and the governor's office last week asking for action from the Bureau of Reclamation to establish the county's right to no less than 50,000 acre-feet of the Trinity's water. In 2002, federal officials overrode the recommendations of their own scientists and decided to divert more water to farmers and residents of Southern California, which led to an unprecedented fish kill in the Klamath River. Although tribal and county governments have been asking for the right for years, this year's abundance of returning chinook salmon and what the tribe says are historically low water levels may bolster the discussion. ?The combination of low water leaves and high fish populations could produce conditions similar to those that led to the devastating fish kill in the Lower Klamath River that occurred in October 2002. We urge you to take immediate action to prevent that kind of outcome in the fall of 2012,? the tribe's letter said. Brian Person, the area manager for the Bureau of Reclamation's Northern California Area Office, acknowledged that this year has been a subpar year for rainfall, but it's still too soon to tell if a fish kill will happen. ?The hydrology has been abysmal, but we still have some precipitation months left,? he said Friday. ?A large part of what drives this system and drives the run-off is snow melt.? Humboldt County 5th District Supervisor Ryan Sundberg said the county is working on its own letter urging action while continuing to monitor the weather. The board expects to review a draft in a couple of weeks, he said. ?There's a huge, huge rush of fish this year with not a lot of rain so far and not a lot of snow pack,? Sundberg said. ?We want to make sure the Bureau of Reclamation will release water.? According to the Hoopa Valley Tribe's letter, fisheries scientists developed criteria for the release of water from the Trinity, including a forecasted fish run in excess of the historic average run of 110,000 adult fall chinook salmon from 1981 to 2003. ?The 2012 forecast is three times that threshold,? the letter said, adding that the release criteria refined in 2010 need to be revised again for this year. Person said the criteria's revision is ongoing. He said the key criteria are a low flow rate below the Iron Gate Dam on the Klamath River, the estimated salmon run size and diseases predictors. Scientists are estimating that this year will bring nearly 1.6 million returning adult salmon, which means about 300,000 chinook salmon could be in the fall run, according to a preseason report from the Pacific Fishery Management Council released last month. The council meets in Sacramento today to discuss the numbers. Salmon fishermen and Humboldt Bay Harbor Recreation and Conservation District Commissioner Aaron Newman said local fishing representatives are in Sacramento to urge the council to consider the large numbers while deciding on season limits. ?The whole situation is just so strange,? he said. ?Usually, we're having a situation where we're having not enough fish, and here we are with this crazy, crazy number.? Newman said there should be some measures in place to ensure that there is enough water for the volume of fish this year. Humboldt County 1st District Supervisor Jimmy Smith said the county has been waiting on the bureau to make a decision for a long time, and this year's run may be the best example of why it needs to happen. ?It's good to be prepared, to have water set aside, just in case they have an emergency,? he said. Contact Donna Tam at 441-0532 or dtam at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Mon Mar 5 10:42:37 2012 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 10:42:37 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard; Humboldt, Hoopa ask for more water to avoid possible fish kill Message-ID: <007e01ccfaff$bca6bc30$35f43490$@sisqtel.net> And how will this proposed extra water coordinate with the late August pulse flow (aka "ceremonial flow") that BOR sends down every year? Some of us in the upper watersheds are concerned that artificial pulse flows (in the Trinity or Klamath, for whatever reason) may prematurely attract the Chinook spawners to move upstream from the cooler ocean or estuary when upper Klamath River conditions are still too low and warm to support large numbers of spawners. ~Sari Sommarstrom Etna From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2012 8:38 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard; Humboldt, Hoopa ask for more water to avoid possible fish kill http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_20099526 By Donna Tam Humboldt County officials and the Hoopa Valley Tribe are saying a fish kill on the Klamath is possible this year if the government doesn't release more water from the Trinity River. The Hoopa Valley Tribal Council sent a letter to the U.S. Department of the Interior and the governor's office last week asking for action from the Bureau of Reclamation to establish the county's right to no less than 50,000 acre-feet of the Trinity's water. In 2002, federal officials overrode the recommendations of their own scientists and decided to divert more water to farmers and residents of Southern California, which led to an unprecedented fish kill in the Klamath River. Although tribal and county governments have been asking for the right for years, this year's abundance of returning chinook salmon and what the tribe says are historically low water levels may bolster the discussion. "The combination of low water leaves and high fish populations could produce conditions similar to those that led to the devastating fish kill in the Lower Klamath River that occurred in October 2002. We urge you to take immediate action to prevent that kind of outcome in the fall of 2012," the tribe's letter said. Brian Person, the area manager for the Bureau of Reclamation's Northern California Area Office, acknowledged that this year has been a subpar year for rainfall, but it's still too soon to tell if a fish kill will happen. "The hydrology has been abysmal, _____ _____ but we still have some precipitation months left," he said Friday. "A large part of what drives this system and drives the run-off is snow melt." Humboldt County 5th District Supervisor Ryan Sundberg said the county is working on its own letter urging action while continuing to monitor the weather. The board expects to review a draft in a couple of weeks, he said. "There's a huge, huge rush of fish this year with not a lot of rain so far and not a lot of snow pack," Sundberg said. "We want to make sure the Bureau of Reclamation will release water." According to the Hoopa Valley Tribe's letter, fisheries scientists developed criteria for the release of water from the Trinity, including a forecasted fish run in excess of the historic average run of 110,000 adult fall chinook salmon from 1981 to 2003. "The 2012 forecast is three times that threshold," the letter said, adding that the release criteria refined in 2010 need to be revised again for this year. Person said the criteria's revision is ongoing. He said the key criteria are a low flow rate below the Iron Gate Dam on the Klamath River, the estimated salmon run size and diseases predictors. Scientists are estimating that this year will bring nearly 1.6 million returning adult salmon, which means about 300,000 chinook salmon could be in the fall run, according to a preseason report from the Pacific Fishery Management Council released last month. The council meets in Sacramento today to discuss the numbers. Salmon fishermen and Humboldt Bay Harbor Recreation and Conservation District Commissioner Aaron Newman said local fishing representatives are in Sacramento to urge the council to consider the large numbers while deciding on season limits. "The whole situation is just so strange," he said. "Usually, we're having a situation where we're having not enough fish, and here we are with this crazy, crazy number." Newman said there should be some measures in place to ensure that there is enough water for the volume of fish this year. Humboldt County 1st District Supervisor Jimmy Smith said the county has been waiting on the bureau to make a decision for a long time, and this year's run may be the best example of why it needs to happen. "It's good to be prepared, to have water set aside, just in case they have an emergency," he said. Contact Donna Tam at 441-0532 or dtam at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Mar 5 11:58:33 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 11:58:33 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] EA/FONSI from 2003 for Trinity fall flows In-Reply-To: <007e01ccfaff$bca6bc30$35f43490$@sisqtel.net> References: <007e01ccfaff$bca6bc30$35f43490$@sisqtel.net> Message-ID: There was a Finding of No Significant Impact in 2003 for similar flows. I found it and have attached it for your reading pleasure. There is a part of the document where they say that the California Dept. of Fish and Game has said that straying is not a problem. I did a search for the word "straying." Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org On Mar 5, 2012, at 10:42 AM, Sari Sommarstrom wrote: And how will this proposed extra water coordinate with the late August pulse flow (aka ?ceremonial flow?) that BOR sends down every year? Some of us in the upper watersheds are concerned that artificial pulse flows (in the Trinity or Klamath, for whatever reason) may prematurely attract the Chinook spawners to move upstream from the cooler ocean or estuary when upper Klamath River conditions are still too low and warm to support large numbers of spawners. ~Sari Sommarstrom Etna From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2012 8:38 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard; Humboldt, Hoopa ask for more water to avoid possible fish kill http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_20099526 By Donna Tam Humboldt County officials and the Hoopa Valley Tribe are saying a fish kill on the Klamath is possible this year if the government doesn't release more water from the Trinity River. The Hoopa Valley Tribal Council sent a letter to the U.S. Department of the Interior and the governor's office last week asking for action from the Bureau of Reclamation to establish the county's right to no less than 50,000 acre-feet of the Trinity's water. In 2002, federal officials overrode the recommendations of their own scientists and decided to divert more water to farmers and residents of Southern California, which led to an unprecedented fish kill in the Klamath River. Although tribal and county governments have been asking for the right for years, this year's abundance of returning chinook salmon and what the tribe says are historically low water levels may bolster the discussion. ?The combination of low water leaves and high fish populations could produce conditions similar to those that led to the devastating fish kill in the Lower Klamath River that occurred in October 2002. We urge you to take immediate action to prevent that kind of outcome in the fall of 2012,? the tribe's letter said. Brian Person, the area manager for the Bureau of Reclamation's Northern California Area Office, acknowledged that this year has been a subpar year for rainfall, but it's still too soon to tell if a fish kill will happen. ?The hydrology has been abysmal, but we still have some precipitation months left,? he said Friday. ?A large part of what drives this system and drives the run-off is snow melt.? Humboldt County 5th District Supervisor Ryan Sundberg said the county is working on its own letter urging action while continuing to monitor the weather. The board expects to review a draft in a couple of weeks, he said. ?There's a huge, huge rush of fish this year with not a lot of rain so far and not a lot of snow pack,? Sundberg said. ?We want to make sure the Bureau of Reclamation will release water.? According to the Hoopa Valley Tribe's letter, fisheries scientists developed criteria for the release of water from the Trinity, including a forecasted fish run in excess of the historic average run of 110,000 adult fall chinook salmon from 1981 to 2003. ?The 2012 forecast is three times that threshold,? the letter said, adding that the release criteria refined in 2010 need to be revised again for this year. Person said the criteria's revision is ongoing. He said the key criteria are a low flow rate below the Iron Gate Dam on the Klamath River, the estimated salmon run size and diseases predictors. Scientists are estimating that this year will bring nearly 1.6 million returning adult salmon, which means about 300,000 chinook salmon could be in the fall run, according to a preseason report from the Pacific Fishery Management Council released last month. The council meets in Sacramento today to discuss the numbers. Salmon fishermen and Humboldt Bay Harbor Recreation and Conservation District Commissioner Aaron Newman said local fishing representatives are in Sacramento to urge the council to consider the large numbers while deciding on season limits. ?The whole situation is just so strange,? he said. ?Usually, we're having a situation where we're having not enough fish, and here we are with this crazy, crazy number.? Newman said there should be some measures in place to ensure that there is enough water for the volume of fish this year. Humboldt County 1st District Supervisor Jimmy Smith said the county has been waiting on the bureau to make a decision for a long time, and this year's run may be the best example of why it needs to happen. ?It's good to be prepared, to have water set aside, just in case they have an emergency,? he said. Contact Donna Tam at 441-0532 or dtam at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: EA_for Fall_Flows_20Aug2003_final.doc Type: application/msword Size: 207872 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Mar 7 10:17:04 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 10:17:04 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] TRRP Response to Questions from December Junction City meeting Message-ID: I happened to come across this document second hand. It is from the Trinity River Restoration Program through the Trinity County Resource Conservation District and it attempts to answer public questions asked at an early December meeting at the North Fork Grange in Junction City. Even though I wasn't at the meeting, I find the document interesting and thought that others who were not sent this document would also find it enlightening. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRRP Responses to JC 12.07.2011 Outreach_Final_wcover.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 195423 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- From tstokely at att.net Thu Mar 8 09:32:20 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 09:32:20 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle- Fishery experts forecast banner salmon season Message-ID: <753A1B22-30F8-48D1-94E9-E3B2E8986EC9@att.net> Fishery experts forecast banner salmon season Peter Fimrite Thursday, March 8, 2012 The salmon will be jumping off the coast of California this summer and, for the first time in years, anglers will be allowed to snag them in large numbers for placement on dinner tables, fishery managers announced Wednesday. There are more chinook salmon swimming in the ocean right now than anyone has seen since at least 2005, according to projections released by biologists during the annual weeklong industry fret-fest that decides how many salmon are available to be reeled in along the West Coast. Nobody knows for sure why there is a revival, but experts have cited several possibilities, including a two-year ban on fishing that ended last year, improved ocean conditions, abundant precipitation in 2011 and limits on water diversions. The king salmon bonanza prompted the Pacific Fishery Management Council, which advises the federal government on how to manage local fish populations, to outline a series of options for commercial fishermen that all provide ample sport and commercial fishing throughout the spring and summer. "We're going to have some good fishing this year thanks to a combination of better water management and a little help from Mother Nature," said Victor Gonella, president of the Golden Gate Salmon Association, a coalition of fishermen, environmentalists, restaurants and industry representatives. "Consumers can look forward to some of the best food on Earth - wild salmon, coming to a dinner plate near them soon." The 14-member fishery council, made up of fishermen, biologists and industry representatives from California, Oregon, Washington and Idaho, meets at this time every year to plan the fishing season. promising numbers The council's experts said there are 820,000 chinook in the ocean now preparing to return to the Sacramento River system to lay eggs next fall. Another 1.6 million chinook from the Klamath River are out there, according to the estimates - one of the largest populations of salmon on record. "That is really good news. Those are really big numbers," said Harry Morse, a spokesman for the California Department of Fish and Game, which has a representative on the Fishery Management Council. "Everybody is looking at it in a very positive light." The abundance forecasts are based largely on the percentage of 2-year-old salmon that return early to the river system. A large number of these so-called jacks are usually a good indication of how many fully grown fish will return the next year. King salmon generally return three years later to spawn at the spot where they were hatched. fish tales The problem is that projections have been wrong before, including last year. Fisheries experts estimated that there were 730,000 salmon in the ocean in 2011. They predicted 333,000 salmon would return to spawn in the Sacramento River in the fall, but only 114,741 showed up. "They were off by a substantial amount," Morse said. "Once the salmon hit the ocean it becomes very hard to predict what is going to happen. It's not an exact science." The council nevertheless outlined three fishing options based on those projections, all of which will give anglers off the California coast significant time to haul in chinook from April through at least October. The options would generally begin the commercial fishing season April 7 in the ocean around Humboldt County, San Francisco,Monterey and all the way to the Mexican border. The season would end in October or November, depending on which option is eventually chosen. The regulations would require all salmon that are caught to be at least 20 inches long. The fishing season in the Klamath River zone would run from May through September. No fishing for coho salmon would be allowed south of the Oregon border. Central Valley chinook, which come from the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers and their tributaries, have historically made up the bulk of the salmon that fishermen catch along the California coast. spawning peak At the species' spawning peak in the river system, an estimated 769,868 fish laid eggs in 2002. Then, in 2008, the salmon populations suddenly plummeted. That year, commercial fishing was banned off the coasts of California and Oregon. In 2009, only 39,500 fall-run chinook returned to spawn in the Sacramento, the worst showing on record. That year highlighted the worst three-year period in the watershed since records were first compiled in the 1970s, biologists said. The council is expected to recommend one of the three options to the National Marine Fisheries Service within a month. Peter Fimrite is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. pfimrite at sfchronicle.com http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/03/08/MN471NHHMF.DTL This article appeared on page A - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Mar 8 09:38:29 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 09:38:29 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Capital Press- Interior to signal preference on Klamath dams Message-ID: <8AC02D82-2F86-445C-92A0-BED1276D3A47@att.net> Interior to signal preference on Klamath dams http://www.capitalpress.com/content/TH-klamath-follow-up-w-infobox-030912 By TIM HEARDEN Capital Press YREKA, Calif. - Though U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar won't be making a formal determination on the Klamath dam removal project, the government will still tip its hand later this spring. Work is continuing on a final environmental document that will choose a "preferred alternative" among six options, which range from doing nothing to fully dismantling the four dams in Southern Oregon and Northern California. In addition, an overview report on the scientific studies unveiled last fall are undergoing a peer review. The final environmental analysis and scientific report will be out this spring, Salazar's office indicated last week. After public and written comments were taken on the environmental documents last fall, "now what we do is look at all the comments and provide responses to the comments," said Matthew Baun, a spokesman for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service here. Salazar will choose from among five alternatives in the environmental impact statement, which include full removal of all the dams; partial removal while leaving some structures behind; removing only two of the four dams; and installing fish passages around the dams, Baun said. The document will provide a clue of Salazar's intentions even though he said he would not be able to make a formal determination by a March 31 deadline. He cited several reasons, including that Congress has not yet passed an authorization bill. Meanwhile, critics of the dam removal proposal are focusing on a complaint letter sent by former U.S. Bureau of Reclamation science adviser Paul Houser, who claims he was fired after raising concerns about how his superiors were characterizing the draft environmental documents and scientific studies to the public. In a Feb. 24 letter to the Interior Department's executive secretariat and regulatory affairs office, Houser alleged officials wrote a summary and news release to elicit support for dam removal while downplaying negative remarks from scientists that were in the full reports. "My disclosure was clearly made to people who had authority to fix the press release ... and people who had influence on the Secretarial decision process," Houser wrote. "My disclosure was never directly addressed, and supervisors have used my probationary status to enact reprisal for the disclosure culminating in the termination of my employment ..." Houser, who is a professor at George Mason University in Virginia, did not return a call to his office seeking comment. Government officials noted that Houser's complaints had to do with how the environmental analysis and scientific studies were presented to the public, not the documents themselves. Interior spokeswoman Kate Kelly said Houser's allegations are being reviewed as called for under the department's scientific integrity policy. "Interior has established a strong scientific, public input and peer review process that is guiding the studies that will lead to a decision" on the dams, she told the Capital Press in an e-mail. Online Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement studies and EIS/EIR: http://klamathrestoration.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Thu Mar 8 10:15:12 2012 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 10:15:12 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Abundant Sacramento and Klamath salmon drive season options In-Reply-To: <753A1B22-30F8-48D1-94E9-E3B2E8986EC9@att.net> References: <753A1B22-30F8-48D1-94E9-E3B2E8986EC9@att.net> Message-ID: <36EC4A81-6D2A-4970-A467-2E35D5FA4CF4@fishsniffer.com> http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2012/03/08/abundant-sacramento- and-klamath-salmon-drive-season-options/ http://www.fishsniffer.com/content/1719-abundant-sacramento-klamath- salmon-drive-season-options.html In the Klamath River, biologists are forecasting four times more salmon than last year ? and an astounding 15 times more than in 2006, according to the PFMC. The ocean salmon population is estimated to be 1.6 million adult Klamath River fall Chinook, compared to last year?s forecast of 371,100. Photo of the Pacific Fishery Management Council meeting to develop season options courtesy of the PFMC. ? 08_ma.jpg Abundant Sacramento and Klamath salmon drive season options by Dan Bacher The Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) at its meeting in Sacramento on March 7, encouraged by predictions of plentiful salmon returns along the West Coast, released three alternatives for ocean salmon fisheries including those based on Sacramento and Klamath River stocks. In all three alternatives, the recreational ocean salmon season is slated to open on April 7 in the Fort Bragg, San Francisco and Monterey areas, from Horse Mountain to the U.S./Mexico Border. There are three opening date alternatives ? May 1, May 12 and May 26 ? for the Oregon and California Klamath Management Zones. After hearing public comment on the alternatives, the Council will make a final recommendation at their next meeting in Seattle on April 1-6. ?It is great to see such a nice rebound for California salmon populations and the prospect of good fishing in 2012,? said Council chairman Dan Wolford. ?Anglers should be be very happy about the salmon season alternatives released Wednesday,? said Craig Stone, owner of the Emeryville Sportfishing Center and a member of the Salmon Advisory Subpanel of the PFMC. ?The salmon population is in a lot better shape than it was last year or two years ago. If the pre-season projections are close to the actual numbers of fish that return to spawn, it should be a banner year also on the Sacramento and Klamath rivers.? Salmon fisheries in California and Oregon look particularly promising, due primarily to ?good river conditions and excellent ocean conditions for salmon,? according to a statement from the PFMC. Sacramento, Klamath, and Rogue River Chinook returns are expected to be significantly higher than during the past several years, and Oregon Coast coho also have a strong forecast. However, these fishery alternatives are necessarily constrained to protect Endangered Species Act-listed Sacramento River winter Chinook, now in alarming decline, and Columbia River coho stocks. North of Cape Falcon, returns look similar to last year. Klamath River expected to see record salmon return In the Klamath River, biologists are forecasting four times more salmon than last year ? and an astounding 15 times more than in 2006, according to the PFMC. The ocean salmon population is estimated to be 1.6 million adult Klamath River fall Chinook, compared to last year?s forecast of 371,100. This estimate is based largely on the 85,840 two-year-old salmon (jacks) that returned to the Klamath in 2011. This is the highest number of jacks to return since at least 1978, when recordkeeping began. ?Sacramento stocks are also looking better, with a conservative forecast of ocean abundance of 819,400 Sacramento River fall Chinook, up from 729,000 last year,? the PFMC said. ?Adult spawners in the Sacramento system are expected to be at least 436,000. The spawning escapement objective is 122,000 ? 180,000 adult spawners, and the 2012 annual catch limit is at least 245,820 spawners.? The PFMC said these returns are particularly important when seen in the context of the last several years, since Klamath and Sacramento stocks drive ocean fishing seasons off California and Oregon. In 2008 and 2009, poor Sacramento returns, spurred by a ?Perfect Storm? of record water exports out of the California Delta, poor ocean conditions and bad federal and state water management, led to the largest fishery closures on record. In 2010, returns improved, allowing limited commercial fishing season off California. A total of 200,460 chinook salmon, including 114,741 adults and 85,719 jacks, returned to the Sacramento, Feather and American rivers and their tributaries in the fall of 2011. This number includes both hatchery and naturally spawning fish. The Feather River saw the largest number of fish, 84,518 fish, including 53,845 adults and 30,673 jacks. The upper Sacramento saw a total of 77,942 fish, including 39,778 adults and 38,164 jacks, while the American River reported 38,000 salmon, including 21,118 adults and 7,919 jacks. Winter run and spring chinooks continue to decline While the fall run chinook has rebounded, the Sacramento River winter run chinook salmon, an endangered species under the state and federal Endangered Species Acts, declined to its lowest level in the past 10 years in 2011, due to record water exports out of the California Delta and declining water quality. Only 637 adults and 187 jacks, a total of 825 fish, came back to the Sacramento to spawn in 2011. This estimate is derived from a carcass survey conducted on the upper Sacramento River and includes winter Chinook captured in the Keswick trap, which provides broodstock to Livingston Stone National Fish Hatchery. ?For the better part of three years during the fall run collapse, there was little or no commercial and recreational fishing for salmon,? emphasized Dick Pool, president of Water for Fish. ?You have to look hard at the environmental and habitat factors for the winter run and other runs during that period of time. We know there are many problems with salmon habitat in the Delta and upper river, flows, temperatures and other factors that these fish have deal with to survival.? The spring chinook run also struggles to survive. Escapement of spring Chinook to the Sacramento River system in 2011 totaled 7,400 fish (jacks and adults), most of which (an estimated 5,431 fish) returned to upper Sacramento River tributaries; the remaining 1,969 fish returned to the Feather River Hatchery. While the fall run chinook abundance forecasts for the Sacramento and Klamath rivers look very promising, the runs of both rivers are threatened by the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the peripheral canal. A coalition of Delta residents, fishermen, Indian Tribes, environmentalists and family farmers is opposing the peripheral canal?s construction because it would lead to the extinction of native Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail, green sturgeon, striped bass and southern resident killer whales, which feed upon salmon. The peripheral canal also threatens the salmon runs of the Trinity River, the Klamath?s largest tributary, because much of the water to be delivered through the canal is expected to come from the Trinity via Whiskeytown Reservoir. Summary of sport and commercial seasons: Ocean Chinook recreational fishing alternatives in the Brookings/ Crescent City/Eureka area open in May and continue into September. California ocean sport fishing alternatives generally start April 7 and run through October or November from Fort Bragg south, but size limits vary in the San Francisco and Monterey areas to protect ESA- listed Sacramento winter-run Chinook. California commercial fishing alternatives in Crescent City/Eureka have quota fisheries in late September or are closed. In Fort Bragg, commercial alternatives open in July or August and run through September. In the San Francisco and Monterey areas, alternatives open May 1 and run through September with some closures in June. Along the south- central coast, season alternatives are open from May 1 through September 30. The Council also included alternatives to collect genetic stock identification samples from research fisheries in closed times and areas. All fish caught in research fisheries would have to be released unharmed after collection of biological samples. Public hearings to receive input on the alternatives are scheduled for March 26 in Westport, Washington and Coos Bay, Oregon; and for March 27 in Eureka, California. The Council will consult with scientists, hear public comment, and revise preliminary decisions until it chooses a final alternative at its meeting during the week of April 1 in Seattle, Washington. At its April 1-6 meeting in Seattle, the Council will narrow these options to a single season recommendation to be forwarded to National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for their final approval before May 1. All Council meetings are open to the public, and audio is streamed online (for information on how to hear the online audio, go to http:// tinyurl.com/7vvxuvg. For more information, go to: ? Pacific Fishery Management Council: http://www.pcouncil.org ? Options for 2012 salmon management will be posted on the Council website (link above) this evening. ? Geographical points used in salmon management: http:// www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/geosalmon1.pdf ? Explanation of common terms used in salmon management: http:// www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/com_terms_salmon.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 08_ma.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 69837 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Mar 8 15:50:39 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 15:50:39 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Two_Rivers_Tribune-_Whistleblower_?= =?windows-1252?q?Says_Interior_=93Spun=94_Science_on_Klamath_Dam_Removal?= Message-ID: All, I got this from Allie Hostler, Editor of the Two Rivers Tribune. Their website is being changed, so there aren't any new articles being posted on it at this time but I am told they will be up an running again soon. This article has a lot more detail than other articles I've seen on this issue. You can reach Allie Hostler at allieehostler at yahoo.com. Tom Stokely ********************************************** Whistleblower Says Interior ?Spun? Science on Klamath Dam Removal By Allie Hostler, Two Rivers Tribune Published March 6, 2012 A scientific integrity officer with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation filed a whistle-blower complaint claiming he was fired after he questioned the ?biased summarization of key scientific conclusions? in messages intended for the public and the Secretary of Interior about Klamath River dam removal. On Sept. 15, 2011, Dr. Paul Houser expressed concern about the integrity of a draft press release about the environmental analysis for removing the Klamath River dams. He also expressed concern verbally about the scientific integrity of the larger Klamath River dam removal Secretarial Determination process. Houser is not questioning the integrity of the science itself, rather the way it was ?spun? by the Department of Interior (DOI) to meet the outcome desired by the Secretary of Interior, Ken Salazar. ?I hadn?t intended on this allegation going public,? Houser told the Two Rivers Tribune. ?But since it has, I will talk and be true to the story.? Houser was fired on February 10 in what he describes as ?systematic reprisal.? His whistle-blower complaint was filed with the Office of the Executive Secretariat and Regulatory Affairs on Feb. 24, 2012 just three days before Salazar announced more delays to the Klamath dam removal process. According to the Klamath Settlements Salazar was due to make a decision whether or not dam removal is in the best interest of the public by March 31 of this year. Salazar?s statement blames federal lawmakers for not approving legislation that would authorize the settlements and his decision. In February of 2009 Salazar gave a speech at the Klamath Settlement signing ceremony in Salem, Ore., proclaiming the DOI?s support for dam removal under the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA) and the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA). Houser said the Department of Interior?the government arm that oversees the Bureau of Reclamation and the Bureau of Indian Affairs among other agencies?was motivated by Secretary Salazar?s publicly stated intention to issue a Secretarial Determination in favor of removing four dams on the Klamath River. ?The Department of Interior has likely followed a course of action to construct such an outcome,? Houser said. ?In 2009, Secretary Salazar stated that the proposal to remove the Klamath River dams ?will not fail.? This intention has motivated DOI officials to ?spin? or incompletely report the scientific results toward a more optimistic scientific story that supports dam removal.? Houser, a Ph.D. hydrologist who is also an adjunct professor at George Mason University in Virginia, believes the DOI?s Scientific Integrity Policy (305 DM 3) was crafted in good faith and that those who built it had genuine, noble intentions uncluttered by governmental politics. ?I?m certainly concerned about scientific integrity in the Department, but I?m not going to discount the entire process,? Houser said. ?The scientific integrity policy sometimes interferes with other policy that the Department has already decided to follow. Does the science support decisions, or does science help to shape decisions that have already been made?? DOI spokeswoman Kate Kelly said the complaint is currently under review. Houser?s complaint details two specific allegations. IN the first allegation, Houser says the Summary of Key Conclusions: Draft EIS/EIR and Related Scientific/Technical Reports intentionally distorts and presents a biased view of the Klamath River dam removal benefits. ?It intends to present only the positive, without the uncertainties or negatives,? Houser wrote in his complaint. He goes on to cite five points, the first being climate change. ?Climate changes are projected to play an important role in fish recovery according to the Klamath science reports, but climate was never mentioned in the summary,? he wrote. The second relates to recovery rates being projected at 81.4 percent, but he says that recovery rate was based on nine contingencies that were not mentioned in the summary. ?Upper Klamath Lake and Keno Reservoir water quality issues; reduction in disease; enabling free migration to the upper basin; hatchery salmon do not overwhelm spawning grounds; predation is sufficiently low; climate change; small reductions in fall flows; and no long-term dam removal impacts,? Houser listed. ?Neglecting to report on these contingencies provides the public and the Secretary with a falsified and incomplete scientific summary.? The third relates to coho salmon reclaiming 68 miles of habitat. Houser says the summary distorts and falsifies the science by omitting information that was provided in the Expert Panel science reports that claim, ?The difference between the proposed action[dam removal] and the current conditions [no change in current operations] is expected to be small, especially in the short term (0-10 years after dam removal).? He describes a similar scenario about dam removal and its purported impact on reducing salmon diseases. He points to an excerpt from the Klamath River Expert Panel Science Report that states, ?Although several aspects of the proposed action [dam removal] could lead to a reduction in disease-related mortality, uncertainty about these aspects is very high.? ?The summary also spins an optimistic outlook for Steelhead trout, providing access to 420 miles of historical habitat,? Houser wrote in his complaint. ?However, the April 25, 2011 ?Final Report?states this success would be dependent on effective implementation of the proposed and related actions [e.g. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)]; whereas ineffective implementation would result in no detectable response. Houser?s second allegation involves a press release that he was asked to review by a colleague. The press release was purportedly written by a lead Interior attorney working on the Klamath Settlements, John Bezdek. Bezdek?s role in the Klamath Secretarial Determination process as well as his role in drafting statements for the press and public are called into question, by not only Houser, but other scientists and press officials working within the DOI. After calling into question the summary of the Klamath studies and a press release, Houser emails several colleagues to ask if they too had similar feelings about the bias of how information was presented to the public. He received several responses. Two scientists and two press officials said they agreed that summary and associated press release were slanted in a way that promotes the Department of Interior?s desired outcome. A subsequent email from Christine Karas, the Deputy Area Manager of the Bureau of Reclamation?s Klamath Area Office, softly scolded Houser for using email as a vehicle to discuss his disclosure about the press release and summary. A copy of the email, along with 29 more attachments was included with Houser?s complaint. ?As degreed government employees who may be called as expert witnesses, please carefully consider the depth of familiarity you have with the body of science surrounding Klamath dam removal before creating discoverable records of your personal opinions,? Kara wrote. Kelly said Interior will not comment on personnel matters due to privacy concerns. ?It is important to note that nobody is questioning the integrity of the science itself, and nobody is questioning the fact that all of the studies, reports, and data are available for anyone and everyone to see, review, and draw their own conclusions,? Kelly said. ?All the scientific and technical reports to date underwent a technical review process, and the majority of these reports underwent a peer review by independent scientists. We have made the process as transparent as possible, with numerous opportunities for the public and outside technical experts to offer comments, ideas and recommendations for science directions or approaches.? Interior stands by the science saying the science is high quality and technically reviewed by independent reviewers. But, that?s not what Houser?s complaint is about. ?I was concerned that if the department was summarizing the science in a biased manner, that the same bias may infuse the March 2012 Secretarial Determination,? Houser said. ?Further, I stated that I was not for or against the Secretarial determination outcome, but rather was concerned that the science be reported accurately with critical uncertainties and caveats, so that the Secretarial Determination can be made without scientific bias.? -END- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Mar 8 15:58:08 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 15:58:08 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- Proposed Suction Dredging Regs Causing a Stir Message-ID: Proposed Suction Dredging Regs Causing a Stir By Malcolm Terence, Two Rivers Tribune Contributing Writer Published March 6, 2012 The state?s new round of proposed regulations for suction dredging for gold is getting mixed reviews by the stakeholders. The Karuk Tribe, which has opposed dredging because of harm to fish and water quality, says they are an improvement in every way, but still inadequate. And the Western Mining Alliance (WMA) says ?this is the end of suction dredging in the state of California.? The dredges, currently banned by legislation until June 30, 2016, operate as floating vacuum cleaners that use a gas-powered pump to suck up gravel and cobble in a river or stream and run it through a sluice box that winnows out any gold. At its height, dredgers lined up close together in large numbers in places like the Salmon River where their operations triggered concerns about the effects on dwindling aquatic populations. The WMA website for January said that miners need to focus on overturning two specific state laws?SB670 and AB120?that block continued mining. The group wrote that 2011 ?was the year that propaganda, mistruths, and extreme environmentalism threw us off the rivers.? The group appealed to their members? support, a litigation strategy, by each donating $250 to fund an hour of lawyer time. The WMA website said claim holders had been slow to respond to an appeal from People for Public Land for information about individual claims. Only a few claim holders had responded so far. In their detailed response to the Department of Fish and Game (DFG), the mining advocates challenged several specific regulations including the 4 inch maximum nozzle size, the ban on dredging within 3 feet from a channel bank, and the requirement that no dredge operate within 500 feet of another. They claim a part of the state?s environmental review shows that sediment settles within 300 feet and that the turbidity isn?t harmful to fish, anyway. They also objected to a requirement that a containment system be used so fuel and oil don?t enter the river and said fuel isn?t spilled unless a dredge is flipped, an event that would submerge the containment system anyway. And they complained that there was no basis for the issuance limit in the new regulations of only 1,500 permits statewide, a figure that they said would not allow one permit for every 10 claim holders. The 1,500-permit limit was actually one of the best improvements in the new regulations, according to Craig Tucker, Klamath coordinator for the Karuk Tribe since 2004. He also praised the 500-foot separation between dredges. ?The regs are an improvement in almost every way but they are still unacceptable,? Tucker wrote in an e-mail to the Two Rivers Tribune. He pointed out that they still allow dredges in the main stem of the Salmon River which is refuge of the Klamath?s last spring Chinook, and the Scott and Shasta Rivers which are habitat for the threatened coho salmon. The regulations do ban dredges in the lowest 8 miles of the main stem Salmon River as well as many other locations in the Klamath Basin. They include a ban on dredging anything within a 500-foot radius of where a stream enters a river. These stretches of cold-water refugia often fill with migrating fish as the main river water warms in late summer and early fall. One Salmon River resident, a member of the Karuk Tribe, who lives near such an area, praised that regulation and said ?Good. I won?t have to have miners threaten to kick my butt when I tell them they shouldn?t mine there.? Tucker, a biochemist, challenged the claims of mining advocates that the dredges did not stir up old mercury deposits and said ?You?re welcome to your own opinion but not your own facts. Studies by California Water Quality Control Board specifically measuring the concentrations of suspended mercury above and below an operating dredge show that dredging dramatically increases the concentrations of this highly toxic heavy metal in the river. Miners actually participated in the study and they are part of the CEQA record. Problem is the Department of Fish and Game claim their job is not to regulate water quality. Fish and Game basically leave it up to the water board to regulate dredging to prevent the mercury problem and the water board does not have law enforcement personnel.? Tucker reiterated that the regulations are an improvement but still not adequate. ?Until Fish and Game can come up with regulations that don't jeopardize the survival of salmon, lamprey, mussels, and water quality, the Karuk Tribe will continue this fight,? he said. Another condition of AB 120 is that the costs of a permit should fully recover all the costs to the DFG related to administration of dredging. Such a change would need to be approved by the legislature. Pro-dredging advocates said that such a fee might be prohibitive. Dave McCracken, owner of the New 49ers recreational mining business in Happy Camp could not respond to telephone calls because he was out of the country, and also did not respond to repeated e-mailed interview questions from Two Rivers Tribune. He has postings on the issue on his website at http://www.goldgold.com . The actual regulations are available at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/suctiondredge/. The website for the Western Mining Alliance is http://westernminingalliance.org/. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bhill at igc.org Thu Mar 8 18:31:29 2012 From: bhill at igc.org (Brian Hill) Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 18:31:29 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- Proposed Suction Dredging Regs Causing a Stir In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <009401ccfd9c$eab99c60$c02cd520$@org> Suction dredges are designed to remove heavy metals, esp., gold and platinum, from waterways. Because mercury and lead are almost as heavy as gold, suction dredges REMOVE mercury and lead from waterways along with gold and other heavy metals. This blatant fact known to every dredge miner is carefully circumvented by those opposed to small stream miners. Doesn't it make sense that removing mercury from waterways improves the health of the waterway? A test of whether dredging stirs up or removes mercury from waterways would be very simple to demostrate. Brian Hill From: env-trinity-bounces+bhill=igc.org at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces+bhill=igc.org at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2012 3:58 PM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- Proposed Suction Dredging Regs Causing a Stir Proposed Suction Dredging Regs Causing a Stir By Malcolm Terence, Two Rivers Tribune Contributing Writer Published March 6, 2012 The state's new round of proposed regulations for suction dredging for gold is getting mixed reviews by the stakeholders. The Karuk Tribe, which has opposed dredging because of harm to fish and water quality, says they are an improvement in every way, but still inadequate. And the Western Mining Alliance (WMA) says "this is the end of suction dredging in the state of California." The dredges, currently banned by legislation until June 30, 2016, operate as floating vacuum cleaners that use a gas-powered pump to suck up gravel and cobble in a river or stream and run it through a sluice box that winnows out any gold. At its height, dredgers lined up close together in large numbers in places like the Salmon River where their operations triggered concerns about the effects on dwindling aquatic populations. The WMA website for January said that miners need to focus on overturning two specific state laws-SB670 and AB120-that block continued mining. The group wrote that 2011 "was the year that propaganda, mistruths, and extreme environmentalism threw us off the rivers." The group appealed to their members' support, a litigation strategy, by each donating $250 to fund an hour of lawyer time. The WMA website said claim holders had been slow to respond to an appeal from People for Public Land for information about individual claims. Only a few claim holders had responded so far. In their detailed response to the Department of Fish and Game (DFG), the mining advocates challenged several specific regulations including the 4 inch maximum nozzle size, the ban on dredging within 3 feet from a channel bank, and the requirement that no dredge operate within 500 feet of another. They claim a part of the state's environmental review shows that sediment settles within 300 feet and that the turbidity isn't harmful to fish, anyway. They also objected to a requirement that a containment system be used so fuel and oil don't enter the river and said fuel isn't spilled unless a dredge is flipped, an event that would submerge the containment system anyway. And they complained that there was no basis for the issuance limit in the new regulations of only 1,500 permits statewide, a figure that they said would not allow one permit for every 10 claim holders. The 1,500-permit limit was actually one of the best improvements in the new regulations, according to Craig Tucker, Klamath coordinator for the Karuk Tribe since 2004. He also praised the 500-foot separation between dredges. "The regs are an improvement in almost every way but they are still unacceptable," Tucker wrote in an e-mail to the Two Rivers Tribune. He pointed out that they still allow dredges in the main stem of the Salmon River which is refuge of the Klamath's last spring Chinook, and the Scott and Shasta Rivers which are habitat for the threatened coho salmon. The regulations do ban dredges in the lowest 8 miles of the main stem Salmon River as well as many other locations in the Klamath Basin. They include a ban on dredging anything within a 500-foot radius of where a stream enters a river. These stretches of cold-water refugia often fill with migrating fish as the main river water warms in late summer and early fall. One Salmon River resident, a member of the Karuk Tribe, who lives near such an area, praised that regulation and said "Good. I won't have to have miners threaten to kick my butt when I tell them they shouldn't mine there." Tucker, a biochemist, challenged the claims of mining advocates that the dredges did not stir up old mercury deposits and said "You're welcome to your own opinion but not your own facts. Studies by California Water Quality Control Board specifically measuring the concentrations of suspended mercury above and below an operating dredge show that dredging dramatically increases the concentrations of this highly toxic heavy metal in the river. Miners actually participated in the study and they are part of the CEQA record. Problem is the Department of Fish and Game claim their job is not to regulate water quality. Fish and Game basically leave it up to the water board to regulate dredging to prevent the mercury problem and the water board does not have law enforcement personnel." Tucker reiterated that the regulations are an improvement but still not adequate. "Until Fish and Game can come up with regulations that don't jeopardize the survival of salmon, lamprey, mussels, and water quality, the Karuk Tribe will continue this fight," he said. Another condition of AB 120 is that the costs of a permit should fully recover all the costs to the DFG related to administration of dredging. Such a change would need to be approved by the legislature. Pro-dredging advocates said that such a fee might be prohibitive. Dave McCracken, owner of the New 49ers recreational mining business in Happy Camp could not respond to telephone calls because he was out of the country, and also did not respond to repeated e-mailed interview questions from Two Rivers Tribune. He has postings on the issue on his website at http://www.goldgold.com . The actual regulations are available at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/suctiondredge/. The website for the Western Mining Alliance is http://westernminingalliance.org/. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Jay_Glase at nps.gov Fri Mar 9 07:12:12 2012 From: Jay_Glase at nps.gov (Jay_Glase at nps.gov) Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 09:12:12 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- Proposed Suction Dredging Regs Causing a Stir In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Tucker reiterated that the regulations are an improvement but still not adequate. ?Until Fish and Game can come up with regulations that don't jeopardize the survival of salmon, lamprey, mussels, and water quality, the Karuk Tribe will continue this fight,? he said. This line jumped out at me because of the mussel reference, which led me to find this website below - in case anyone else is interested, http://treesfoundation.org/publications/article-393 It's nice to see these fascinating animals getting some attention west of the Mississippi. And for those of you that think mussels aren't fascinating, check out a few videos from this site from missouri state university - mostly different genera than you'll find in that area, but still worth checking out http://unionid.missouristate.edu/ cheers, jay Jay Glase National Park Service Great Lakes Area Fishery Biologist 402-661-1512 Tom Stokely To Sent by: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca env-trinity-bounc .us es+jay_glase=nps. cc gov at velocipede.dc n.davis.ca.us Subject [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- Proposed Suction Dredging Regs 03/08/2012 05:58 Causing a Stir PM Proposed Suction Dredging Regs Causing a Stir By Malcolm Terence, Two Rivers Tribune Contributing Writer Published March 6, 2012 The state?s new round of proposed regulations for suction dredging for gold is getting mixed reviews by the stakeholders. The Karuk Tribe, which has opposed dredging because of harm to fish and water quality, says they are an improvement in every way, but still inadequate. And the Western Mining Alliance (WMA) says ?this is the end of suction dredging in the state of California.? The dredges, currently banned by legislation until June 30, 2016, operate as floating vacuum cleaners that use a gas-powered pump to suck up gravel and cobble in a river or stream and run it through a sluice box that winnows out any gold. At its height, dredgers lined up close together in large numbers in places like the Salmon River where their operations triggered concerns about the effects on dwindling aquatic populations. The WMA website for January said that miners need to focus on overturning two specific state laws?SB670 and AB120?that block continued mining. The group wrote that 2011 ?was the year that propaganda, mistruths, and extreme environmentalism threw us off the rivers.? The group appealed to their members? support, a litigation strategy, by each donating $250 to fund an hour of lawyer time. The WMA website said claim holders had been slow to respond to an appeal from People for Public Land for information about individual claims. Only a few claim holders had responded so far. In their detailed response to the Department of Fish and Game (DFG), the mining advocates challenged several specific regulations including the 4 inch maximum nozzle size, the ban on dredging within 3 feet from a channel bank, and the requirement that no dredge operate within 500 feet of another. They claim a part of the state?s environmental review shows that sediment settles within 300 feet and that the turbidity isn?t harmful to fish, anyway. They also objected to a requirement that a containment system be used so fuel and oil don?t enter the river and said fuel isn?t spilled unless a dredge is flipped, an event that would submerge the containment system anyway. And they complained that there was no basis for the issuance limit in the new regulations of only 1,500 permits statewide, a figure that they said would not allow one permit for every 10 claim holders. The 1,500-permit limit was actually one of the best improvements in the new regulations, according to Craig Tucker, Klamath coordinator for the Karuk Tribe since 2004. He also praised the 500-foot separation between dredges. ?The regs are an improvement in almost every way but they are still unacceptable,? Tucker wrote in an e-mail to the Two Rivers Tribune. He pointed out that they still allow dredges in the main stem of the Salmon River which is refuge of the Klamath?s last spring Chinook, and the Scott and Shasta Rivers which are habitat for the threatened coho salmon. The regulations do ban dredges in the lowest 8 miles of the main stem Salmon River as well as many other locations in the Klamath Basin. They include a ban on dredging anything within a 500-foot radius of where a stream enters a river. These stretches of cold-water refugia often fill with migrating fish as the main river water warms in late summer and early fall. One Salmon River resident, a member of the Karuk Tribe, who lives near such an area, praised that regulation and said ?Good. I won?t have to have miners threaten to kick my butt when I tell them they shouldn?t mine there.? Tucker, a biochemist, challenged the claims of mining advocates that the dredges did not stir up old mercury deposits and said ?You?re welcome to your own opinion but not your own facts. Studies by California Water Quality Control Board specifically measuring the concentrations of suspended mercury above and below an operating dredge show that dredging dramatically increases the concentrations of this highly toxic heavy metal in the river. Miners actually participated in the study and they are part of the CEQA record. Problem is the Department of Fish and Game claim their job is not to regulate water quality. Fish and Game basically leave it up to the water board to regulate dredging to prevent the mercury problem and the water board does not have law enforcement personnel.? Tucker reiterated that the regulations are an improvement but still not adequate. ?Until Fish and Game can come up with regulations that don't jeopardize the survival of salmon, lamprey, mussels, and water quality, the Karuk Tribe will continue this fight,? he said. Another condition of AB 120 is that the costs of a permit should fully recover all the costs to the DFG related to administration of dredging. Such a change would need to be approved by the legislature. Pro-dredging advocates said that such a fee might be prohibitive. Dave McCracken, owner of the New 49ers recreational mining business in Happy Camp could not respond to telephone calls because he was out of the country, and also did not respond to repeated e-mailed interview questions from Two Rivers Tribune. He has postings on the issue on his website at http://www.goldgold.com . The actual regulations are available at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/suctiondredge/. The website for the Western Mining Alliance is http://westernminingalliance.org/. _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity From bhill at igc.org Fri Mar 9 07:50:30 2012 From: bhill at igc.org (Brian Hill) Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 07:50:30 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Proposed Suction Dredging Regs In-Reply-To: <84df.65e9420a.3c8acf6f@aol.com> References: <84df.65e9420a.3c8acf6f@aol.com> Message-ID: <000001ccfe0c$6325dc30$29719490$@org> Thank you Glen for the documentation and very clear explanation. This is the first documentation I have seen regarding mercury and suction dredging. I hope the suction dredging community will spend time studying these reports, because, if the reports confirm the news article you reference, then it seems that suction dredging is a threat to waterways as suction dredge technology exists today. I will forward your information to the dredging community. Brian Hill From: FISH1IFR at aol.com [mailto:FISH1IFR at aol.com] Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2012 7:14 PM To: bhill at igc.org; env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Proposed Suction Dredging Regs In a message dated 3/8/2012 6:33:06 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, bhill at igc.org writes: Suction dredges are designed to remove heavy metals, esp., gold and platinum, from waterways. Because mercury and lead are almost as heavy as gold, suction dredges REMOVE mercury and lead from waterways along with gold and other heavy metals. This blatant fact known to every dredge miner is carefully circumvented by those opposed to small stream miners. Doesn't it make sense that removing mercury from waterways improves the health of the waterway? A test of whether dredging stirs up or removes mercury from waterways would be very simple to demostrate. Brian Hill Brian.... I know the above in an "article of faith" for suction dredge miners, and one of their great defensive talking points, but it is also dead wrong on the science. While the dredge might catch some otherwise dormant and sequestered subsurface mercury, it also stirs it up and methylates the rest (and likely a lot more than it catches), thus creating the most water soluble (and toxic to humans and fish) chemical compounds of mercury known. See, for instance, the USGS study Mercury contamination in California?s South Yuba River, available at: http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2686 In short, the tests have been done, in many streams under varying conditions, and the conclusion is inescapable that suction dredging releases otherwise sequestered river bottom mercury that constitutes a human as well as fish health hazard. And this is quite aside for any other adverse impacts, which also occur (increased sediments, disturbing or destroying intra-gravel eggs, disrupting noises affecting fish behavior, etc.). All these suction dredge impacts are well documented. In fact, CDFG did a good literature search of the scientific literature showing these various impacts, which is included as Appendix D to the Draft EIR and (for those hardy souls who like to see the source of such assertions) is attached. There is thus every good reason, both for environmental and human health reasons, to minimize suction dredge impacts in many California streams, and in many others to ban it altogether. ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: www.pcffa.org Email: fish1ifr at aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Thu Mar 8 19:13:52 2012 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 22:13:52 -0500 (EST) Subject: [env-trinity] Proposed Suction Dredging Regs Message-ID: <84df.65e9420a.3c8acf6f@aol.com> In a message dated 3/8/2012 6:33:06 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, bhill at igc.org writes: Suction dredges are designed to remove heavy metals, esp., gold and platinum, from waterways. Because mercury and lead are almost as heavy as gold, suction dredges REMOVE mercury and lead from waterways along with gold and other heavy metals. This blatant fact known to every dredge miner is carefully circumvented by those opposed to small stream miners. Doesn't it make sense that removing mercury from waterways improves the health of the waterway? A test of whether dredging stirs up or removes mercury from waterways would be very simple to demostrate. Brian Hill Brian.... I know the above in an "article of faith" for suction dredge miners, and one of their great defensive talking points, but it is also dead wrong on the science. While the dredge might catch some otherwise dormant and sequestered subsurface mercury, it also stirs it up and methylates the rest (and likely a lot more than it catches), thus creating the most water soluble (and toxic to humans and fish) chemical compounds of mercury known. See, for instance, the USGS study Mercury contamination in California?s South Yuba River, available at: _http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2686_ (http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2686) In short, the tests have been done, in many streams under varying conditions, and the conclusion is inescapable that suction dredging releases otherwise sequestered river bottom mercury that constitutes a human as well as fish health hazard. And this is quite aside for any other adverse impacts, which also occur (increased sediments, disturbing or destroying intra-gravel eggs, disrupting noises affecting fish behavior, etc.). All these suction dredge impacts are well documented. In fact, CDFG did a good literature search of the scientific literature showing these various impacts, which is included as Appendix D to the Draft EIR and (for those hardy souls who like to see the source of such assertions) is attached. There is thus every good reason, both for environmental and human health reasons, to minimize suction dredge impacts in many California streams, and in many others to ban it altogether. ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) Email: fish1ifr at aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: DEIRAppx_D_LitRev[1].pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 1305514 bytes Desc: not available URL: From truman at jeffnet.org Fri Mar 9 08:39:37 2012 From: truman at jeffnet.org (Patrick Truman) Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 08:39:37 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- Proposed Suction DredgingRegs Causing a Stir In-Reply-To: <009401ccfd9c$eab99c60$c02cd520$@org> References: <009401ccfd9c$eab99c60$c02cd520$@org> Message-ID: <52D6BF97EE3447CB9F4F24E597CB25A1@Bertha> really? I had no idea, but it does make sense is there a recycling program? how much mercury and lead has been removed each year and where has it gone? please cite some studies and peer reviews, thanks From: Brian Hill Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2012 6:31 PM To: env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- Proposed Suction DredgingRegs Causing a Stir Suction dredges are designed to remove heavy metals, esp., gold and platinum, from waterways. Because mercury and lead are almost as heavy as gold, suction dredges REMOVE mercury and lead from waterways along with gold and other heavy metals. This blatant fact known to every dredge miner is carefully circumvented by those opposed to small stream miners. Doesn't it make sense that removing mercury from waterways improves the health of the waterway? A test of whether dredging stirs up or removes mercury from waterways would be very simple to demostrate. Brian Hill From: env-trinity-bounces+bhill=igc.org at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces+bhill=igc.org at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2012 3:58 PM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- Proposed Suction Dredging Regs Causing a Stir Proposed Suction Dredging Regs Causing a Stir By Malcolm Terence, Two Rivers Tribune Contributing Writer Published March 6, 2012 The state?s new round of proposed regulations for suction dredging for gold is getting mixed reviews by the stakeholders. The Karuk Tribe, which has opposed dredging because of harm to fish and water quality, says they are an improvement in every way, but still inadequate. And the Western Mining Alliance (WMA) says ?this is the end of suction dredging in the state of California.? The dredges, currently banned by legislation until June 30, 2016, operate as floating vacuum cleaners that use a gas-powered pump to suck up gravel and cobble in a river or stream and run it through a sluice box that winnows out any gold. At its height, dredgers lined up close together in large numbers in places like the Salmon River where their operations triggered concerns about the effects on dwindling aquatic populations. The WMA website for January said that miners need to focus on overturning two specific state laws?SB670 and AB120?that block continued mining. The group wrote that 2011 ?was the year that propaganda, mistruths, and extreme environmentalism threw us off the rivers.? The group appealed to their members? support, a litigation strategy, by each donating $250 to fund an hour of lawyer time. The WMA website said claim holders had been slow to respond to an appeal from People for Public Land for information about individual claims. Only a few claim holders had responded so far. In their detailed response to the Department of Fish and Game (DFG), the mining advocates challenged several specific regulations including the 4 inch maximum nozzle size, the ban on dredging within 3 feet from a channel bank, and the requirement that no dredge operate within 500 feet of another. They claim a part of the state?s environmental review shows that sediment settles within 300 feet and that the turbidity isn?t harmful to fish, anyway. They also objected to a requirement that a containment system be used so fuel and oil don?t enter the river and said fuel isn?t spilled unless a dredge is flipped, an event that would submerge the containment system anyway. And they complained that there was no basis for the issuance limit in the new regulations of only 1,500 permits statewide, a figure that they said would not allow one permit for every 10 claim holders. The 1,500-permit limit was actually one of the best improvements in the new regulations, according to Craig Tucker, Klamath coordinator for the Karuk Tribe since 2004. He also praised the 500-foot separation between dredges. ?The regs are an improvement in almost every way but they are still unacceptable,? Tucker wrote in an e-mail to the Two Rivers Tribune. He pointed out that they still allow dredges in the main stem of the Salmon River which is refuge of the Klamath?s last spring Chinook, and the Scott and Shasta Rivers which are habitat for the threatened coho salmon. The regulations do ban dredges in the lowest 8 miles of the main stem Salmon River as well as many other locations in the Klamath Basin. They include a ban on dredging anything within a 500-foot radius of where a stream enters a river. These stretches of cold-water refugia often fill with migrating fish as the main river water warms in late summer and early fall. One Salmon River resident, a member of the Karuk Tribe, who lives near such an area, praised that regulation and said ?Good. I won?t have to have miners threaten to kick my butt when I tell them they shouldn?t mine there.? Tucker, a biochemist, challenged the claims of mining advocates that the dredges did not stir up old mercury deposits and said ?You?re welcome to your own opinion but not your own facts. Studies by California Water Quality Control Board specifically measuring the concentrations of suspended mercury above and below an operating dredge show that dredging dramatically increases the concentrations of this highly toxic heavy metal in the river. Miners actually participated in the study and they are part of the CEQA record. Problem is the Department of Fish and Game claim their job is not to regulate water quality. Fish and Game basically leave it up to the water board to regulate dredging to prevent the mercury problem and the water board does not have law enforcement personnel.? Tucker reiterated that the regulations are an improvement but still not adequate. ?Until Fish and Game can come up with regulations that don't jeopardize the survival of salmon, lamprey, mussels, and water quality, the Karuk Tribe will continue this fight,? he said. Another condition of AB 120 is that the costs of a permit should fully recover all the costs to the DFG related to administration of dredging. Such a change would need to be approved by the legislature. Pro-dredging advocates said that such a fee might be prohibitive. Dave McCracken, owner of the New 49ers recreational mining business in Happy Camp could not respond to telephone calls because he was out of the country, and also did not respond to repeated e-mailed interview questions from Two Rivers Tribune. He has postings on the issue on his website at http://www.goldgold.com . The actual regulations are available at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/suctiondredge/. The website for the Western Mining Alliance is http://westernminingalliance.org/. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4859 - Release Date: 03/08/12 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bhill at igc.org Fri Mar 9 09:33:27 2012 From: bhill at igc.org (Bhill) Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 09:33:27 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Proposed Suction Dredging Regs In-Reply-To: <84df.65e9420a.3c8acf6f@aol.com> References: <84df.65e9420a.3c8acf6f@aol.com> Message-ID: <0229572B-7BD6-4DDD-A366-927001CAB08C@igc.org> http://westernminingalliance.org/?page_id=1111 Response from western mining alliance. Sent from my iPhone On Mar 8, 2012, at 7:13 PM, FISH1IFR at aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 3/8/2012 6:33:06 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, bhill at igc.org writes: > Suction dredges are designed to remove heavy metals, esp., gold and platinum, from waterways. Because mercury and lead are almost as heavy as gold, suction dredges REMOVE mercury and lead from waterways along with gold and other heavy metals. This blatant fact known to every dredge miner is carefully circumvented by those opposed to small stream miners. > > > Doesn't it make sense that removing mercury from waterways improves the health of the waterway? > > > A test of whether dredging stirs up or removes mercury from waterways would be very simple to demostrate. > > > Brian Hill > > Brian.... > > I know the above in an "article of faith" for suction dredge miners, and one of their great defensive talking points, but it is also dead wrong on the science. While the dredge might catch some otherwise dormant and sequestered subsurface mercury, it also stirs it up and methylates the rest (and likely a lot more than it catches), thus creating the most water soluble (and toxic to humans and fish) chemical compounds of mercury known. > > See, for instance, the USGS study Mercury contamination in California?s South Yuba River, available at: http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2686 > > In short, the tests have been done, in many streams under varying conditions, and the conclusion is inescapable that suction dredging releases otherwise sequestered river bottom mercury that constitutes a human as well as fish health hazard. And this is quite aside for any other adverse impacts, which also occur (increased sediments, disturbing or destroying intra-gravel eggs, disrupting noises affecting fish behavior, etc.). All these suction dredge impacts are well documented. In fact, CDFG did a good literature search of the scientific literature showing these various impacts, which is included as Appendix D to the Draft EIR and (for those hardy souls who like to see the source of such assertions) is attached. > > There is thus every good reason, both for environmental and human health reasons, to minimize suction dredge impacts in many California streams, and in many others to ban it altogether. > > ====================================== > Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director > Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) > PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 > Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 > Web Home Page: www.pcffa.org > Email: fish1ifr at aol.com > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bhill at igc.org Fri Mar 9 12:09:08 2012 From: bhill at igc.org (Bhill) Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 12:09:08 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Proposed Suction Dredging Regs References: <4F5A4526.9090102@gmail.com> Message-ID: <81A52892-4398-41CB-9071-0E3983F55D96@igc.org> Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: WMA Rick > Date: March 9, 2012 10:00:06 AM PST > To: Bhill > Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Proposed Suction Dredging Regs > > Read the attached too > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: HumbugCreekFieldWork.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 920757 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Mercury Levels in Trout California.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 393505 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bhill at igc.org Sun Mar 11 08:31:03 2012 From: bhill at igc.org (Brian Hill) Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 08:31:03 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] FW: Proposed Suction Dredging Regs Message-ID: <005201ccff9c$07bab780$17302680$@org> To env-trinity/Glen Spain: Below is a letter to Mark Stopher from Dave MacCracken who was a participant in the USGS study Mercury contamination in California's South Yuba River, available at: http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2686. Glen H. Spain said in a previous email on this list that "[w]hile the dredge might catch some otherwise dormant and sequestered subsurface mercury, it also stirs it up and methylates the rest (and likely a lot more than it catches), thus creating the most water soluble (and toxic to humans and fish) chemical compounds of mercury known", but Wikipedia says that colloidal mercury in nature is not sequestered or dormant, rather, '[m]ethylmercury is formed from inorganic mercury by the action of anaerobic organisms that live in aquatic systems including lakes , rivers , wetlands , sediments , soils and the open ocean .[5] This methylation process converts inorganic mercury to methylmercury in the natural environment." So colloidal mercury naturally converts to methylmercury and enters the food chain as a natural process. Thus, mercury in any form in our waterways poisons all life exposed to it, sooner or later. This is why, according to the testimony below, that suction dredges are employed to remove mercury from the Combie Reservoir which stores drinking water for humans. Lastly, Spain's comment that "[w]hile the dredge might catch some otherwise dormant and sequestered subsurface mercury, it also stirs it up and methylates the rest (and likely a lot more than it catches)" seems questionable when one considers MacCracken's claim, based on his participation in the studies relied on by Spain and his own participation in these studies, that 95-98% of the mercury is removed from waterways with suction dredges. As for suction dredging, "disturbing or destroying intra-gravel eggs". Fish and Game dredging regulations carefully prevent dredging in spawning areas and during spawning seasons. Are there studies documenting "disrupting noises affecting fish behavior", because the sound of dredge motors cannot be heard underwater, at least by humans, and there is no shortage of fish wherever dredging is taking place. Doesn't it therefore seem practical to use suction dredges to remove 95-98% of the mercury from our waterways so that the colloidal mercury does not continuously convert to methyl mercury? There seems to be enough scientific documentation available to develop best practices standards for river restoration and for suction dredge mining if all stakeholders can meet and develop consensus based on the best science and technology available. Brian Hill ____________________________________________________________________________ ______________ Pro-Mack Mining Underwater Mining Specialists Mark Stopher Acting Regional Manager California Department of Fish and Game 601 Locust Street Redding, CA 96001 6 March 2010 Dear Mr. Stopher: I understand that a presentation was made at the most recent suction dredge PAC meeting concerning a mercury clean-up pilot project that I personally was involved with on the South Fork of the Yuba River, Malakoff Diggins, Humbug during 2007 and the fall of 2008. As I am at somewhat of a disadvantage of not being able to study any final findings concerning that project [would someone please provide a link to these findings?], and it sounds to me like some of the results are being taken out of the proper context, please allow me to go on record in the ongoing suction dredge CEQA process with a factual basis concerning the project: I was first contacted about the project on 23 August 2008 by Matthew Wetter of Tetra Tech EM Inc., which is an environmental services engineering company based at 10860 Gold Center Drive, Suite 200 | Rancho Cordova, CA 95670 | www.tetratech.com. Mr. Wetter e-mailed me that Tetra Tech was "working with Dave Lawler at the BLM on a mercury removal treatability study," and was interested in contracting the services of my company, Pro-Mack Mining, to provide underwater excavation (dredging work) for the project. Mr. Wetter asked me to provide a bid for our services. Tetra Tech also provided the following information: "Contract Officer Representative (COR): David Lawler is the designated Contracting Officer Representative (COR) for the project. Mr. Lawler is located in the California State Office. Mr. Lawler can be contacted at Bureau of Land Management, CASO, Attn: Dave Lawler (CA-920), 2800 Cottage Way Ste. W- 1834, And Sacramento, CA 95825-1886, Cell phone: (916) 425-3740" In order to gain a better understanding of the project and make a proper bid, I followed up in a telephone conversation with Mr. David Lawler. In turn, Mr. Lawler sent me the following explanation: BPS Project Title: HUMBUG CK-SOUTH YUBA PILOT MERCURY CLEANUP PROJECT BPS Project Number : (#36234) Description: The Humbug Creek Project site is located at the confluence of the South Yuba River and Humbug Creek on unpatented BLM administered land within the North Bloomfield Mining District. Project proposes to remove a mercury "hot spot" consisting of several hundred pounds of elemental mercury contained within the Humbug Creek Delta, located at the confluence of Humbug Creek and South Fork Yuba River. Thousands of pounds of elemental mercury were lost from historic placer gold sluice box systems at the North Bloomfield Hydraulic gold mining operations during the 1850's-1880's period. Significant amounts of elemental and amalgamated mercury were than deposited within a hydraulic tailings dam at the confluence of Humbug Creek and South Fork Yuba River. The tailings dam has subsequently been destroyed during a series of 100+ year flood events on the South Yuba, allowing mercury contaminated sediment to discharge seasonally downstream. BLM manages 7 miles of contiguous watershed on the South Yuba from 1/2 mile upstream from Humbug Creek to Purdon Crossing. This site represents an excellent pilot - mercury "hot spot" removal project, since significant watershed impacts have occurred to the BLM-managed portion immediately downstream from the hydraulic mine. Project proposes to use modified suction dredge equipment - combined with conventional placer gold recovery equipment/technology to recover large quantities of elemental mercury without undue degradation or impacts to the watershed. Geographic Description: T.17N, R.9E.,S.14, ,MDBM, NEVADA CO., CALIFORNIA (SOUTH YUBA RIVER WATERSHED) Benefits: The Humbug Creek Delta site is one of the known elemental mercury "hot spots" known in the Sierra Nevada region with elevated mercury levels in water and sediment. Removal of high concentrations of elemental mercury contained in mercury-contaminated stream and river sediments at this site will eliminate a pollution "point source of discharge" of hazardous materials under the Clean Water Act and reduce downstream discharge within the South Yuba River watershed. The California State Water Control Board and other regulatory agencies require that BLM mandate significant reductions in mercury loads from its managed lands within the Sacramento River watershed - Bay Delta region, under its existing basin plan. Feasibility: This site is one of BLM's emerging priority AML 1010 sites for pilot cleanup. Project implementation will include use of modified suction dredge equipment - combined with a conventional placer gold recovery equipment and technology to recover large quantities of elemental mercury without undue significant degradation or impact to the watershed. During FY99-03, USGS technical specialists have previously collected water, sediment, and biota samples from selected sites within this watershed. During FY06, USGS technical specialists and watershed stakeholders (e.g. Trout Unlimited, SYRCL) will coordinate on preremediation sampling of water, sediment, and biota at this specific site. BLM coordinators and contractor(s) will also compile all required CERCLA and NEPA related environmental documents. Testing of pilot mercury removal methods will also occur. During FY07, BLM coordinators and contractor(s) will undertake pilot cleanup of fluvial bedload areas containing elemental mercury concentrations. During FY08-09, post-remediation monitoring will be undertaken to assess the watershed benefits of mercury "hot spot" removal. Support: There is widespread support from interagency Federal partners (USFS,ACE,EPA), State Partners (DOC AMLU,CWQCB,RWQCB, CA Fish&Game, Public Health), County Partners (Dept. Envtl Health) and various watershed stakeholders (Trout Unlimited, NCRCD,SYRCL, Yuba Watershed Institute).Trout Unlimited has been working on AML partnerships efforts in Utah (American Fork) - subsequent remediation actions have effectively reduced toxic metal source loading to downstream watershed environments. Trout Unlimited volunteers can potentially assist with collecting additional macroinvertebrates and fish from the project site for bioassessment purposes. The California State Water Resources Control Board (CA-SWRB) is highly interested in removal of elemental mercury "hot spots" in priority watersheds. The South Yuba is a 303(d) listed impaired water body for mercury. The SWRCB will to match funds with BLM on this cleanup project. Project Objectives: To develop portable suction dredging equipment that will effectively recover elemental mercury from submerged sediments. Subsequently, Pro-Mack's involvement in the project (hereafter referred to as "BLM project") was contracted by Tetra Tech. This evolved into several site visits and a trial run during the fall of 2007, using a standard 3-inch Keene dredge. The trial run was mainly to work out how we would do the project during 2008 using an 8-inch dredge. During one of the site visits, I had a personal opportunity to engage in a substantial discussion with Mr. Charlie Alpers, USGS Research Chemist, who I understand is a leading authority on the subject of mercury. Mr. Alpers was directly involved with this BLM project. As I am an expert in heavy metals recovery, I found Mr. Alpers very interesting. During our conversation, Mr. Alpers instructed me on several points which he believed were important in context to the BLM project objective to determine if normal suction dredges can properly be used to recover mercury from established mercury waste sites. Here are a few of the points Mr. Alpers made (according to my understanding, in my own words): 1) The nature of mercury as an element allows it to break down into such small particles (perhaps smaller than particles), that they can become permanently suspended in water. Mr. Alpers described this as "colloidal." This, similar to the salt in sea water. 2) Through different kinds of physical and biological activity, elemental mercury can be transformed into different forms and migrate away from the original location (point source). 3) Mr. Alpers and the other USGS scientists involved in the BLM project made it abundantly clear that science has shown that very small particles of mercury have a strong attraction to very, very small particles of light sediment. 4) Mr. Alpers told me that modern science now has the equipment to measure the presence of mercury in nearly every substance known to man. He told me mercury is present nearly everywhere. He said the instruments at his disposal would detect mercury in any of the soils or riverbeds in California. In view of these revelations from Mr. Alpers, it seemed clear to me without going any further that standard suction dredges could not be used to remove 100% of the mercury from established mercury waste sites. Standard suction dredges (use of gravity separation recovery systems) will be effective at removing all or most of the elemental mercury down to a certain size fraction. Pro-Mack (and Keene Engineering) has developed advanced gravity recovery systems on suction dredges that will recover elemental mercury effectively down to any size fraction within the visible range. But when you start getting down to capturing colloidal (mercury which has become part of the water), or capturing extremely fine sediments with mercury attached to them, it is clear that gravity separation alone (such as the Nelson Concentrator) is not the answer for 100% results. Please keep in mind that this explanation is in context to the BLM Project Objective, which was to determine whether or not standard suction dredges can be used to effectively recover the mercury from an established mercury waste site located at the bottom of a flowing waterway. Sometime during the summer of 2008, the California Water Quality Control Board made a formal objection to BLM and USGS. In view of the 98% recovery results (of mercury from an established mercury waste site in another location) by Mr. Humphreys using a 4- inch dredge, the Water Board did not want us to use an 8-inch dredge at the confluence of the South Yuba River and Humbug Creek. While I was not privy to all the communications involved, I was informed by Mr. Wetter that the potential of a 2% loss of mercury into the water column might be considered a water quality violation by the State of California. Consequently, BLM formally revised the purpose of the project to the following (please see attached Revised Scope of Work for agreement between the USGS and the BLM which is dated June 27, 2008): Purpose: Because dredge operators have collected and recovered large amounts of Hg from the South Yuba River near Humbug Creek, the BLM wishes to remove and recover these Hg-contaminated sediments, thus removing a potential environmental hazard from the ecosystem. However, it is unknown what impact the removal process will have in the immediate vicinity of the dredge operation or downstream. The BLM initially proposed to remove the Hg from the confluence using a suction dredge. Although suction dredging has been shown to recover as much as 98% of the mercury from contaminated river sediments, qualitative evidence suggests that the dredging may, through "flouring" of the Hg during the suction dredging, actually enhance Hg transport and reactivity and ultimately increase Hg uptake in downstream biota (Humphreys, 2005). Before suction dredging or any other removal technique can be used, the hotspot will need to be characterized to determine the potential impact of the removal on downstream environments. Since dredging within the active waterway was no longer going to be part of the project, another site visit was scheduled so that we could locate a place(es) to take samples outside of the active waterway. Matt Wetter may have a record of who participated in that visit to the site. I was there, along with several participants from the USGS. We found a gravel bar out in the S. Yuba River that was located near the confluence of Humbug Creek. We also found some dry riverbed just downstream from Humbug Creek. As dredging was not going to be allowed, these were pretty-much the only two remaining options to obtain samples. We decided to sample the gravel bar (located out in the river) first, and then follow with the riverbed gravels alongside the river. As I had originally bid the project to provide an 8-inch dredge, and we were not going to be able to use that, Matt Wetter asked me if there was some other type of gear that Pro- Mack could provide to assist with the project. So my Pro-Mack team went to work in our shop to create a suction excavation system that would contain all of the material, using recirculated water, so that there would be zero discharge back into the active waterway. This system used the same principle as a normal dredge to create suction at the nozzle. But this was different because water and excavated material were pumped into a holding tank, and the water was then pumped out of the holding tank to provide suction to the nozzle. We were using the same water over and over again within a closed system to create our suction-power at the nozzle (please see attached images). [attachment provided if requested] Because Mr. Alpers voiced concern about colloidal mercury, and very small particles of mercury that attach themselves to sediment, Pro-Mack devised a suction recovery system that would capture 100% of the sediment, along with 100% of the water used in the excavation process. I ran this idea by the BLM project team in a phone conference, and the participants (USGS, BLM, Tetra Tech) expressed interest and encouragement. My understanding is that BLM (Dave Lawler) ran the idea by the Water Board and they decided to send Rick Humphreys out to observe our project. He was present when we operated Pro-Mack's self-contained suction system, and Mr. Humphreys, along with everyone else present, agreed that we made no discharge into the river using our self contained suction system. To my knowledge, this is the only system -concept in existence that will provide 100% recovery of hazardous materials in all forms from waste sites (mercury or otherwise), either above or below the water. Here follow some very important observations which should not be ignored: 1) The gravel we were excavating from the bar out in the South Yuba River was above the river during late fall flows. They will be underwater during winter flows, or at least during storm events. This was mostly loose gravel. It was not a hardpacked streambed; it was not compacted or armored. This means that those gravels likely get swept downstream during storm events; especially large storm events. Therefore, any mercury recovery we obtained within our closed system is the same mercury that will be washed down the river system during storm events. Since our excavation was small in comparison to the whole area of the South Yuba that is identified as a waste site, it is reasonable to assume that huge volumes of mercury are moving downstream during storm events. 2) This was just a trial run of a closed circuit suction excavation system to determine if it would work. It was only the first phase on a small scale. Tetra Tech, BLM and USGS agreed to analyze samples of the collected water to see if our closed system will recover and concentrate mercury; specifically the very fine mercury that they are so concerned about. Since it was just a beginning-test, I don't believe that anyone kept close track of the volume of gravel that we excavated. More importantly, we did not measure how many times the same water was recirculated to excavate the waste materials. While I have not seen the test results on our recirculated water, I understand that Mr. Alpers stated in the recent PAC meeting that the mercury levels were very high. This is good. It means our system worked very well to recover and concentrate the small particles of mercury from the waste site which Mr. Alpers and other scientists are concerned about; particles so fine in size that no gravity system alone can be expected to provide adequate recovery if 100% results are desired. Note: Before using our closed suction system, after carefully sanitizing the tank (with a solution which USGS brought along specifically for that purpose), we carefully filled it with water from the South Yuba River. I am certain that the USGS team captured and analyzed water samples from the South Yuba to create a baseline. Therefore, any increase in mercury in the water from our closed system will be mercury that we recovered and concentrated from the waste material at the site. The higher the concentration of mercury within our closed system, the more mercury we removed from the environment! 3) In a closed system such as this, the longer we operate it in the waste site, the more times the very same water is exposed to the waste, and the more concentrated the mercury will become in the water. We ran the system for perhaps two hours or longer. The pump we used produces 350 gallons per minute. This means the water was recirculated through the waste material more than 100 times. I understand that during the PAC meeting, Mr. Alpers reported that suspended sediment and mercury was present in the water from our closed test seven days afterwards. That is exactly what you would expect to see with recirculated water that was used 100+ times to excavate mercury-contaminated material! 4) Very important: While anti-mining activists are sure to try, the results of this test (concentration of mercury in the water used within our closed system) cannot be correlated or compared to normal suction dredging in California's waterways. Here is why: A) First of all, we were doing the project in an established mercury hot spot. Please read David Lawler's BPS Project description above. This site is so contaminated, the California Water Board refused to allow BLM and USGS to operate suction dredge there for the BLM project. Even while we were conducting our tests, Rich Humphreys was swimming around the area with mask and snorkel and finding visible mercury on the bedrock. We were panning mercury from the bedrock just upstream from where we performed this testing. This place is loaded with mercury contamination! It would be grossly unfair to compare the average stretch of California waterway to this established waste site where "Thousands of pounds of elemental mercury were lost from historic placer gold sluice box systems" (BPS Project description). B) To my knowledge, California's average waterways have not been quantified as to the amount of mercury which exists in them. If present at all, the amount of mercury is sure to vary from one location to the next. According to Mr. Alpers, some level of mercury can be located anywhere (everywhere). Therefore, for the purpose of dredge regulation, we should be concerned with hazardous levels of mercury. We should not be comparing normal suction dredge activity to an isolated extreme condition! For the purpose of dredge regulation, it would be highly indefensible to use the results of a toxic cleanup test as a baseline average for all waterways in California! C) The water from our closed system that was recirculated through mercury waste at least 100 times cannot be compared to the water discharge from a normal dredging system in an average waterway. Our closed system exposed the same water over and over to pre-established mercury waste (continuous exposure for hours). The water flowing through a normal dredge will have been exposed to gravel only once (for several seconds), likely in a location which does not contain hazardous levels of mercury in the first place. Any attempt to compare normal dredging conditions with a concentrated solution used to clean up a heavily contaminated site would be completely lacking in intellectual integrity. D) Our closed system design appears to have confirmed Mr. Alper's (and the California Water Board's) concerns about potential losses of fine particles of mercury if standard suction dredges are used to clean up established mercury waste sites. That is, if California's policy is to proceed with mercury recovery only if 100% results can be obtained. We could argue over whether or not the dredge system is causing flouring, or if the mercury is already present there in a form that is too small to recover using gravity methods. But it doesn't really matter. If our closed system concentrated suspended mercury in the water, it seems reasonable that recovery systems (used in established waste sites) must be developed that contain all of the water which is used during the excavation and gravity separation process. Then the water will need to be treated. E) Because the mercury that is not removed from active river systems is sure to migrate downstream, and we have already developed the prototype of a closed excavation system, I would encourage the various State and federal agencies to continue the important work which BLM and USGS has been doing in this area. I would be pleased to participate, as long as the process is intended to clean up California's waterways, rather than put suction dredgers out of business. F) Anyone who would attempt to use the important results we have obtained in a very serious waste site to reflect upon conditions in a normal dredging setting is probably more motivated by political gain, than in cleaning up California's waterways. The truth is that suction dredging is the only workable way of discovering where the mercury hot spots are located in California's waterways. According to the BLM BPS Project description above, it was suction dredgers who discovered the waste site at the South Yuba River and Humbug Creek. And it will require suction dredges (modified into closed systems) to remove the contamination. Mercury that is not removed will haunt California for the foreseeable future. This very same scenario could be playing out in other locations. Suction dredgers are the solution to this problem. Shutting them down because mercury is proven to exist within isolated locations would be counterproductive. This is because Mother Nature will just keep pounding that mercury down into more-broadly distributed, smaller and smaller particles while we do absolutely nothing about it. 5) Most important: Based upon all of the results we obtained in this BLM project, along with all of the concerns expressed by BLM, USGS, DFG, California tribes and environmental organizations, there may be some serious problems with the Nevada Irrigation District's (NID) plan to clear toxic Gold Rush mercury from Combie Reservoir (they also intend to use a suction dredge). According to the press release at http://www.theunion.com/article/20100227/NEWS/100229808/1066 &ParentProfil e=1053: "NID had Canadian firm Pegasus Earth Sensing Corp. demonstrate the system last fall and managed to extract six grams of mercury per ton of sediment dredged from the bottom of the reservoir. NID routinely dredges the reservoir to extract silt and keep water capacity as high as possible for customers." "Pegasus designed their centrifuge to extract gold from ancient river rock, but company officials found it did a better job of trapping mercury, according to Monohan." A centrifuge is a gravity separation device. And while very effective at concentrating heavy metal particles down to a certain size, it will not be effective at recovering the colloidal mercury which Mr. Alpers is concerned about. Even worse, a centrifuge is designed specifically to discharge (as tailings) the very fine particles of light sediment which USGS scientists are so concerned about (because micro-particles of mercury attach to them). Perhaps the largest concern should be that all of the colloidal mercury and fine sediment which is stirred up in the water during the excavation process ("NID routinely dredges the reservoir to extract silt and keep water capacity as high as possible for customers.") will most certainly be creating a water quality violation of huge proportions -- for all the reasons which are being expressed by PAC participants in the suction dredge CEQA process. The NID Project description on line shows a diagram of the planned dredge system. More than just a suction dredge, the NID dredge will employ a cutter head at the nozzle (see http://evereadymarineservices.com/downloads/Eveready%20Marine%20Services %204.pdf ). A cutter head is a powerful grinding machine that is designed to break up solids and force oversized material out of the way. A cutter head will create enormous disturbance down in the contaminated sediments. Consequently, some substantial portion of the disturbed water and light sediments within the contaminated material will be greatly disturbed, pushed out of the way and not be sucked up as dredged material. Reading more about the NID project at http://www2.newsvirginian.com/wnv/news/local/article/old_technology_new_solu ti on/42961/961/ "Tim Crough, assistant general manager with the Nevada Irrigation District, who is overseeing the project, said the district wants to remove the mercury in its elemental stage, where it is less harmful." He said, "Knelson Concentrators' mercury-removal process combines traditional dredging technology with a "spin" process, using the company's Knelson Mercury Recovery Concentrator, to separate and remove the mercury from the sediment and out of the water. "If we can remove 95 percent of it, which the Knelson Concentrator is expected to do, we can free up that much of the river system from having the contamination of methyl mercury," Crough said. http://www.sacbee.com/2009/03/24/1723627/nevada-irrigation-districtplans. html: "Tim Crough, the district's assistant general manager, said the Combie project would combine dredging with a centrifuge process to "spin" the mercury out of water extracted from the lake. '"It's a pretty novel approach," said Charles Alpers, a research chemist with the U.S. Geological Survey in Sacramento and a consultant for the project."' "The elemental mercury that would be removed, according to Ryan Jones, a Knelson Concentrators representative, is relatively simple to recover and inexpensive when using the company's device. '"The important thing is to get the elemental mercury out of the material so that it can't convert to methyl mercury," ' Jones said." The press release goes on to say: "The consultant (Carrie Monohan) is also on the staff of the Sierra Fund in Nevada City, which has been educating Californians about the mountain range's toxic mining past in recent years." At http://www.conawayranch.com/content/mercury-rising "Elizabeth "Izzy" Martin, CEO of the Sierra Fund, is quoted as saying '"The state's rules are forcing Sacramento into that mode. They're a hundred miles down from the problem and trying to filter it out. Sacramento would very much like to come up here and clean up the mercury because they think it will probably be cheaper to clean up four hundred pounds of mercury up here than it will be to filter out two pounds of mercury down there."' While I personally would not disagree with these statements, there appears to be two different standards being applied here. The Water Board is objecting to normal suction dredges because Rick Humphries measured a 2% loss of mercury from a standard 4-inch dredge. Mr. Alpers and the Sierra Fund are objecting to normal suction dredges because of the potential of not recovering colloidal mercury and extremely fine particles of mercury that have evolved out of the elemental stage and attach themselves to fine sediments which can remain suspended in water for long periods of time. Yet both Mr. Alpers and the Sierra Fund are directly involved as consultants in this NID project which is only targeting 95% of the elemental mercury. How can this be? DFG can do the math on six grams of mercury per ton of sediment. There is no doubt that this should be classed as a mercury hot spot, hazardous waste site. That amount of mercury will exceed the average amount of mercury in California's rivers by thousands or millions of times. Yet the Sierra Fund , who is working so hard to put suction dredgers out of business in sections of California waterways where hazardous levels of mercury are not even present, is completely ignoring the science which has been developed in the BLM project, the very science which they are now attempting to use against suction dredgers. All you need to do is look at Charles Alper's data on the amount of mercury in the water that we concentrated in Pro-Mack's closed tank system, and you will know that the NID project and Sierra Fund are stirring up the very same kind of contaminated water and sediments at the bottom of the Combie Reservoir with the use of a cutter head devise (powerful grinding machine) -- which is a source of drinking water for Californians. Mr. Alpers and the Sierra Fund cannot have it both ways. If it beneficial for NID (at a cost of $8+ million) to recover 95% of the elemental mercury from an established waste site within a drinking water supply, while stirring up and spreading around particles of mercury which are too small to recover, then it is also beneficial to have suction dredgers recovering 98% of any mercury they happen to encounter while assisting the State to locate new hot spots (at no cost to the State or federal governments). The CEQA process is designed to flush out real problems using the best available science. There is supposed to be integrity in the process. If you are allowing gravity separation equipment to process mercury from a mercury hot spot inside of a reservoir, then you certainly cannot object to gravity concentration technology being used by suction dredgers in areas which are not known to contain any hazardous levels of mercury. I hope this helps place Mr. Alper's test results in a more balanced perspective, and would be pleased to provide more information upon request. Sincerely, Dave McCracken 27 Davis Road, Happy Camp, California 96039 (530) 313-5378 Fax: (530) 493-2095 www.promackmining.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Dave Mack Humbug Creek Comments.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 163025 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Mar 13 07:45:42 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 07:45:42 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] California Watch- US Senate to vote on timber payments for rural schools, counties Message-ID: <30653D27-274C-4C95-9976-7C75035AC510@att.net> http://californiawatch.org/dailyreport/us-senate-vote-timber-payments-rural-schools-counties-15272 From MCKIER at dfg.ca.gov Tue Mar 13 15:32:50 2012 From: MCKIER at dfg.ca.gov (Mary Claire Kier) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:32:50 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Last week of TRH trapping Message-ID: <4F5F6866.A226.009F.1@dfg.ca.gov> As my counterpart in Weaverville said, Put a fork in it, it's done. Attached please find the final Trinity River trapping summary of the 2011-2012 season, through the last TRH trap day (today). Please keep in mind that while the data are preliminary in nature, the QA/QC will not likely change the final database (and therefore numbers) substantially. We are, considering the lack of rain/snow this season, anticipating getting the JC weir in in early June this year. It is THEN you may expect to receive your next Trinity River Project trapping summary. 'Until then. Mary Claire Mary Claire Kier DFG - Trinity River Project 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 707/822-5876 - FAX 822-2855 mckier at dfg.ca.gov Trinity River documents can be found at: http://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/documents/ContextDocs.aspx?cat=KlamathTrinity -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: weir&TRH_summary11.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 90624 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Mar 16 09:32:12 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 09:32:12 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- 2 stories-Fall Chinook Salmon Run Projection: Largest on Modern Day Record, Drought Poses Danger + USFS Streamlining Message-ID: <1BAD7ED1-A146-45B5-8BD7-98EB20C9F8FC@att.net> All, these stories are courtesy of Allie Hostler of the Two Rivers Tribune, which is still offline, so there are no online links for these articles. Yours truly, Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org Fall Chinook Salmon Run Projection: Largest on Modern Day Record, Drought Poses Danger Hoopa and Yurok Tribe to Share 160,000 Salmon By Allie Hostler, Two Rivers Tribune Fishermen are gearing up for what could be the biggest fall run of Chinook salmon in their lifetimes. Fisheries experts estimate that more than one and one-half million Klamath and Trinity River origin fall run Chinook are preparing to voyage up the river to spawn?the largest run on modern day record. Officials estimate that more than 310,000 will actually travel the river. The run-size estimate is based on a multitude of data gathered every year by tribal, state, and federal agencies. A week-long meeting of the Pacific Fisheries Management Council (PFMC)?a 14-member council made up of fishermen, biologists, and industry representatives from California, Oregon, Washington, and Idaho?ended early last week when they announced three options that will shape the upcoming season on the ocean, for in-river recreational fishermen and for tribal fishermen on the lower Klamath and Trinity Rivers. The options are on the PFMC website for public review. Alternative I calls for an in-river recreational fishery allocation of 69,100 adult Chinook with a tribal in-river allocation of 160,500 adult Chinook; Alternative II calls for an in-river recreational allocation of 70,300 and an in-river tribal allocation of 159,100; Alternative III calls for an in-river recreational allocation of 70,300 and an in-river tribal allocation of 159,400. The public is invited to comment on these alternatives at a public hearing that will be held later this month in Eureka. Because the Hoopa and Yurok Tribes are the only tribes in the Klamath Basin that maintain a federally reserved fishing right, the two must share the overall tribal allocation which will be about 160,000 this fall season. Because there is no written agreement between the two tribes, intra-tribal allocation remains a sensitive subject. The Yurok Tribe claims 80 percent of the share and Hoopa claims 20 percent. Hoopa has argued in the past that if Hoopa catches its full 20 percent, they will push to harvest more despite the unwritten agreement to split 80/20. With an 80/20 split, the Hoopa Tribe is expecting to harvest approximately 32,000 fish, more than six times the number they are accustomed to catching. The Yurok Tribe is expecting to harvest about 128,000. Some fisheries managers attribute the larger-than-usual run size to improved water management, but others are cautiously optimistic about a large run and dry water year type. Hoping for the best but preparing for the worst, the Hoopa Tribe is working to secure additional water for the river in case an emergency situation arises. ?With below average rainfall and snowpack, the water year is shaping up to be dry, or possibly critically dry,? Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries Manager, Mike Orcutt said. Orcutt explained that flows in the Trinity River are determined by the water year type and that official water year types are not decided upon until after April 1. ?People are still hoping for more precipitation.? According to the 2000 Record of Decision, which mandates river flows and a restoration program on the Trinity River, the distinction between dry and critically dry is the difference of about 83,400 acre-feet of water in the river?an acre-foot is the amount of water it takes to cover an acre, one foot deep. Also, if the year is designated as ?critically dry? Central Valley irrigators would receive 273,000 less than if it was classified as a ?dry year.? In normal water years irrigators receive about 459,000 acre-feet and the river receives 646,500 acre-feet. The past two years have either been classified as wet or normal. In 2009 a dry year was recorded, but a critically dry year has not been recorded since before the 2000 Trinity River Record of Decision was implemented. Orcutt is concerned that the large salmon run expected on the Klamath and Trinity Rivers will be forced into a dangerous situation similar to that of 2002 when flows were low and warm, contributing to an adult fish kill. Little could be done to prevent the kill as it occurred during a time wrought with political controversy on the Klamath River. The Hoopa Tribe and Humboldt County believe they have a reserve of water that should be made available for use should the coming salmon run face life threatening conditions this season?Humboldt County?s contract for 50,000 acre-feet. The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors is expected to sign a joint letter with the Hoopa Valley Tribe today, following a vote from the supervisors at their regularly scheduled meeting. The letter, addressed to Secretary of Interior, Ken Salazar and California Governor, Jerry Brown, outlines the county?s contract with the Bureau of Reclamation for the 50,000 acre-feet that was promised to the county back in the 1960s but was never delivered. ?To understand the magnitude of the risk to the fishery that these forecasts represent, the water and in-river fish estimates for 2012 may be compared with the conditions in 2002 when the water year was also constrained by limited water supply in the Klamath-Trinity basin and the returning fish numbered 161,000 adult fall Chinook,? the letter reads. ?Also, in 2004, fisheries scientists developed criteria for release of water from the Trinity Division for the benefit of fish migration in the Lower Klamath River. One criterion was a forecast fish run in excess of the historic average run size of 110,000 adult fall Chinook. The 2012 forecast is three times that threshold.? Meanwhile, Hoopa and Yurok fishermen are bracing for what could be a productive fishing year. The PFMC public hearing to discuss the proposed fishing season alternatives will be held on the March 27 in Eureka at the Red Lion Inn at 7pm. For a full set of proposed regulations, including ocean recreational and commercial recommendations visit.pcouncil.org and click on the salmon tab. -end- USFS Planning to ?Streamline? Lower Trinity and Orleans District Mushrooming Permits Still Up for Discussion By Malcolm Terence, Two Rivers Tribune Contributing Writer A U.S. Forest Service proposal to merge its Orleans District with its Lower Trinity District, all under the leadership of Orleans Ranger Nolan Colegrove was aired last week at a small public meeting in Orleans. The Orleans District already manages the Ukonom District which was once managed by the Klamath National Forest. The meeting may have had a small turnout?five members of the public and three Forest Service presenters?because of the short notice of its scheduling, two business days before the date of the meeting. Or the public may view the proposal like one Orleans observer who compared it to ?rearranging the deck chairs? on the sinking Titanic. Tyrone Kelley, Forest Supervisor for the Six Rivers, said the reorganization of the districts stemmed from the widespread cutbacks in the federal budget. The Forest Service is part of the Department of Agriculture, which faces a seven to eight percent cut this year, plus possibly another equal amount next year. He also said that the proposals would not lead to any layoffs or firings. Any staff reductions would come from attrition as workers retired or transferred out of Six Rivers. Kelley repeatedly stressed that the Forest Service?s ability to deal with wildfires would remain unchanged. He said the agency now termed this ability ?Firefighter Production Capability,? a label that may unsettle locals who remember when the goal of fire fighting was to put out fires. Some of the changes, which Kelley called ?streamlining,? would include installing a deputy district ranger in Lower Trinity rather than filling the currently vacant ranger position and realigning vegetation, fuels and recreation staffs in the merged districts. He said that all fire stations would remain open. Josh Saxon, who works for both Mid Klamath Watershed Council and for Salmon River Restoration Council and is a member of the Karuk Tribe, acknowledged the cutbacks and asked Kelley if there was any growth strategy in the plans. Kelley responded that the Forest was developing private-public partnerships that might increase resources when federal dollars were shrinking. He also said Six Rivers was on the lookout for cross-boundary solutions with other agencies. He cited a situation in the El Dorado National Forest which has developed arrangements with the agency that supplies water to San Francisco. The changes still will need approval of the regional supervisor and of the chief of the agency in Washington, D.C. As preface, Kelley has presented his plan to the neighboring tribes and county governments. The plan does not include any reservation lands. He said he had gotten favorable reception when he presented the plans in Willow Creek to the Kiwanis and to the local community service district, but that he still planned a public meeting there. He said Trinity and Humboldt County offered support. The reception was less favorable from the board of supervisors in Siskiyou and Del Norte Counties. According to the Siskiyou Board minutes, Supervisor Marcia Armstrong was concerned that the proposals were presented to the public before they were brought to the supervisors which she said was required by the federal law concerning coordination between agencies. Siskiyou officials have used the term ?coordination? in the past to suggest that the county should have more control in federal actions. Rick Costales, Siskiyou County?s natural resource policy specialist, said he favored the Ukonom Ranger District being returned to Klamath National Forest control and Armstrong cited the problems when she said that during wildfires ?dispatching is taking place from as far away as Orleans.? Armstrong also complained about the lack of timber produced on Six Rivers, that Siskiyou was not part of a stakeholders? group that addressed mid-Klamath restoration and the treatment of suction dredge miners. When Kelley made his presentation to the Del Norte Supervisors, according to reports in the Triplicate, they complained about federal land acquisitions and the agency?s role in the maintenance of communication towers on Red Mountain. The site is considered sacred by the Yurok Tribe but the towers are a vital communications link for emergency services. Supervisors complained that the Forest Service was meeting with the tribe on the issue but not with public agencies who were also stakeholders. Responding to public questioning at the Orleans meeting, Kelley said that work was ongoing to change the mushroom collection permit costs for non commercial collectors. The issue was the trigger for a large public rally at the Orleans station last fall when the Six Rivers required a $200 per person permit for collection of matsutake mushrooms, also called tanoak. He said the planning included collection of only incidental fees or no fees for non-commercial use but that the four national forests involved were still working on specific provisions and language. He said he hoped the changes would be in place by next season. A public meeting will be held in Willow Creek on March 20 at 5:30 pm, Veteran?s Hall. -end- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Mar 16 10:05:16 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 10:05:16 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Klamath articles- Siskiyou Daily News and AP Message-ID: <5EF1CA6A-E83C-4AB7-85F2-979A46727E0E@att.net> Siskiyou Daily News- Panel: Dam report is reliable http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/news/x1907513188/Panel-Dam-report-is-reliable Associated Press- Shortage Means Klamath Reclamation Farms must find alternatives to surface water http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/57113fc237dc4c39a3843df0aa993b1c/OR--Klamath-Water/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Mar 19 21:12:09 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 21:12:09 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Klamath Riverkeeper plans to sue Shasta River dam operator References: <38B9E47F-E30E-4C61-B936-C29645550828@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <4ED38A23-973F-42B3-A855-99E79393DFD2@att.net> From: Dan Bacher Date: March 19, 2012 7:32:06 PM PDT Subject: Klamath Riverkeeper plans to sue Shasta River dam operator http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2012/03/19/klamath-riverkeeper-plans-to-sue-shasta-river-dam-operator/ http://www.fishsniffer.com/content/section/842-dan-bacher.html ?Coho once numbered in the thousands in the Shasta River,? noted Erica Terence, Klamath Riverkeeper Executive Director. ?Today fewer than 50 return most years. In 2009 only 9 endangered coho salmon (all male) returned to spawn in the Shasta River, according to the California Department of Fish and Game.? Photo of toxic algae on Shastina Reservoir courtesy of Klamath Riverkeeper. dwinnell-toxic-algae.jpg Klamath Riverkeeper plans to sue Shasta River dam operator by Dan Bacher In a major effort to restore coho salmon to the Shasta River, the Klamath Riverkeeper (KRK) is planning to sue the operator of a dam and reservoir on the major Klamath River tributary. On March 12, the group filed a 60-day Notice of Intent to Sue the Montague Water Conservation District (MWCD) for ongoing operation of Dwinnell Dam and associated diversions in violation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Notice provides an opportunity for the District to propose measures to settle the claims before initiating a judicial proceeding, according to KRK Executive Director Erica Terence. ?Coho once numbered in the thousands in the Shasta River,? noted Terence. ?Today fewer than 50 return most years. In 2009 only 9 endangered coho salmon (all male) returned to spawn in the Shasta River, according to the California Department of Fish and Game.? Shasta coho decline part of a statewide trend The coho collapse in the Shasta is part of an alarming decline of the once abundant fish throughout California. Only 1% of historic coho salmon populations remain in California?s waters, according to UC Davis fishery scientist Peter Moyle. ?In the past three years (2008-2010), estimates by California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) indicate somewhere between 500 and 3000 adult coho total returned each year to California streams, a 90% decline since our last study, meaning that at most 1% remain. They are virtually extinct south of San Francisco Bay,? said Moyle (http://caltrout.org/2011/11/californias-coho-salmon-on-verge-of-extinction). Moyle said the over-riding cause of coho decline is 150 years of land abuse in fragile coastal watersheds. (http://californiawaterblog.com/2011/10/12/coho-in-crisis-part-2-saving-coho-saving-salmon-restoring-streams). ?This abuse is from logging, farming, grazing, mining, urbanization, road building, and other practices that alter ecosystems, cause massive sediment delivery to the rivers, divert water, block fish migrations, and generally create environments inhospitable to coho salmon,? explained Moyle. The species? sharp decline has prompted fish advocates such as Terence to make every effort they can to restore the species in streams where they still exist, although in remnant numbers. Diversions threaten Shasta coho survival Montague Water Conservation District owns and operates Dwinnell Dam and Shastina Reservoir on the Shasta River. A large part of Parks Creek, a key Shasta tributary, is also diverted to the Reservoir. From there water is diverted through a large ditch over 20 miles to grow hay and irrigate pasture, according to Terence. Terence said fisheries biologists have long noted that despite being in a relatively dry area, the Shasta is historically one of the most prolific salmon producing streams in the West. The Shasta River is fed by spring water that originates on the slopes of Mt. Shasta. ?These numerous springs provide a stable supply of water at the optimal temperature for salmon,? Terence explained. ?The water is also rich in nutrients that in turn grow the insects that salmon feed on. However, since the 1920?s, much of the Shasta?s pristine waters have been diverted by Montague Water Conservation District without any stipulations on how much water must be left in-stream for salmon.? That is no longer legal, according to the KRK Notice of Intent. The KRK said these diversions have resulted in the unlawful take of coho, defined by any actions that ?harass, harm, kill, trap or capture? the species. According to the letter the group sent to the district, ?MWCD?s operation and maintenance of Dwinnell Dam, Lake Shastina, and the Parks Creek and Little Shasta River diversions is harassing, wounding, killing, trapping, capturing and most certainly harming Southern Oregon and Northern California Coastal (SONCC) coho both by killing and/or injuring individuals of this species and by causing significant habitat modification or degradation to its habitat that impairs behavioral patterns, including spawning, rearing, migrating, feeding, and sheltering ??and thus has caused substantial decline in the SONCC coho population in the Shasta River and its tributaries.? If MWCD fails in the next 60 days to demonstrate adequate, good-faith efforts to comply with legal requirements for permits to kill endangered coho salmon, she said KRK may consult fisheries experts and seek a court order to remedy the devastating impacts of the MWCD?s dam and diversions. ?We want to balance water use in the Shasta so that both farm and fish dependent communities can thrive,? said Terence. ?The two are not mutually exclusive but we have to learn how to better share the resource.? Water district claims 'no prior communications,' 'substantial inaccuracies' After receiving the KRK?s Notice of Intent to Sue, the Montague Water Conservation District issued a statement claiming that the notice was served without any ?prior communications? from the group. ?The notice was served without any prior communications from Klamath Riverkeeper or any attempt at informal resolution,? according to the statement. ? This is disturbing, given the district has been very pro-active in making every effort to meet or exceed the ever-changing regulations governing the distribution of its members? water rights.? ?The district has also made substantial efforts to work with the governing agencies to improve habitat while preserving their members? rights. Unfortunately, the Notice of Intent to Sue from the Klamath Riverkeeper contains substantial inaccuracies. The district is hopeful that once the true facts are known, the notice will be withdrawn. The district remains steadfastly committed to protecting its members water rights and compliantly maintaining its water distribution system in this difficult regulatory environment,? the district said. The statement did not include any details on the ?substantial inaccuracies? it claimed were made by the group in the notice. While the coho numbers have been low in recent years, the numbers of fall run chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) returning to the Shasta increased in 2011. The Department of Fish and Game estimated that 11,400 natural spawning fall run chinooks, the largest number of any tributary to the Klamath besides the Trinity, returned to spawn in fall 2011. 2011?s count contrasts greatly with the 1,348 Chinook salmon that the DFG estimated returned to the Shasta in 2010. For more information on the Klamath Riverkeeper, go to: http://www.klamathriver.org. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: unknown.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 567846 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Mar 20 17:19:24 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 17:19:24 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Upcoming TAMWG and TMC meetings Message-ID: <2F98836F-006B-4C68-8FED-6F6C96676DDA@att.net> All, You can find out about Trinity River Restoration Program meetings at the trrp.net calendar, located at http://www.trrp.net/?page_id=69. It's also on the home page in the middle top row. The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group meets this Thursday in Weaverville, March 22 at the Victorian Inn. The Trinity Management Council meets March 28-29 at the Weaverville LIbrary. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From trinityjosh at gmail.com Sat Mar 24 14:04:46 2012 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 14:04:46 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Seeking employment Message-ID: Greetings Trinity River Enthusiasts, This is just FYI. I'm in the market for employment within the natural resources realm, being that I will be graduating this May, with a 3.65gpa in the Masters of Public Administration from CSU Chico. As some of you may be aware, I have a background in riparian restoration, public participation, granting, and planning with a BS in Natural Resources Planning from Humboldt State. Currently I have applications completed with the Capital Fellows Executive Program, Ameri-Corp's University of Oregon Resource Assistance for Rural Environments program, Nevada County as a planner, and working on an application with Food & Water Watch as an environmental/water issues organizer. Though I am also trying to make sure that I have other avenues of employment, should none of those come through, and to ensure other potential opportunities. Therefore that is why I am informing the Trinity list-serve of my availability. If you are in need and interested in adding someone like me to your organization, please feel free to make contact, and discuss the potential for employment. Many of the applications I currently have submitted will not inform me of their selection until April through June. Attached is my resume and please feel free to look it over or forward it to someone you may know that could use a dedicated public servant whose interests lie in making the natural environment and governance better for future generations. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter! Sincerely, Joshua Allen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Resume_JAllen_Fall2011.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 32472 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Mar 26 08:42:50 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 08:42:50 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Management Council March 28 Meeting Agenda Message-ID: <8A91230A-FE4C-4A3D-9D9C-B792AC58BD9A@att.net> Draft Agenda TRINITY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL Trinity County Library Weaverville, CA Wednesday, March 28, 2012 Time Topic, Purpose and/or Decision to be Made Discussion Leader Regular Business: 09:30 Introductions: Brian Person, Chair - Approval of Agenda - Approval of December and January 2012 Minutes 10:00 Open Forum: Comments from the public Brian Person 10:30 Report from TAMWG Chair Elizabeth Hadley 11:00 Report from TMC Chair Brian Person ? Landowner issue update ? Joint TMC-TAMWG meeting 11:30 Report from Executive Director Robin Schrock 11:45 2012 Budget Robin Schrock ? Watershed Assessment ? Contract Review 12:00 Lunch Information / Decision Items: 1:00 Flow Release Recommendation (handout) Tim Hayden ? Fall Flows Basinwide Coordination Rod Wittler 1:45 Implementation Update DJ Bandrowski 2:15 Phase 1 Review Ernest Clarke 2:45 Science Update ? FY 2013 Science Work Plan Process - (handouts) Ernest Clarke ? Metadata ? a requirement ? Investigation Plan Database ?benefits ? 2013 projects and executive summaries ? Expert Review Update 3:15 Open Forum 3:45 Calendar ? Website calendar, meeting date, locations and time on full size calendar 4:00 Adjourn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Daryl_Van_Dyke at fws.gov Mon Mar 26 09:55:36 2012 From: Daryl_Van_Dyke at fws.gov (Daryl_Van_Dyke at fws.gov) Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 10:55:36 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Daryl Van Dyke is out of the office. Message-ID: I will be out of the office starting 03/24/2012 and will not return until 03/29/2012. I will respond to your message when I return. Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Mar 26 10:02:33 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 10:02:33 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Ocean Protection Council survey References: <33CD1030A8F6094BAD01DAE4433C80F7366C86646F@ASMMSX07.calegis.net> Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: From: "Weseloh, Tom" Date: March 26, 2012 9:39:01 AM PDT To: "Weseloh, Tom" Cc: Moira McEnespy , Caitrin Phillips Subject: RE: Survey for your List Serve from SCC As per a request from the Ocean Protection Council (OPC), please see information below regarding development of a California voluntary sustainable seafood program. The OPC is seeking input on program development via a short survey. The survey link is below. Your name and organization category are the only required fields for the survey. Thank you for considering their request. Regards, Tom Weseloh Consultant Joint Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture c/o Assemblymember Wesley Chesbro 710 E Street, Suite 150 Eureka, CA 95501 707.445.7014 x13 Tom.weseloh at asm.ca.gov ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello Tom, If you could distribute the following language and link to your list serve I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you very much for your help and time. ________________________________ The California Ocean Protection Council (OPC) is charged with developing a California voluntary sustainable seafood program, which includes developing a protocol on how to be independently certified to internationally-accepted standards, coming up with an accompanying logo or label, implementing a marketing assistance program in consultation with the California Department of Food and Agriculture, and awarding grants and loans (when funds are available) to assist with certification and marketing. We are starting to develop the marketing assistance program for fisheries certified as sustainable under a new CA logo (?California logo marketing assistance program?), and are seeking input. This survey serves to gather from you any advice or recommendations that you may have for developing this program. If you could please take a few minutes to answer this short survey by following the link below it would be greatly appreciated. Please complete this survey by Friday April 6th. Survey Link Questions? Please contact Moira McEnespy (mmcenespy at scc.ca.gov) or Caitrin Phillips (caitrin.phillips at gmail.com). -- Caitrin E Phillips Master of Public Policy Candidate 2012 Goldman School of Public Policy University of California, Berkeley caitrin.phillips at gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Mar 30 10:33:45 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 10:33:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times- Standard- Klamath River expected to exceed flood stage Message-ID: <46D5CE99-941C-44B0-8002-24E5F5315304@att.net> Klamath River expected to exceed flood stage Times-Standard Posted: 03/29/2012 05:42:48 PM PDT http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_20285608/klamath-river-expected-exceed-flood-stage A flood warning has been issued for the Smith River and the Klamath River is expected to exceed flood stage tomorrow afternoon, according to the National Weather Service in Eureka. The Klamath River is expected to reach its flood stage of 38 feet at 2 p.m. The river is likely to peak at 43.3 feet at 10 p.m. tomorrow. As of 1:30 p.m. today, the river was at a level of 19.3 feet. Moderate flooding is forecast. Margaret Keating Elementary School in Klamath has canceled school tomorrow in anticipation of the flooding. As of 5 p.m. today, Del Norte County School District officials said no other schools have canceled classes. At 42 feet, the Klamath River floods U.S. Highway 101 near Requa Road. The NWS said the road to Klamath Glen and other adjacent low-lying secondary roads near the delta is likely. Flooding will be amplified if strong onshore winds are present. During the next 24 hours, an additional three to four inches of rain is expected for the Klamath Basin and five to seven inches is expected for the Smith River Basin. The NWS said this particular anticipated crest of the Klamath compares to a previous crest of 43.8 feet on Jan. 1, 1997. Motorists are reminded not to drive their vehicles across flooded roadways, as it only takes about two feet of water to float most cars. Road conditions can be checked by calling Caltrans at 1-800-427-7623 or going online towww.dot.ca.gov/cgi-bin/roads.cgi. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Mar 30 10:35:54 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 10:35:54 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Mixed reactions to river flow requests Message-ID: http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_e49ae32c-78dd-11e1-a12b-001a4bcf6878.html Mixed reactions to river flow requests By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 7:00 am The request from Humboldt County and the Hoopa Valley Tribe that an additional 50,000 acre-feet of water be released to the Trinity River this year to avert a fish die-off is met with varying responses in Trinity County. The Hoopa tribe and Humboldt say conditions for a die-off like that seen in the Lower Klamath in 2002 are ripe in a water year looking to be dry or critically dry, with a big fall chinook salmon run anticipated. They seek the 50,000 acre-feet of water promised to be released from the Trinity Reservoir for Humboldt County and downstream water users in the 1955 act that authorized construction of the Trinity River Division. While not taking a position for or against the higher release, the Trinity County Board of Supervisors reiterated comments made earlier that "any decision on allocation of water from the Trinity River and Trinity Lake should carefully consider Trinity County's preferential right as the County of Origin" and Trinity County citizens are clearly "downstream users" of Trinity reservoir releases. A letter to that effect has been sent to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, adding that as the County of Origin, the board is committed to a plan for beneficial uses of the Trinity River below the dam. Such uses, the letter states, include development of community water systems in Trinity County along the river, addition of a new power plant in Lewiston, farm and ranch uses along the river and potential biomass facilities in Weaverville, Douglas City, Junction City and Burnt Ranch. At the request of Sup. Judy Pflueger, the letter also states that the supervisors feel it's critical to maintain the Trinity Lake level to ensure adequate supply of cold water releases for fish. They suggest a minimum of one million acre-feet kept in the lake as reasonable. From the Trinity River Guides Association, President Bill Dickens agreed with those concerned a "perfect storm" is brewing for a fish die-off. "The more water down the river the better as far as we're concerned," Dickens said, adding that he would like to see releases that don't drop below 450 cfs at any time of the year. On Monday, the release was reported to be 315 cfs. Projects on the river have made it wider and shallower, Dickens said, and that causes the water to heat more. "The cooler water holds the oxygen," he said. "The warmer water does not." From the Trinity Public Utilities District, General Manager Paul Hauser said he plans to see if the TPUD board wants to weigh in on the issue, but he can't imagine the board endorsing the request by Humboldt County and the Hoopa Valley Tribe. "That 50,000 acre-feet would cost the customers of the PUD about $70,000 annually," Hauser said. "The total economic value of that 50,000 acre-feet (for agriculture and power production) would be $4 million." Water released to the Trinity River does not go through as many power plants as water that is diverted, so decreased diversions mean decreased power production for the federal Western Area Power Administration. Costs to operate the dam don't vary much, and the higher cost per kilowatt is passed along to the TPUD. "When we make those decisions, we need to make them knowing all the costs," he said. Furthermore, Hauser said at a recent meeting of the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group a hydrologist presented information that indicated because the reservoir is high the temperature goals for fish in the Trinity River can be met even if it does turn out to be a critically dry year. "Why would you need an additional 50,000 acre-feet?" he asked. In their letter to Interior Secretary Salazar and California Gov. Jerry Brown, Humboldt County supervisors and the Hoopa Valley Tribe said conditions are looking similar to those preceding the fish die-off in 2002. That fall, thousands of chinook salmon, many of them bound for the Trinity River, died in the Lower Klamath before spawning of diseases believed to have resulted from overcrowding and warm water conditions. The federal Bureau of Reclamation has long contended that the 50,000 acre-feet they seek is already included in the amount sent down the river for fisheries flows. That position is now being re-evaluated in Washington, D.C. On Monday, Reclamation area manager Brian Person said hydrologic conditions have improved with the latest storms, but it is not clear yet if it is improved to the extent that there is less concern about the Lower Klamath. If more water is needed, he said, it could come from the Klamath River or the Trinity that feeds into it. If the Obama administration releases a decision on the 50,000 acre-feet, he said, "Humboldt County could choose to use it in the Lower Klamath" but there would be water rights requirements to be met first. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Mar 30 12:37:46 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 12:37:46 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Pat Higgins editorial in Two Rivers Tribune on KHSA and KBRA References: <4F76008B.2000603@humboldt1.com> Message-ID: <3D8CCF45-A6B9-4AAF-999F-275638AEB761@att.net> More Ethical Problems with Klamath Dam Removal Process than Press Releases By Pat Higgins Thanks to the Two Rivers Tribune for the excellent article on the ethics scandal related to the government dam removal process (Whistle-Blower Says DOI Employees Spun Science on Klamath Dam Removal). The dismissal of Scientific Integrity Officer Dr. Paul Houser by the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) for trying to keep them true to science is very ironic, but not a surprise to someone who has tracked the Klamath dam removal process closely. While Dr. Houser may be restricting his concerns to whether the Department of Interior (DOI) press releases reflected scientific findings, in fact the ethics problems and abuse of science in the dam removal process goes much deeper than that. Your article is correct in its assertion that government staff ended up as promoters of the Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA) and its companion Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) because of the Secretary of Interior?s strong support. Environmental documents produced by the government provided no alternatives to the KBRA, such as ecological restoration. This is illegal under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which requires the government to "study, develop, and describe appropriate alternatives to recommended courses of action in any proposal which involves unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources." Instead of analyzing controversial aspects of the KBRA, the government claimed that actions under the KBRA were not yet defined. The real reason the actions of the KBRA were not analyzed is because they couldn?t be scientifically justified. The best scientific reports related to the Klamath dam removal process were those produced by Expert Panels for Chinook Salmon and for Steelhead and Coho Salmon, which were composed some of the foremost authorities on salmon restoration. The questions raised by these experts are not even broached in the environmental impact report. Documents and presentations by DOI all selected the same quote as representative of the Chinook Expert Panel: ?The Proposed Action appears to be a major step forward in conserving Chinook compared with decades of vigorous disagreements, obvious fish passage barriers, and continued ecological degradation.? Actually the Chinook Expert Panel stated that lack of effective KBRA nutrient reduction in the Upper Klamath Basin would cause the Keno Reservoir reach to remain an anoxic dead-zone for weeks a year. With regard to sufficiency of pollution reduction of the KBRA they stated that ?The Panel is nevertheless very concerned that the magnitude of the proposed solutions may not match the scope and extent of the water quality problem?. Without solving the water quality problems, a fully self-sustaining run of fall Chinook salmon to the upper basin is unlikely.? The Steelhead and Coho Expert Panel also expressed concern that lower Klamath River algae blooms would continue after dam removal and create stressful conditions for salmonid juveniles and high incidences of fish disease. ?Thus, it would be premature to conclude that any problems caused by these blooms, including low dissolved oxygen, will be substantially reduced by KBRA.? The recently released dam removal Overview report is another example of out of control spin. It blatantly misrepresents science and mischaracterizes Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) findings. It says ?FERC (2007) concluded that dam removal would enhance water quality and reduce the cumulative water quality and habitat effects that contribute to disease-induced salmon die-offs in the Klamath River downstream of Iron Gate Dam.? In reality, the FERC final Environmental Impact Statement on dam relicensing (p 155) asserts that acute fish disease problems would likely continue after dam removal and that only the location of where fish diseases occur would change. Lost River and shortnose suckers are the canaries in the Upper Klamath coal mine and the Overview report makes the following claim: ?KBRA implementation would provide greater promise for preventing extinction of these species, and for increasing overall population abundance and productivity, than would occur if the dams were left place and KBRA was not implemented.? Only three populations of these fish remain: Tule Lake, Upper Klamath Lake and Clear Lake in the upper Lost River. On April 22, 2010, less than 90 days after the KBRA was signed, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) issued a revised Biological Opinion for Klamath Project operation allowing BOR to drop Tule Lake to where it would no longer support suckers and allowing sucker removal. Although federal agencies are not bound by the KBRA without authorizing legislation, no other reason but adherence to the KBRA seems to explain USFWS complicity. The agency abdicating its responsibility to protect endangered suckers raises additional serious moral questions. People should also keep in mind that this is not the first ethics scandal on the Klamath. Fisheries biologist Mike Kelly blew the whistle when he quit the National Fisheries Marine Fisheries Service in 2004. Flows for coho are also in play with the KBRA and the NMFS Biological Opinion for Klamath Project operation was already compromised according to Kelly?s resignation letter. ?In October 2002, I believed, both personally and professionally, that our agency had violated the law during the Klamath River ESA Section 7 consultation, and I filed a disclosure under the Whistleblower Protection Act. Although a federal judge eventually ruled the Klamath consultation was illegal, my specific allegations were dismissed. My efforts were ultimately unproductive, and appear to have served only to create stress for my supervisors, my family and me. Threatened coho salmon in the Klamath basin still do not have adequate flow conditions to assure their survival.? The reason that water quality problems cannot be solved by the KBRA is that not enough of the marsh and lakes of the Upper Basin would be restored so that the natural water storage and water purification capacity is rebuilt. Dam decommissioning can be achieved through the FERC relicensing process instead of the KHSA. If the Klamath River is ultimately to be saved, legislation taking ecological restoration approach similar to the Everglades will be necessary because it is the only scientifically valid solution. For more information see www.KlamathER.org. Patrick Higgins is a consulting fisheries biologist who has been assisting the Resighini Rancheria with its response to the government dam removal process. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Mar 30 13:20:50 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 13:20:50 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] AP- Dry winter means tough times along the Klamath Message-ID: This article is 9 days old. Sorry for the delay. Dought and flood all at once! Tom Stokely Dry winter means tough times along the Klamath By JEFF BARNARD, AP Environmental Writer Wednesday, March 21, 2012 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2012/03/21/state/n141330D19.DTL&type=printable (03-21) 17:56 PDT , CA (AP) -- Another tough summer could be shaping up for salmon and farmers in the Klamath Basin of Southern Oregon and Northern California. Klamath County commissioners in Klamath Falls, Ore., declared a drought Tuesday, the first step toward state and federal drought declarations that would trigger aid programs and allow farmers to pump emergency wells for irrigation. On the California end of the basin, Humboldt County and the Hoopa Valley Tribe are asking state and federal officials to devote more water to salmon in the Trinity River ? the biggest Klamath River tributary ? rather than divert it to farms in California's Central Valley. With a record return of more some 380,000 salmon predicted for the Klamath Basin, three times more than recorded numbers, and snow packs running below normal, biologists are concerned conditions could be shaping up for a repeat of 2002, when tens of thousands of adult salmon died before they could spawn in the Klamath River. "The only cold water source that exists is Trinity River water stored in the reservoir," said Mike Orcutt, fisheries director for the Hoopa Tribe. "We feel clearly that we have a legal entitlement to the water. If necessary, we want to be able to do something, rather than collect carcasses, which seemed to be the only option in 2002." Straddling the Oregon-California border, the Klamath Basin regularly has trouble meeting the water demands of the 11,400 farms on a federal irrigation project at the top of the basin, and salmon in the river. The federal government shut off most water to the farms in 2001 to protect threatened coho salmon. After a summer of bitter protests and political battles, the Bush administration restored irrigation to the farms in 2002, only to see tens of thousands of adult salmon die of gill rot diseases that spread rapidly between fish crowded into pools of warm water. The two events persuaded many farmers, tribes, conservation groups and salmon fishermen to overcome their longstanding differences and agree to a water-sharing plan that is linked to removing four small hydroelectric dams from the Klamath River to help salmon. But political battles have blocked enabling legislation in Congress. "I have a constant stream of irrigators in my office trying to figure out what they are going to do this year," said Greg Addington, executive director of the Klamath Water Users Association. "Do they plant, or try to move outside the project where they can find water somewhere else and grow crops? The way we are set up now, I can't tell them how much water they will get from the Klamath Project in 2012 until October. "That's just one more reason everybody sat down and worked out a settlement agreement. A year like this, maybe there would be less water, but boy, there is value in knowing up front what you've got to work with." Just a week ago, the snowpack was 61 percent of normal. That jumped to 84 percent in recent days with new storms. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has warned farmers with junior water rights that they may not get water this year, but a final plan won't be worked out until next month. Since 1963, water from the Trinity's reservoir has been pumped over the mountain to irrigate farms in the Central Valley, contributing to the degradation of salmon habitat in the basin. A federal plan to restore the Trinity went into effect in 2004, a half century after it was first approved by Congress. It guarantees funding for habitat restoration and minimum flows for fish, but the Hoopa Tribe and Humboldt County contend that a 1959 contract for an extra 50,000 acre-feet of water has never been fulfilled, and may have been absorbed into water commitments for the Sacramento Delta. "We are acutely aware that in 2002, when the fish kill occurred, a good number of those fish were destined for the Trinity," said Orcutt. "We want that (extra water) to be in our tool chest this year because of the record predicted (salmon) run size." http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2012/03/21/state/n141330D19.DTL -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Mar 30 13:16:37 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 13:16:37 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Joint Hoopa Valley Tribe/Humboldt County letter on potential for 2012 Klamath fish kill Message-ID: <9DAC0213-2045-4483-AE66-6C67296835DF@att.net> See attached. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Joint HVT-HC-50TAF With attachments.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 826005 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Mar 30 13:23:44 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 13:23:44 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Predicted River flows website Message-ID: <34E7B94B-A60B-4353-8155-4DF3570FE79F@att.net> Here is a link to the predicted flows throughout California from the NWS California-Nevada River Forecast Center with the following caveat: Warning: Levels identified as "guidance" have significant uncertainty due to future weather and/or reservoir regulation and are provided for planning purposes only. http://cdec.water.ca.gov/guidance_plots/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Apr 2 10:30:51 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2012 10:30:51 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Capital Press-Bird deaths fuel posturing over Klamath pact Message-ID: <77F4B6E5-4FCE-4E8E-B24B-446646330643@att.net> Bird deaths fuel posturing over Klamath pact http://www.capitalpress.com/content/TH-klamath-birds-w-infobox-040612 By TIM HEARDEN Capital Press TULELAKE, Calif. - The cholera deaths of at least 3,000 migratory birds in two wildlife refuges near here have fueled the latest round of posturing over a landmark water-sharing agreement. Biologists from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the past week have been collecting carcasses of snow geese and other birds in the Lower Klamath and Tule Lake refuges, where as many as 10,000 birds are suspected of having succumbed to the disease. Outbreaks of avian cholera are an annual occurrence in the Klamath Basin refuges, one of a handful of hot spots in the country, biologists say. This year's numbers are considerably higher than the fewer than 600 dead birds that biologists picked up last year but slightly less than the last large outbreak in 2008, refuge biologist John Beckstrand said. "It's fairly common," he said of the disease. "For me it's hard to attribute it to any one thing. Generally you see it in snow geese ... They'll spread it aerially." The dead birds represent a miniscule fraction of the roughly 6 million migratory birds that use the more than 100-year-old Klamath refuge complex as a stop-off point each year, according to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service statistics. However, environmental groups and supporters of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement have been quick to blame drought conditions for the die-off, arguing that crowding of birds for limited water has spread the disease. Karuk Tribe Klamath coordinator Craig Tucker asserted that if the KBRA were implemented, the refuges would have the same right to water as farms and would have been assured a dry-year delivery of 48,000 acre-feet of water. He said the refuges get inadequate deliveries in eight out of 10 years. "In short, this week's bird kill gives Congress 10,000 more reasons to pass the Klamath Basin Economic Restoration Act," Tucker said in a statement. All water users in the basin have been bracing for a dry year. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation sent letters in March to more than a dozen area water districts informing them that they likely won't get their full allotments for the upcoming irrigation season. There are currently 15,000 acres of wetlands in the refuges that are receiving water from the Ady Canal, said Kevin Moore, a bureau spokesman. Flows to the refuges were stopped on Dec. 2 after some 10,000 acre-feet had been delivered, then as the snowpack improved, deliveries resumed on March 17, he said. Moore noted that the refuges receive some of their water from runoff from irrigators, and since a contract with PacifiCorp expired in 2006, pumping has become much more expensive and irrigators have become much more conservative with their use. "Since that time, Reclamation has made great efforts to supply water through Ady Canal," he said. The latest die-off comes as Congress is debating whether to fund the 2-year-old set of agreements that would provide various fisheries improvements to the Klamath Basin and include the controversial removal of four dams from the Klamath River. Opposing sides of the debate have latched on to several recent developments to bolster their arguments. Recently critics of the proposal seized on a former Bureau of Reclamation official's charge that the government overstated positive remarks about the project by scientists in a press release and summary report. The posturing concerns Greg Addington, executive director of the Klamath Water Users Association. "We're supportive of the KBRA ... but I don't really like politicizing a disaster, necessarily," he said. "I'm concerned about the anti-farm critics of the Klamath reclamation project ... who I guarantee will make this political and say we should downsize the Klamath project and make the refuges a higher priority. I'm certain that's what's going to happen because it's what those guys do." Online Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuge Complex: http://www.fws.gov/klamathbasinrefuges/ Klamath Economic Restoration Act: http://www.klamathrestoration.org/images/stories/pdfs/11-8-11_Klamath_Legislation_Draft_END11921.pdf Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement studies and EIS/EIR: http://klamathrestoration.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Apr 5 06:13:45 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 06:13:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River rescue on Trinity Message-ID: http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_50d10d02-7e59-11e1-99d0-001a4bcf6878.html River rescue on Trinity By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 4, 2012 6:30 am A kayaker got into trouble in the high-flowing Trinity River last Friday afternoon but was rescued by rafters. The kayaker, a Humboldt State University student named Camrin Dengel, was reportedly making the Pigeon Point run with two other kayakers when she got caught in churning water at the bottom of a rapid. She inhaled some river water and was forced to abandon her kayak to get to shore ? the opposite shore from the highway. That was when, as luck would have it, Sheriff's Search and Rescue members James Mitchell and Nick Walker happened by. Both men have worked and volunteered as river rangers. They'd planned that day to check the area for river hazards such as tree "strainers" that can hold a kayaker underwater. "We're cruising down toward Big Bar and we see the ruckus going on," Walker said, with two kayakers on the highway side of the river and the other stranded on the opposite bank. Between them, the Trinity River downstream of the North Fork and Canyon Creek tributaries was running at about 15,000 cubic feet per second. "They tell us they're getting ready to have her swim across," Walker said. "I told them 'No. Stay, we'll get a raft.'" A swimmer could easily become exhausted in that kind of current and drown, he said. In fact, Walker and Mitchell needed one more rower to enact a rescue. "The water's too powerful," Walker said. The Trinity County Sheriff's Department and California Highway Patrol also responded, as did Dave Steinhauser and Dana Hord of Trinity River Rafting with a better raft. Steinhauser was "the perfect guy for the job," Walker said. The trio put in above the stranded kayaker and ran the river, picking her up and getting her to the other side. "We were very grateful for super Dave for showing up," Walker said. He noted that he and Mitchell had considered making the Pigeon Point run in kayaks that day but decided against it. Mitchell said Dengel and the other two kayakers had made the run quite a bit over the summer, but not in these types of flows. "At those flows there are logs floating down and other hazards," Mitchell said. "Thankfully, everything went well." It appears the trio underestimated the river flow based on information from a Web site that had not been updated that day, Steinhauser said. Dengel's kayak was lost in the incident. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Apr 5 06:55:21 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 06:55:21 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com- Upper Trinity, Klamath Chinook not on endangered list; feds deny request of several groups Message-ID: Upper Trinity, Klamath Chinook not on endangered list; feds deny request of several groups http://www.redding.com/news/2012/apr/04/trinity-klamath-chinook-not-on-endangered-list/ By Damon Arthur Wednesday, April 4, 2012 Federal officials have decided not to list Chinook salmon in the upper Trinity and Klamath rivers as threatened or endangered species. The National Marine Fisheries Service issued a notice this week that Chinook do not warrant protection under the Endangered Species Act because there is little risk of them going extinct in the next 100 years. Several groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity, sent a petition to the fisheries service last year asking it to add the Chinook salmon to the endangered species list. After a 12-month study, the agency ruled against the request. Noah Greenwald, endangered species director for the Center for Biological Diversity, disagreed with service's decision. He said the center was most concerned about the spring run of Chinook salmon going extinct. "The loss of that population would be serious," Greenwald said. Center officials haven't yet decided whether to challenge the service's decision, he said. The center and other groups wanted the service to consider the Chinook spring run a distinct species from the fall run of salmon, similar to the way the two runs are treated in the Sacramento River. But the agency said that unlike salmon in the Central Valley, the spring and fall runs "are genetically very similar," according to the notice released by the service on Monday. Greenwald said if the spring run goes extinct, that would reduce the diversity of the salmon, putting the fall run more at risk. In 2011 an estimated 27,194 spring run Chinook returned upstream to the Klamath River Basin, according to the state Department of Fish and Game. The basin includes the Trinity and Klamath Rivers and their tributaries. An estimated 188,845 Chinook salmon were counted in the 2011 fall run for the entire basin, according to the DFG. Numbers for both runs have varied greatly over the years. In 1983 there were 1,945 counted in the spring run, while 69,004 were counted in the 1988 run, according to DFG figures. Fall run figures have ranged from 34,425 in 1991 to 245,542 in 1995, according to the DFG. The fisheries service's decision will not affect work to restore the Trinity River, said Robin Schrock, executive director of the Trinity River Restoration Program, which has been working since 2000 to improve conditions in the river for salmon and steelhead. "We will continue to do our job," Schrock said. The restoration program also is concerned about improving the river to help the coho salmon, as well, she said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sing_logo.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1020 bytes Desc: not available URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Thu Apr 5 11:09:38 2012 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 11:09:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?California=92s_Marin_County_Ranked?= =?windows-1252?q?_Healthiest=2C_Trinity_County_Unhealthiest?= Message-ID: California?s Marin County Ranked Healthiest, Trinity County Unhealthiest[image: Yahoo! Contributor Network] By Sylvia Cochran | Yahoo! Contributor Network ? http://news.yahoo.com/california-marin-county-ranked-healthiest-trinity-county-unhealthiest-230100198.html;_ylc=X3oDMTEwZDlnbW0xBF9TAzIwMjM4Mjc1MjQEZW1haWxJZAMxMzMzNTg5MjM4 The County Health Rankings, compiled and published by the Wisconsin Population Health Instituteand the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, identify California's Marin County as the healthiest place in the Golden State. Trinity County is the unhealthiest. *What health factors did researchers measure?* Measures included premature death and morbidity factors, which included overall health, physical health, mental health, and low birth weight statistics. Also included were economic data and personal behavior choices. *Which county ranked first in premature deaths?* Researchers measured premature death data as the sum total of years lost between a person's age at death and age 75. Trinity County had the highest premature death rate with approximately 10,546 years lost; next came Del Norte County with 10,312 years. Marin County ranked last with only about 3,846 years lost. *How do Marin and Trinity Counties compare and contrast?* A county comparison highlights that the difference between healthiest and unhealthiest California locale may be influenced by unemployment and personal behavior choices. For example, 8.3 percent of Marin County residents are unemployed; in Trinity County, this number is closer to 18.7 percent. By comparison, California's overall unemployment rate is 12.4 percent. Going hand in hand with the lack of income are children living in poverty -- 11 percent versus 31 percent -- and high numbers of uninsured residents. Adult obesity is higher in Trinity County (24 percent) than in Marin County (15 percent). A look at financial data shows that the median household income in Marin County totals $82,383, while Trinity County households on average only made $35,207. *Is income the overall deciding factor in healthy versus unhealthy living?* This is a fair assumption. Modoc County household incomes averaged $34,579, while San Mateo median household incomes were as high as $82,413. Ranking 46th and 5th respectively, 33 percent of children in Modoc County live in poverty whereas 9 percent of San Mateo children fit this classification. Only three percent of San Mateo County residents reported a limited access to healthy foods, while 16 percent of those living in Modoc County faced this problem. *How do these numbers compare to 2010?* In 2010, Marin County still led the charge, but the unhealthiest county was Del Norte; Trinity County was in 53rd place, Modoc County ranked 47th, and San Mateo County remained steady in 5th place. *Why do these rankings matter?* "The County Health Rankings show us that much of what influences our health happens outside of the doctor's office. In fact, where we live, learn, work and play has a big role in determining how healthy we are and how long we live," the president and CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation told the Central Valley Business Times . *Sylvia Cochran is a Los Angeles area resident with a firm finger on the pulse of California politics. Talk radio junkie, community volunteer and politically independent, she scrutinizes the good and the bad from both sides of the political aisle.* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danaalfs at gmail.com Thu Apr 5 13:29:49 2012 From: danaalfs at gmail.com (dan aalfs) Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 13:29:49 -0700 Subject: =?windows-1252?Q?Re=3A_=5Benv=2Dtrinity=5D_California=92s_Marin_County_Ranked?= =?windows-1252?Q?_Healthiest=2C_Trinity_County_Unhealthiest?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2012/4/5 Joshua Allen > California?s Marin County Ranked Healthiest, Trinity County Unhealthiest[image: > Yahoo! Contributor Network] > By Sylvia Cochran > | Yahoo! Contributor Network ? > > > http://news.yahoo.com/california-marin-county-ranked-healthiest-trinity-county-unhealthiest-230100198.html;_ylc=X3oDMTEwZDlnbW0xBF9TAzIwMjM4Mjc1MjQEZW1haWxJZAMxMzMzNTg5MjM4 > > The County Health Rankings, > compiled and published by the Wisconsin Population Health Instituteand > the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, identify California's Marin County as > the healthiest place in the Golden State. Trinity County is the > unhealthiest. > > *What health factors did researchers measure?* > > Measures included > premature death and morbidity factors, which included overall health, > physical health, mental health, and low birth weight statistics. Also > included were economic data and personal behavior choices. > > *Which county ranked first in premature deaths?* > > Researchers measured premature death data as > the sum total of years lost between a person's age at death and age 75. > Trinity County had the highest premature death rate with approximately > 10,546 years lost; next came Del Norte County with 10,312 years. Marin > County ranked last with only about 3,846 years lost. > > *How do Marin and Trinity Counties compare and contrast?* > > A county comparison highlights > that the difference between healthiest and unhealthiest California locale > may be influenced by unemployment and personal behavior choices. For > example, 8.3 percent of Marin County residents are unemployed; in Trinity > County, this number is closer to 18.7 percent. By comparison, California's > overall unemployment rate is 12.4 percent. Going hand in hand with the lack > of income are children living in poverty -- 11 percent versus 31 percent -- > and high numbers of uninsured residents. Adult obesity is higher in Trinity > County (24 percent) than in Marin County (15 percent). A look at financial > data shows that the median household income in Marin County totals $82,383, > while Trinity County households on average only made $35,207. > > *Is income the overall deciding factor in healthy versus unhealthy living? > * > > This is a fair assumption. Modoc County household incomes averaged > $34,579, while San Mateo median household incomes were as high as $82,413. > Ranking 46th and 5th respectively, 33 percent of children in Modoc County > live in poverty whereas 9 percent of San Mateo children fit this > classification. Only three percent of San Mateo County residents reported a > limited access to healthy foods, while 16 percent of those living in Modoc > County faced this problem. > > *How do these numbers compare to 2010?* > > In 2010, > Marin County still led the charge, but the unhealthiest county was Del > Norte; Trinity County was in 53rd place, Modoc County ranked 47th, and San > Mateo County remained steady in 5th place. > > *Why do these rankings matter?* > > "The County Health Rankings show us that much of what influences our > health happens outside of the doctor's office. In fact, where we live, > learn, work and play has a big role in determining how healthy we are and > how long we live," the president and CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson > Foundation told the Central Valley Business Times > . > > *Sylvia Cochran is a Los Angeles area resident with a firm finger on the > pulse of California politics. Talk radio junkie, community volunteer and > politically independent, she scrutinizes the good and the bad from both > sides of the political aisle.* > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ema.berol at yahoo.com Thu Apr 5 20:24:50 2012 From: ema.berol at yahoo.com (Emelia Berol) Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 20:24:50 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River rescue on Trinity In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Kudos to TAMWG member Dave Steinhausr for his role in this rescue! The river was raging that day, very high with a constant stream of large logs floating down ... we were watching the stretch in Willow Creek between Camp Kimtu and the mouth of Willow Creek ... thrilling but very dangerous.... emelia berol Sent from my iPad On Apr 5, 2012, at 6:13 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > > http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_50d10d02-7e59-11e1-99d0-001a4bcf6878.html > River rescue on Trinity > By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 4, 2012 6:30 am > A kayaker got into trouble in the high-flowing Trinity River last Friday afternoon but was rescued by rafters. > The kayaker, a Humboldt State University student named Camrin Dengel, was reportedly making the Pigeon Point run with two other kayakers when she got caught in churning water at the bottom of a rapid. She inhaled some river water and was forced to abandon her kayak to get to shore ? the opposite shore from the highway. > That was when, as luck would have it, Sheriff's Search and Rescue members James Mitchell and Nick Walker happened by. Both men have worked and volunteered as river rangers. > They'd planned that day to check the area for river hazards such as tree "strainers" that can hold a kayaker underwater. > "We're cruising down toward Big Bar and we see the ruckus going on," Walker said, with two kayakers on the highway side of the river and the other stranded on the opposite bank. Between them, the Trinity River downstream of the North Fork and Canyon Creek tributaries was running at about 15,000 cubic feet per second. > "They tell us they're getting ready to have her swim across," Walker said. "I told them 'No. Stay, we'll get a raft.'" > A swimmer could easily become exhausted in that kind of current and drown, he said. > In fact, Walker and Mitchell needed one more rower to enact a rescue. "The water's too powerful," Walker said. > The Trinity County Sheriff's Department and California Highway Patrol also responded, as did Dave Steinhauser and Dana Hord of Trinity River Rafting with a better raft. Steinhauser was "the perfect guy for the job," Walker said. > The trio put in above the stranded kayaker and ran the river, picking her up and getting her to the other side. > "We were very grateful for super Dave for showing up," Walker said. > He noted that he and Mitchell had considered making the Pigeon Point run in kayaks that day but decided against it. > Mitchell said Dengel and the other two kayakers had made the run quite a bit over the summer, but not in these types of flows. > "At those flows there are logs floating down and other hazards," Mitchell said. "Thankfully, everything went well." > It appears the trio underestimated the river flow based on information from a Web site that had not been updated that day, Steinhauser said. > Dengel's kayak was lost in the incident. > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Apr 12 12:18:04 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 12:18:04 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard Guest Opinion- Restoration pact offers Klamath Basin hope Message-ID: <13BC3E9C-EDB8-458B-974C-5BA9ED0A3139@att.net> http://www.times-standard.com/guest_opinion/ci_20379287/restoration-pact-offers-klamath-basin-hope Restoration pact offers Klamath Basin hope Erik Bergren/For the Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Posted: Times-Standard.com Over 10,000 waterfowl have died in the Lower Klamath and Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuges in the last couple of weeks due to an avian cholera outbreak exacerbated by low water conditions. This is one of the largest drought-related die-offs the refuges have seen in their 100-year history. During years of low precipitation, water allocations in the Klamath Basin are stretched. The refuges are dependent on water deliveries from the Bureau of Reclamation's Klamath Project and it can be difficult to balance water needs among fisheries, wildlife refuges, tribes and irrigators. While not a perfect solution, implementation of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement would help Klamath basin wildlife refuges by allowing refuge managers flexibility in allocating a set amount of water to support spring and fall waterfowl migrations. Refuges would be on equal footing with irrigation deliveries for the first time. The agreement represents local, community derived solutions to the Klamath Basin's water needs. If the agreement had been implemented, the magnitude of disease outbreak on the refuges would have been lessened because more flooded habitat would have been present. Currently, it is the only viable option to ensuring more reliable water deliveries to the refuge over the long term. With the struggle to balance water between farms and fish, the refuges are often overlooked. Of all the wetlands within the Pacific Flyway, no area provides more important staging habitats, both in the fall and spring, for migratory waterfowl than the marshes and lakes of the Klamath Basin. This spring, the refuge has been one of the driest on record. According to refuge managers, only 50 percent of the wetlands on the refuge contain water. That is 15,000 acres of wetlands flooded out of about 31,000 acres on the Lower Klamath refuge. Legislation authorizing the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement is now before Congress and is an example of a locally developed plan that would solve many of the water-balancing issues that these communities face after dry winters like the one we just experienced. It is time for Congress to act. Erik Bergren is a communications administrator with California Waterfowl. Find more information online at www.calwaterfowl.org. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Apr 12 12:32:32 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 12:32:32 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Q&A with staff of restoration program Message-ID: <5C69F877-D0A7-40C4-AD93-FD69BB750166@att.net> http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_13055272-83e9-11e1-b9ca-0019bb30f31a.html Q&A with staff of restoration program Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 am The Trinity River Restoration Program has provided answers to questions raised about the program at a public outreach meeting held in December in Junction City. The meeting at the North Fork Grange was held by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. Although there was restoration work on the Trinity River prior to 2000, the current Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) was authorized in that year, and answers are based on that timeframe. The TRRP responded in writing to questions that were raised. A sampling of the questions and answers follows: Q. "How much money has been spent on the program so far?" A. "$130 million over 12 years, which is an average of $10.8 million per year. The Record of Decision (the federal decision from 2000 that returned higher flows to the river) envisioned full program funding of $16 million per year, which would have totaled $192 million. This funding goal was never reached." Q. "Did the implementation of the projects help reach goals?" A. "Yes, in the short ecological timeframe since the first project went in (2005) there are signs of improvement in key program targets. The program is attempting to re-establish natural river processes throughout a 40-mile stretch of the Trinity River, resulting in improved fisheries habitat. This is a natural system and we are seeking broad-scale changes, we are seeing a gradual change in the use of project sites by fish." Performance Measure Reports are available at www.trrp.net/?pageid=490. Q. "Is there maintenance on existing sites?" A. "No, the program was designed to restore river processes and no funds were designated for maintenance. Current projects are being designed to respond to river flows and will change in response to changing river dynamics." Q. "Who is responsible for removing hazards?" A. "Hazards such as drifting logs and submerged fallen trees are a normal component of a natural dynamic river in a forested watershed and are to be expected in Wild and Scenic Rivers ? On occasion, hazards may be removed by one of the partner federal agencies (BLM, USFS) that administer public lands along the river when resources are available." Q. "Adult holding pools are mentioned in the Record of Decision but no strategies are described in the EIR/EIS ? Are pools filling in and is the TRRP addressing that issue?" A. "A bathymetric survey was already planned for 2012 and is being completed to assess the effects of the 2011 11,000 cfs restoration release. The results will quantify the scour and fill of pools throughout the 40-mile reach between Lewiston Dam and the North Fork Trinity River and compare them to a 2009 survey." The full text of the answers from the Trinity River Restoration Program to the questions posed in Junction City is available online athttp://trinityriver.org/questions_and_answers/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Apr 12 12:50:33 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 12:50:33 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Message-ID: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net> http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-9634-0019bb30f31a.html River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 am Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the program. From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to Lilleberg. "I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you couldn't count fish fast enough ? You might not see one now." Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the river less accessible. "Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. "They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it back." "Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our county." She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic development, saying, "restoration is important ? but it must be balanced." Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over the past year ? that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in holes adult fish use. Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late ?70s to early ?80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three steelhead." Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of wildlife ? particularly in comparison to other rivers. "This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, who lives part time in Lewiston. Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity River flows is the most important way to restore the river. Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion and Central Valley Project use. "That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping recover the river and recover the fish." "Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating the stream.'" Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that law." Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said. The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be provided within 30 days. Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are planned for this year. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Thu Apr 12 14:58:42 2012 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 17:58:42 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard Guest Opinion- Restoration pact offers Klama... Message-ID: <8a9ab.4fbe6570.3cb8aa12@aol.com> Colleagues... Mr. Bergren is, of course, correct. The very best way to avoid massive bird deaths in the future is to provide a guaranteed minimum water supply, which those two refuges do not now have. At present they are the most junior water right holder, which makes that right more or less meaningless since they are at the tail end of a long legal and physical pipeline, and are frequently shorted of water or dried out all together, causing massive bird losses by loss of wetlands habitat and overcrowding. Among many other environmental benefits, the Klamath Settlement Agreement's Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) would benefit these two National Wildlife Refuges by moving the refuges from what is currently the most junior water right to the same senior legal position as the Klamath Irrigation Project itself, finally make "wildlife and refuge" needs a co-equal legal purpose for which the Klamath Irrigation Project must be managed (now it is only for irrigation), and guarantee at least 48,000 acre-feet of water for the Lower Klamath and Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuges even in very dry years, moving up to at least 60,000 acre-feet as rainfall increases (see KBRA Sec. 15.1.2). This is a lot more than the refuges frequently got in past years, or can expect in many future years under the current status quo. There are also several other major environmental benefits to the Refuges from the KBRA of a more indirect nature, but nonetheless of great benefit to its wildlife. But don't take my word for it..... Attached is a 2010 Memo from Refuge Manger Ron Cole summarizing the many benefits to the Tule Lake and Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuges from the KBRA. These are benefits negotiated by USFWS refuge managers themselves, and why they strongly support the Klamath Settlement Agreement as a whole as good for those national wildlife refuges and their wildlife. ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) Email: fish1ifr at aol.com ========================================================== In a message dated 4/12/2012 12:18:24 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tstokely at att.net writes: _http://www.times-standard.com/guest_opinion/ci_20379287/restoration-pact-of fers-klamath-basin-hope_ (http://www.times-standard.com/guest_opinion/ci_20379287/restoration-pact-offers-klamath-basin-hope) Restoration pact offers Klamath Basin hope Erik Bergren/For the Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Posted: _Times-Standard.com_ (http://times-standard.com/) Over 10,000 waterfowl have died in the Lower Klamath and Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuges in the last couple of weeks due to an avian cholera outbreak exacerbated by low water conditions. This is one of the largest drought-related die-offs the refuges have seen in their 100-year history. During years of low precipitation, water allocations in the Klamath Basin are stretched. The refuges are dependent on water deliveries from the Bureau of Reclamation's Klamath Project and it can be difficult to balance water needs among fisheries, wildlife refuges, tribes and irrigators. While not a perfect solution, implementation of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement would help Klamath basin wildlife refuges by allowing refuge managers flexibility in allocating a set amount of water to support spring and fall waterfowl migrations. Refuges would be on equal footing with irrigation deliveries for the first time. The agreement represents local, community derived solutions to the Klamath Basin's water needs. If the agreement had been implemented, the magnitude of disease outbreak on the refuges would have been lessened because more flooded habitat would have been present. Currently, it is the only viable option to ensuring more reliable water deliveries to the refuge over the long term. With the struggle to balance water between farms and fish, the refuges are often overlooked. Of all the wetlands within the Pacific Flyway, no area provides more important staging habitats, both in the fall and spring, for migratory waterfowl than the marshes and lakes of the Klamath Basin. This spring, the refuge has been one of the driest on record. According to refuge managers, only 50 percent of the wetlands on the refuge contain water. That is 15,000 acres of wetlands flooded out of about 31,000 acres on the Lower Klamath refuge. Legislation authorizing the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement is now before Congress and is an example of a locally developed plan that would solve many of the water-balancing issues that these communities face after dry winters like the one we just experienced. It is time for Congress to act. Erik Bergren is a communications administrator with California Waterfowl. Find more information online at _www.calwaterfowl.org_ (http://www.calwaterfowl.org/) . = -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: BriefingPaperRenKBRA.doc Type: application/octet-stream Size: 50688 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jpborruso at gmail.com Mon Apr 16 21:39:01 2012 From: jpborruso at gmail.com (Jim) Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 21:39:01 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net> References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net> Message-ID: <42EAF083-0165-4CE5-877E-D265B485F4C8@gmail.com> Please remove from list Sent from my iPad On Apr 12, 2012, at 12:50 PM, Tom Stokely wrote: > http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-9634-0019bb30f31a.html > River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting > By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 am > Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. > A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the program. > From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to Lilleberg. > "I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." > Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you couldn't count fish fast enough ? You might not see one now." > Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. > Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the river less accessible. > "Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. > "They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it back." > "Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. > Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our county." > She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic development, saying, "restoration is important ? but it must be balanced." > Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over the past year ? that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in holes adult fish use. > Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late ?70s to early ?80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three steelhead." > Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." > Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of wildlife ? particularly in comparison to other rivers. > "This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, who lives part time in Lewiston. > Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity River flows is the most important way to restore the river. > Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion and Central Valley Project use. > "That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping recover the river and recover the fish." > "Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating the stream.'" > Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that law." > Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said. > The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." > From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be provided within 30 days. > Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. > The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are planned for this year. > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Apr 17 10:55:26 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 10:55:26 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] CalTrout job opening, So Cal References: <3CF33A1A2614E14FBD7724008F03B05372DB7C@caltrout01.CALTROUT.LOCAL> Message-ID: See attached flier for Southern California CalTrout position. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CalTrout_Southern California Region Manager.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 88729 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Tue Apr 17 11:35:28 2012 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 11:35:28 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net> References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net> Message-ID: Ok, just for discussion related purposes; I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. A lot of people keep complaining about the gravel and holes being filled in between Lewiston and Douglas City. This has a lot to do, as I see it, with a lack of fishing areas, and the river drastically changing from what it was in the past. Like it was reported, "...need to stop man-ipulating the river" and "what time period is the program trying to capture". Though as I see it, it is not possible to not stop manipulating the river, because there is no period in the river's history that is trying to be captured. Instead a brand new section is being created that never existed before. The river has already manipulated to death since the dams were put up in the first place. ~ Is not the whole point of the program is to create a stretch of river between Lewiston and Douglas City that mimics upstream spawning conditions lost by the dams? ~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those two communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide spawning habitat so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be raised in? ~ If the area in question does not have uniform flat areas for natural spawning of salmonids, instead has huge holes like it did in the past, then spawning can not occur, areas to raise juveniles is limited, and what is left is a dependence upon the hatchery for production? ~ Since this area is meant for spawning and raising of juveniles, does it also not make sense to provide shade cover, like the upper reaches, for said juveniles? ~ Would it also not make sense to limit access to that stretch of river for sport fishing/recreation and instead move such areas out of redds and habitat areas to more appropriate places downstream where there are holes for holding? (i.e potential for Douglas City and Junction City to become the "new" fishing and financial resource areas of the county, while Lewiston focuses on dam related recreation activities.) ~ Should not people be the ones that must adapt to these changes since the fish have already had to adapt to huge changes in their environment with the installation of the dams which provides positive benefits to humans that are negative to natural salmonid production? ~ Isn't the whole point of the program to increase natural production while reducing man-ipulated hatchery production? ~ Can't anyone associated with the program just come out with this "secret" to the public through the participatory process in a way they can understand? I know, blasphemy! But to me, it seems like no one will be happy, because humans are unwilling to adapt to necessary changes, and instead are more focused on the human concepts of recreational use and money. Just my two cents. Though I would be interested in hearing from someone more knowledgeable about the needs of fish, who can answer these questions, and how humans can adapt to these requirements of a changing environment. 2012/4/12 Tom Stokely > > http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-9634-0019bb30f31a.html > River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting > > *By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, > 2012 8:15 am* > > Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last > week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in > Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. > > A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One > Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, > under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD > employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made > clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were > there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the > program. > > From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five > days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his > biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since > construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to > Lilleberg. > > "I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people > fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." > > Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you > couldn't count fish fast enough ? You might not see one now." > > Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. > > Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the > river less accessible. > > "Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at > one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. > > "They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it > back." > > "Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. > > Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County > Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our > county." > > She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic > development, saying, "restoration is important ? but it must be balanced." > > Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over > the past year ? that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in > holes adult fish use. > > Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late ?70s > to early ?80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three > steelhead." > > Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be > able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." > > Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of > wildlife ? particularly in comparison to other rivers. > > "This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, > who lives part time in Lewiston. > > Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity > River flows is the most important way to restore the river. > > Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on > water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity > Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion > and Central Valley Project use. > > "That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping > recover the river and recover the fish." > > "Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop > bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating > the stream.'" > > Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We > are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that > law." > > Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said. > > The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the > program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there > will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. > Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." > > From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be > provided within 30 days. > > Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are > planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. > > The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and > California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel > restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is > complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and > the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are > planned for this year. > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ggoodyear at hotmail.com Tue Apr 17 12:33:17 2012 From: ggoodyear at hotmail.com (Gail Goodyear) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 19:33:17 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net>, Message-ID: Concern about the filling of deep holes between Vitzhum's and Dutton Creek has been expressed in my writings and testimonies. A project plan which focuses on fry fish without maintaining adult fish habitat that nature created is not okay. Period. Requests for plans to balance adult and fry fish habitat transcends money and recreation. It is simply logical not to destroy adult habitat for fry habitat. Josh, buy a piece of land, manage it for ten to twenty years and you might develop a deep respect for how nature continues to do good and to make fascinating changes. Landowners are well used to change and to adapting. There is wisdom in the requests to take a softer approach, and to avoid man-hurried overzealous implementation of a current favored restoration method. Fashions pass. Plopping methods, used on rivers very diffferent from the Trinity River, on our treasured river is not okay. Those scientists and engineers who evolve slowly methods of river management appropriate to the multi-varied ecosystem and to the many different microclimates of the Trinity River will do well here and will build a respected reputation for their work. They will develop methods for each small section of the river rather than implementing blanket treatment of 10 to 40+ miles, or forwarding ideas that would make the Trinity look like a place far different than what nature intended or intends (e.g., [1] excessive revegetation plans for a river that for many miles historically had little vegetation close to river edge and its floodplain, [2] burying bedrock with gravel and [3] numerous, unnatural-looking, large log jams). The successful workers will be creators and innovators who are respectful of the diversity of the Trinity River and its people. Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 11:35:28 -0700 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com To: env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Ok, just for discussion related purposes; I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. A lot of people keep complaining about the gravel and holes being filled in between Lewiston and Douglas City. This has a lot to do, as I see it, with a lack of fishing areas, and the river drastically changing from what it was in the past. Like it was reported, "...need to stop man-ipulating the river" and "what time period is the program trying to capture". Though as I see it, it is not possible to not stop manipulating the river, because there is no period in the river's history that is trying to be captured. Instead a brand new section is being created that never existed before. The river has already manipulated to death since the dams were put up in the first place. ~ Is not the whole point of the program is to create a stretch of river between Lewiston and Douglas City that mimics upstream spawning conditions lost by the dams? ~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those two communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide spawning habitat so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be raised in? ~ If the area in question does not have uniform flat areas for natural spawning of salmonids, instead has huge holes like it did in the past, then spawning can not occur, areas to raise juveniles is limited, and what is left is a dependence upon the hatchery for production? ~ Since this area is meant for spawning and raising of juveniles, does it also not make sense to provide shade cover, like the upper reaches, for said juveniles? ~ Would it also not make sense to limit access to that stretch of river for sport fishing/recreation and instead move such areas out of redds and habitat areas to more appropriate places downstream where there are holes for holding? (i.e potential for Douglas City and Junction City to become the "new" fishing and financial resource areas of the county, while Lewiston focuses on dam related recreation activities.) ~ Should not people be the ones that must adapt to these changes since the fish have already had to adapt to huge changes in their environment with the installation of the dams which provides positive benefits to humans that are negative to natural salmonid production? ~ Isn't the whole point of the program to increase natural production while reducing man-ipulated hatchery production? ~ Can't anyone associated with the program just come out with this "secret" to the public through the participatory process in a way they can understand? I know, blasphemy! But to me, it seems like no one will be happy, because humans are unwilling to adapt to necessary changes, and instead are more focused on the human concepts of recreational use and money. Just my two cents. Though I would be interested in hearing from someone more knowledgeable about the needs of fish, who can answer these questions, and how humans can adapt to these requirements of a changing environment. 2012/4/12 Tom Stokely http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-9634-0019bb30f31a.html River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 am Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the program. >From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to Lilleberg. "I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you couldn't count fish fast enough ? You might not see one now." Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the river less accessible. "Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. "They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it back." "Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our county." She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic development, saying, "restoration is important ? but it must be balanced." Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over the past year ? that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in holes adult fish use. Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late ?70s to early ?80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three steelhead." Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of wildlife ? particularly in comparison to other rivers. "This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, who lives part time in Lewiston. Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity River flows is the most important way to restore the river. Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion and Central Valley Project use. "That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping recover the river and recover the fish." "Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating the stream.'" Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that law." Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said. The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." >From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be provided within 30 days. Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are planned for this year. _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From summerhillfarmpv at aol.com Tue Apr 17 12:03:31 2012 From: summerhillfarmpv at aol.com (summerhillfarmpv at aol.com) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 15:03:31 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net> Message-ID: <8CEEAE3EA063DAC-17C8-3B437@Webmail-m106.sysops.aol.com> I for one, feel this was a very interesting and thought provoking contribution to the dialogue. The issues and changes brought up and discussed by Joshua should make all of us think about what is really driving our concerns. I'm interested to hear the answers to his questions, in particular, question one - Is the whole point of restoration to create spawning habitat similar to the up-stream conditions? That, to me, seems like a driver for many other actions. I'm open to hearing others responses here, but in particular, what are the biological drivers for restoration like we have seen over the past couple of years. Are these wrong, or is it all about timing and sequence on restoration? I believe we all want the best for the Trinity and its fishery, and I get concerned when seeming allies start bickering. Mark Dr. Mark Rockwell Co-VP Conservation, NCCFFF Calif. Rep. Endangered Species Coalition -----Original Message----- From: Joshua Allen To: Trinity List Sent: Tue, Apr 17, 2012 11:45 am Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Ok, just for discussion related purposes; I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. A lot of people keep complaining about the gravel and holes being filled in between Lewiston and Douglas City. This has a lot to do, as I see it, with a lack of fishing areas, and the river drastically changing from what it was in the past. Like it was reported, "...need to stop man-ipulating the river" and "what time period is the program trying to capture". Though as I see it, it is not possible to not stop manipulating the river, because there is no period in the river's history that is trying to be captured. Instead a brand new section is being created that never existed before. The river has already manipulated to death since the dams were put up in the first place. ~ Is not the whole point of the program is to create a stretch of river between Lewiston and Douglas City that mimics upstream spawning conditions lost by the dams? ~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those two communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide spawning habitat so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be raised in? ~ If the area in question does not have uniform flat areas for natural spawning of salmonids, instead has huge holes like it did in the past, then spawning can not occur, areas to raise juveniles is limited, and what is left is a dependence upon the hatchery for production? ~ Since this area is meant for spawning and raising of juveniles, does it also not make sense to provide shade cover, like the upper reaches, for said juveniles? ~ Would it also not make sense to limit access to that stretch of river for sport fishing/recreation and instead move such areas out of redds and habitat areas to more appropriate places downstream where there are holes for holding? (i.e potential for Douglas City and Junction City to become the "new" fishing and financial resource areas of the county, while Lewiston focuses on dam related recreation activities.) ~ Should not people be the ones that must adapt to these changes since the fish have already had to adapt to huge changes in their environment with the installation of the dams which provides positive benefits to humans that are negative to natural salmonid production? ~ Isn't the whole point of the program to increase natural production while reducing man-ipulated hatchery production? ~ Can't anyone associated with the program just come out with this "secret" to the public through the participatory process in a way they can understand? I know, blasphemy! But to me, it seems like no one will be happy, because humans are unwilling to adapt to necessary changes, and instead are more focused on the human concepts of recreational use and money. Just my two cents. Though I would be interested in hearing from someone more knowledgeable about the needs of fish, who can answer these questions, and how humans can adapt to these requirements of a changing environment. 2012/4/12 Tom Stokely http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-9634-0019bb30f31a.html River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 am Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the program. >From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to Lilleberg. "I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you couldn't count fish fast enough ? You might not see one now." Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the river less accessible. "Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. "They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it back." "Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our county." She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic development, saying, "restoration is important ? but it must be balanced." Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over the past year ? that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in holes adult fish use. Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late ?70s to early ?80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three steelhead." Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of wildlife ? particularly in comparison to other rivers. "This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, who lives part time in Lewiston. Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity River flows is the most important way to restore the river. Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion and Central Valley Project use. "That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping recover the river and recover the fish." "Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating the stream.'" Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that law." Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said. The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." >From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be provided within 30 days. Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are planned for this year. _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From frank.t.emerson at gmail.com Tue Apr 17 13:09:49 2012 From: frank.t.emerson at gmail.com (Frank Emerson) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 13:09:49 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net>, Message-ID: I forwarded this article to a friend who grew up on Rush Cr. This was his response to the comments about holes being filled.... "When I was about 10 or 11 years old they came in with excavators and dumptrucks and dredged that hole out, it took 15+ years to completely fill in, so that guys comment is sort of off base being the area never had a natural hole in the first place, additionally the hole was filling in long before gravel injection operations began." He is now about 40 years old. Nature did not create that large pool. So on the one hand I can agree about a careful approach and monitoring it does not seem reasoned to state that gravel injection is "overzealous" in the sense that building the dam stopped all the natural recruitment of gravel in the first place. The same problem that we are dealing here with out local river where a dam blocked all sediment since 1921. Now the dam is filled in, does not store water, and the 10 miles below the dam has only large substrate which is no good for spawning, for production of macro inverterbrates and juvenile habitat. So in short there is only series of pools without riffles in between so no where for adults to spawn. The natural scouring of Spring flows should recreate deeper holding water regardless in not much time I would think. Frank Emerson ----- Original Message ----- From: Gail Goodyear To: trinityjosh at gmail.com ; env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2012 12:33 PM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Concern about the filling of deep holes between Vitzhum's and Dutton Creek has been expressed in my writings and testimonies. A project plan which focuses on fry fish without maintaining adult fish habitat that nature created is not okay. Period. Requests for plans to balance adult and fry fish habitat transcends money and recreation. It is simply logical not to destroy adult habitat for fry habitat. Josh, buy a piece of land, manage it for ten to twenty years and you might develop a deep respect for how nature continues to do good and to make fascinating changes. Landowners are well used to change and to adapting. There is wisdom in the requests to take a softer approach, and to avoid man-hurried overzealous implementation of a current favored restoration method. Fashions pass. Plopping methods, used on rivers very diffferent from the Trinity River, on our treasured river is not okay. Those scientists and engineers who evolve slowly methods of river management appropriate to the multi-varied ecosystem and to the many different microclimates of the Trinity River will do well here and will build a respected reputation for their work. They will develop methods for each small section of the river rather than implementing blanket treatment of 10 to 40+ miles, or forwarding ideas that would make the Trinity look like a place far different than what nature intended or intends (e.g., [1] excessive revegetation plans for a river that for many miles historically had little vegetation close to river edge and its floodplain, [2] burying bedrock with gravel and [3] numerous, unnatural-looking, large log jams). The successful workers will be creators and innovators who are respectful of the diversity of the Trinity River and its people. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 11:35:28 -0700 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com To: env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Ok, just for discussion related purposes; I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. A lot of people keep complaining about the gravel and holes being filled in between Lewiston and Douglas City. This has a lot to do, as I see it, with a lack of fishing areas, and the river drastically changing from what it was in the past. Like it was reported, "...need to stop man-ipulating the river" and "what time period is the program trying to capture". Though as I see it, it is not possible to not stop manipulating the river, because there is no period in the river's history that is trying to be captured. Instead a brand new section is being created that never existed before. The river has already manipulated to death since the dams were put up in the first place. ~ Is not the whole point of the program is to create a stretch of river between Lewiston and Douglas City that mimics upstream spawning conditions lost by the dams? ~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those two communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide spawning habitat so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be raised in? ~ If the area in question does not have uniform flat areas for natural spawning of salmonids, instead has huge holes like it did in the past, then spawning can not occur, areas to raise juveniles is limited, and what is left is a dependence upon the hatchery for production? ~ Since this area is meant for spawning and raising of juveniles, does it also not make sense to provide shade cover, like the upper reaches, for said juveniles? ~ Would it also not make sense to limit access to that stretch of river for sport fishing/recreation and instead move such areas out of redds and habitat areas to more appropriate places downstream where there are holes for holding? (i.e potential for Douglas City and Junction City to become the "new" fishing and financial resource areas of the county, while Lewiston focuses on dam related recreation activities.) ~ Should not people be the ones that must adapt to these changes since the fish have already had to adapt to huge changes in their environment with the installation of the dams which provides positive benefits to humans that are negative to natural salmonid production? ~ Isn't the whole point of the program to increase natural production while reducing man-ipulated hatchery production? ~ Can't anyone associated with the program just come out with this "secret" to the public through the participatory process in a way they can understand? I know, blasphemy! But to me, it seems like no one will be happy, because humans are unwilling to adapt to necessary changes, and instead are more focused on the human concepts of recreational use and money. Just my two cents. Though I would be interested in hearing from someone more knowledgeable about the needs of fish, who can answer these questions, and how humans can adapt to these requirements of a changing environment. 2012/4/12 Tom Stokely http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-9634-0019bb30f31a.html River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 am Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the program. >From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to Lilleberg. "I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you couldn't count fish fast enough ? You might not see one now." Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the river less accessible. "Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. "They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it back." "Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our county." She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic development, saying, "restoration is important ? but it must be balanced." Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over the past year ? that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in holes adult fish use. Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late ?70s to early ?80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three steelhead." Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of wildlife ? particularly in comparison to other rivers. "This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, who lives part time in Lewiston. Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity River flows is the most important way to restore the river. Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion and Central Valley Project use. "That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping recover the river and recover the fish." "Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating the stream.'" Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that law." Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said. The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." >From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be provided within 30 days. Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are planned for this year. _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pcatanese at dhscott.com Wed Apr 18 05:47:03 2012 From: pcatanese at dhscott.com (Paul Catanese) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 05:47:03 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net> Message-ID: Whoever Joshua is I have to say you have hit the nail on the head and confirmed everyone's fears. That fear that man himself rather than nature would dictate what transpires on this river. Moreover, a few select men who by and large do not live here or own property here would decide what's good for others based on the little knowledge they actually have about restoring a river. This year we will have close to a record return return of salmon having little to do with any restoration effort other than water. Seems to me that plenty of spawning has taken place in spite of man made efforts. Whatever caused this should be duplicated over and over because it worked. Bulldozers and gravel or man did not create the huge run we are predicting mother nature did along with restricting commercial fishing.i will bet you curtailing tribal fishing will also lead too more fish. There is not enough time in the day to address what should or shouldn't be done on this river and frankly the less that's done the more success will be achieved. Keep in mind we are going to have a record return of fish with no connection to bulldozers and gravel, just water. Peace love I am going fishing. On Apr 17, 2012, at 11:35 AM, "Joshua Allen" > wrote: Ok, just for discussion related purposes; I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. A lot of people keep complaining about the gravel and holes being filled in between Lewiston and Douglas City. This has a lot to do, as I see it, with a lack of fishing areas, and the river drastically changing from what it was in the past. Like it was reported, "...need to stop man-ipulating the river" and "what time period is the program trying to capture". Though as I see it, it is not possible to not stop manipulating the river, because there is no period in the river's history that is trying to be captured. Instead a brand new section is being created that never existed before. The river has already manipulated to death since the dams were put up in the first place. ~ Is not the whole point of the program is to create a stretch of river between Lewiston and Douglas City that mimics upstream spawning conditions lost by the dams? ~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those two communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide spawning habitat so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be raised in? ~ If the area in question does not have uniform flat areas for natural spawning of salmonids, instead has huge holes like it did in the past, then spawning can not occur, areas to raise juveniles is limited, and what is left is a dependence upon the hatchery for production? ~ Since this area is meant for spawning and raising of juveniles, does it also not make sense to provide shade cover, like the upper reaches, for said juveniles? ~ Would it also not make sense to limit access to that stretch of river for sport fishing/recreation and instead move such areas out of redds and habitat areas to more appropriate places downstream where there are holes for holding? (i.e potential for Douglas City and Junction City to become the "new" fishing and financial resource areas of the county, while Lewiston focuses on dam related recreation activities.) ~ Should not people be the ones that must adapt to these changes since the fish have already had to adapt to huge changes in their environment with the installation of the dams which provides positive benefits to humans that are negative to natural salmonid production? ~ Isn't the whole point of the program to increase natural production while reducing man-ipulated hatchery production? ~ Can't anyone associated with the program just come out with this "secret" to the public through the participatory process in a way they can understand? I know, blasphemy! But to me, it seems like no one will be happy, because humans are unwilling to adapt to necessary changes, and instead are more focused on the human concepts of recreational use and money. Just my two cents. Though I would be interested in hearing from someone more knowledgeable about the needs of fish, who can answer these questions, and how humans can adapt to these requirements of a changing environment. 2012/4/12 Tom Stokely > http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-9634-0019bb30f31a.html River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 am Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the program. >From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to Lilleberg. "I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you couldn't count fish fast enough ? You might not see one now." Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the river less accessible. "Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. "They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it back." "Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our county." She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic development, saying, "restoration is important ? but it must be balanced." Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over the past year ? that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in holes adult fish use. Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late ?70s to early ?80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three steelhead." Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of wildlife ? particularly in comparison to other rivers. "This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, who lives part time in Lewiston. Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity River flows is the most important way to restore the river. Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion and Central Valley Project use. "That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping recover the river and recover the fish." "Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating the stream.'" Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that law." Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said. The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." >From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be provided within 30 days. Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are planned for this year. _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Wed Apr 18 09:37:52 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 10:37:52 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change order - Trinity River Division Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River: Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) April 21, 2012 0700 300 400 April 21, 2012 0900 400 500 April 28, 2012 0700 500 750 April 28, 2012 0900 750 1,000 April 28, 2012 1100 1,000 1,250 April 28, 2012 1300 1,250 1,500 April 28, 2012 1500 1,500 1,750 April 28, 2012 1700 1,750 2,000 April 29, 2012 0700 2,000 2,250 April 29, 2012 0900 2,250 2,500 Ordered by: Thuy Washburn Note: ROD flows -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Wed Apr 18 09:56:41 2012 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:56:41 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net>, Message-ID: <001001cd1d84$3b631450$b2293cf0$@suddenlink.net> Perhaps there's some confusion here re the diff between 'gravel' and 'sediment' ? As the State Senate's natural resources cmte consultant in 1967 - a bit before your friend was born, Frank - I took my cmte by 'con camp' bus down to the mouth of Grass Valley Cr to witness the double-whammy effect of flow curtailment (Trinity Dam) and careless logging practices. The loggers had cut the toe out of Grass Valley's decomposed granite hillsides and there were no substantial downstream flows remaining to move the DG sediment that flowed down Grass Valley Cr into the Trinity River. Somewhere there's a great photo, taken that day in Oct 1967, of CDFG Region 1 fisheries mgt supervisor Elton Bailey standing on the bed of the Trinity at the confluence of Grass Valley Cr with head-high banks of DG close to either side of him That trip down to the mouth of GV Cr, by the way, was the very beginning of policy-level Trinity River restoration history. I wrote a ltr for my boss, then-State Senator Bob Lagomasino's sig to then-Resources Sec'y Ike Livermore, asking, in effect, how in the world did that river get in that awful shape and what's to be done about it ? (Elton Bailey and I had been CDFG office mates at Sacramento HQs ten years before - it was he who put me up to taking the Senators down there) Ike Livermore was concerned enough that the agencies jumped on it and formed a Trinity River restoration task force - or perhaps it was a Grass Valley Cr investigation task force - it's been awhile now A minor CA gov't history note here : the CA Dept of Water Resources established a district office in Red Bluff for the purpose of planning and supervising the construction of diversion facilities from the North Coast, beginning with Dos Rios dam on the middle fork Eel, the Grindstone tunnel to the Valley and Paskenta-Newville reservoir (which would have been the world's largest evaporation pan) to receive the North Coast water (there were to be more dams, right up to and including the Klamath, envisioned in the 1957 State Water Plan) One of the DWR/Red Bluff engineers, Ed Barnes, had too much energy to loll around an office that was clearly waiting for a general public North Coast rivers decision (the CA Wild and Scenic Rivers Act took the North Coast rivers 'off the table' in 1972). Ed had volunteered to be part of the NPS-led federal survey of rivers for inclusion in the federal W&S Rivers system, which preceded that 1968 enactment, and he jumped at the chance to head up the task force triggered by that ltr that I wrote for Bob Lagomasino. Ed continued to have a strong and decisive hand in Trinity and Klamath river restoration matters for many, many years thereafter. He gave a legitimacy to DWR's Red Bluff office that would have gone conclusively south with enactment of the CA W&S Rivers Act otherwise - he was the model for those who would hustle up work for DWR in northern CA long after the initial purpose of that Red Bluff office was history Bill Kier Kier Associates, Fisheries and Watershed Professionals P.O Box 915 Blue Lake, CA 95525 (707) 668-1822 Mobile: 707.498.7847 www.kierassociates.net GSA Contractor GS10F0124U From: env-trinity-bounces+kierassociates=suddenlink.net at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces+kierassociates=suddenlink.net at velocipede.dcn.dav is.ca.us] On Behalf Of Frank Emerson Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2012 1:10 PM To: Gail Goodyear; trinityjosh at gmail.com; env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting I forwarded this article to a friend who grew up on Rush Cr. This was his response to the comments about holes being filled.... "When I was about 10 or 11 years old they came in with excavators and dumptrucks and dredged that hole out, it took 15+ years to completely fill in, so that guys comment is sort of off base being the area never had a natural hole in the first place, additionally the hole was filling in long before gravel injection operations began." He is now about 40 years old. Nature did not create that large pool. So on the one hand I can agree about a careful approach and monitoring it does not seem reasoned to state that gravel injection is "overzealous" in the sense that building the dam stopped all the natural recruitment of gravel in the first place. The same problem that we are dealing here with out local river where a dam blocked all sediment since 1921. Now the dam is filled in, does not store water, and the 10 miles below the dam has only large substrate which is no good for spawning, for production of macro inverterbrates and juvenile habitat. So in short there is only series of pools without riffles in between so no where for adults to spawn. The natural scouring of Spring flows should recreate deeper holding water regardless in not much time I would think. Frank Emerson ----- Original Message ----- From: Gail Goodyear To: trinityjosh at gmail.com ; env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2012 12:33 PM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Concern about the filling of deep holes between Vitzhum's and Dutton Creek has been expressed in my writings and testimonies. A project plan which focuses on fry fish without maintaining adult fish habitat that nature created is not okay. Period. Requests for plans to balance adult and fry fish habitat transcends money and recreation. It is simply logical not to destroy adult habitat for fry habitat. Josh, buy a piece of land, manage it for ten to twenty years and you might develop a deep respect for how nature continues to do good and to make fascinating changes. Landowners are well used to change and to adapting. There is wisdom in the requests to take a softer approach, and to avoid man-hurried overzealous implementation of a current favored restoration method. Fashions pass. Plopping methods, used on rivers very diffferent from the Trinity River, on our treasured river is not okay. Those scientists and engineers who evolve slowly methods of river management appropriate to the multi-varied ecosystem and to the many different microclimates of the Trinity River will do well here and will build a respected reputation for their work. They will develop methods for each small section of the river rather than implementing blanket treatment of 10 to 40+ miles, or forwarding ideas that would make the Trinity look like a place far different than what nature intended or intends (e.g., [1] excessive revegetation plans for a river that for many miles historically had little vegetation close to river edge and its floodplain, [2] burying bedrock with gravel and [3] numerous, unnatural-looking, large log jams). The successful workers will be creators and innovators who are respectful of the diversity of the Trinity River and its people. _____ Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 11:35:28 -0700 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com To: env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Ok, just for discussion related purposes; I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. A lot of people keep complaining about the gravel and holes being filled in between Lewiston and Douglas City. This has a lot to do, as I see it, with a lack of fishing areas, and the river drastically changing from what it was in the past. Like it was reported, "...need to stop man-ipulating the river" and "what time period is the program trying to capture". Though as I see it, it is not possible to not stop manipulating the river, because there is no period in the river's history that is trying to be captured. Instead a brand new section is being created that never existed before. The river has already manipulated to death since the dams were put up in the first place. ~ Is not the whole point of the program is to create a stretch of river between Lewiston and Douglas City that mimics upstream spawning conditions lost by the dams? ~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those two communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide spawning habitat so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be raised in? ~ If the area in question does not have uniform flat areas for natural spawning of salmonids, instead has huge holes like it did in the past, then spawning can not occur, areas to raise juveniles is limited, and what is left is a dependence upon the hatchery for production? ~ Since this area is meant for spawning and raising of juveniles, does it also not make sense to provide shade cover, like the upper reaches, for said juveniles? ~ Would it also not make sense to limit access to that stretch of river for sport fishing/recreation and instead move such areas out of redds and habitat areas to more appropriate places downstream where there are holes for holding? (i.e potential for Douglas City and Junction City to become the "new" fishing and financial resource areas of the county, while Lewiston focuses on dam related recreation activities.) ~ Should not people be the ones that must adapt to these changes since the fish have already had to adapt to huge changes in their environment with the installation of the dams which provides positive benefits to humans that are negative to natural salmonid production? ~ Isn't the whole point of the program to increase natural production while reducing man-ipulated hatchery production? ~ Can't anyone associated with the program just come out with this "secret" to the public through the participatory process in a way they can understand? I know, blasphemy! But to me, it seems like no one will be happy, because humans are unwilling to adapt to necessary changes, and instead are more focused on the human concepts of recreational use and money. Just my two cents. Though I would be interested in hearing from someone more knowledgeable about the needs of fish, who can answer these questions, and how humans can adapt to these requirements of a changing environment. 2012/4/12 Tom Stokely http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-963 4-0019bb30f31a.html River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 am Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the program. >From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to Lilleberg. "I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you couldn't count fish fast enough . You might not see one now." Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the river less accessible. "Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. "They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it back." "Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our county." She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic development, saying, "restoration is important - but it must be balanced." Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over the past year - that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in holes adult fish use. Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late '70s to early '80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three steelhead." Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of wildlife - particularly in comparison to other rivers. "This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, who lives part time in Lewiston. Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity River flows is the most important way to restore the river. Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion and Central Valley Project use. "That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping recover the river and recover the fish." "Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating the stream.'" Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that law." Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said. The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." >From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be provided within 30 days. Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are planned for this year. _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _____ _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michael at theflyshop.com Wed Apr 18 10:00:50 2012 From: michael at theflyshop.com (Michael Caranci) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 10:00:50 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net> Message-ID: It's pretty apparent that Mr. Allen really knows very little, or has very little actual, on-the-river understanding of how fish and rivers interact together, focusing more on an idealistic, uber-environmentalist, false-utopian concept that man is better than nature in our attempts to "recreate" nature, nor has he listened to or paid any attention to any of the dialogue in the past year pertaining to these topics. The only way to fully recreate the spawning (and rearing) habitat lost by the implementation of the dams is to remove said dams and re-open access to the hundreds of miles of habitat above the dams (something we all know is extremely unlikely to happen anytime soon, if ever). Destroying 40+ more miles of river habitat, to mitigate the loss of the upstream habitat, is simply a foolish idea, and one without merit from the river's, fishes', and stakeholders' standpoints. Only government bureaucracies can find a modicum of sense in spending billions of dollars to destroy habitat under the illusion that they're "helping the river". Furthermore, if you have 40 miles of spawning and rearing habitat, where exactly do you propose the adult fish hold and stage before attempting to spawn? If there's nowhere for adult fish, you won't have adult fish to make juvenile fish, and the end result will be no fish at all. Do the math. If you get to that point, you won't need to limit fishing in the upper river because there won't be any fish to catch anyway. So much of this pressure for excessive gravel and spawning habitat is intended towards the salmon populations, and the lowly steelhead, also an integral part of the ecosystem (and economy of Trinity County), is conveniently forgotten. Steelhead often arrive in the upper sections of river as early as September, and often don't spawn until March/April. Where are these fish supposed to live and survive for 6+ months with no holding water? --Michael Caranci 2012/4/18 Paul Catanese > Whoever Joshua is I have to say you have hit the nail on the head and > confirmed everyone's fears. That fear that man himself rather than nature > would dictate what transpires on this river. Moreover, a few select men who > by and large do not live here or own property here would decide what's good > for others based on the little knowledge they actually have about restoring > a river. This year we will have close to a record return return of salmon > having little to do with any restoration effort other than water. Seems to > me that plenty of spawning has taken place in spite of man made efforts. > > Whatever caused this should be duplicated over and over because it worked. > Bulldozers and gravel or man did not create the huge run we are predicting > mother nature did along with restricting commercial fishing.i will bet you > curtailing tribal fishing will also lead too more fish. There is not enough > time in the day to address what should or shouldn't be done on this river > and frankly the less that's done the more success will be achieved. Keep in > mind we are going to have a record return of fish with no connection to > bulldozers and gravel, just water. Peace love I am going fishing. > > > On Apr 17, 2012, at 11:35 AM, "Joshua Allen" > wrote: > > Ok, just for discussion related purposes; I'm going to play devil's > advocate for a moment. A lot of people keep complaining about the gravel > and holes being filled in between Lewiston and Douglas City. This has a lot > to do, as I see it, with a lack of fishing areas, and the river > drastically changing from what it was in the past. Like it was reported, > "...need to stop man-ipulating the river" and "what time period > is the program trying to capture". > > Though as I see it, it is not possible to not stop manipulating the river, > because there is no period in the river's history that is trying to be > captured. Instead a brand new section is being created that never existed > before. The river has already manipulated to death since the dams were put > up in the first place. > > ~ Is not the whole point of the program is to create a stretch of > river between Lewiston and Douglas City that mimics upstream spawning > conditions lost by the dams? > ~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those two > communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide > spawning habitat so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be > raised in? > ~ If the area in question does not have uniform flat areas for natural > spawning of salmonids, instead has huge holes like it did in the past, then > spawning can not occur, areas to raise juveniles is limited, and what is > left is a dependence upon the hatchery for production? > ~ Since this area is meant for spawning and raising of juveniles, does it > also not make sense to provide shade cover, like the upper reaches, for > said juveniles? > ~ Would it also not make sense to limit access to that stretch of river > for sport fishing/recreation and instead move such areas out of redds and > habitat areas to more appropriate places downstream where there are holes > for holding? (i.e potential for Douglas City and Junction City to become > the "new" fishing and financial resource areas of the county, while > Lewiston focuses on dam related recreation activities.) > ~ Should not people be the ones that must adapt to these changes > since the fish have already had to adapt to huge changes in their > environment with the installation of the dams which provides positive > benefits to humans that are negative to natural salmonid production? > ~ Isn't the whole point of the program to increase natural production > while reducing man-ipulated hatchery production? > ~ Can't anyone associated with the program just come out with this > "secret" to the public through the participatory process in a way they can > understand? > > I know, blasphemy! But to me, it seems like no one will be happy, because > humans are unwilling to adapt to necessary changes, and instead are more > focused on the human concepts of recreational use and money. Just my two > cents. Though I would be interested in hearing from someone > more knowledgeable about the needs of fish, who can answer these questions, > and how humans can adapt to these requirements of a changing environment. > > 2012/4/12 Tom Stokely > >> >> http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-9634-0019bb30f31a.html >> River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting >> >> *By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, >> 2012 8:15 am* >> >> Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme >> last week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in >> Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. >> >> A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One >> Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, >> under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD >> employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made >> clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were >> there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the >> program. >> >> >From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five >> days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his >> biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since >> construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to >> Lilleberg. >> >> "I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know >> people fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." >> >> Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, >> "you couldn't count fish fast enough ? You might not see one now." >> >> Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. >> >> Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the >> river less accessible. >> >> "Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that >> at one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. >> >> "They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it >> back." >> >> "Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. >> >> Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County >> Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our >> county." >> >> She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic >> development, saying, "restoration is important ? but it must be balanced." >> >> Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over >> the past year ? that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in >> holes adult fish use. >> >> Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late ?70s >> to early ?80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three >> steelhead." >> >> Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be >> able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." >> >> Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of >> wildlife ? particularly in comparison to other rivers. >> >> "This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, >> who lives part time in Lewiston. >> >> Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity >> River flows is the most important way to restore the river. >> >> Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on >> water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity >> Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion >> and Central Valley Project use. >> >> "That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping >> recover the river and recover the fish." >> >> "Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop >> bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating >> the stream.'" >> >> Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We >> are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that >> law." >> >> Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he >> said. >> >> The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the >> program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there >> will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. >> Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." >> >> >From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be >> provided within 30 days. >> >> Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are >> planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. >> >> The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and >> California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel >> restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is >> complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and >> the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are >> planned for this year. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> env-trinity mailing list >> env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity >> >> > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > -- Michael Caranci Director of Outfitters Director of Schools & Camps The Fly Shop 530-222-3555 or 800-669-3474 michael at theflyshop.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From acaswr at yahoo.com Wed Apr 18 11:49:07 2012 From: acaswr at yahoo.com (lou jacobson) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 11:49:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net> Message-ID: <1334774947.45257.YahooMailNeo@web120201.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> All, Issues like these are certainly not black and white, both Michael and Josh seem to have valid points. However, it is very disconcerting that such aggressive language is being used to communicate. This is not productive nor will it afford various stakeholders an ability to find common ground. Something that is absolutely necessary should we ever want to take real steps forward in restoring the Trinity to what it once was ( what ever that means considering no point in time has been selected per this conversation, as Josh notes). Michael is certainly right, the real solution is removing the dams. And as he points out, this is most likely not going to happen any time soon--and would most likely create a very contentious situation with those who have come to enjoy the Trinity's water in the central valley or even those who depend on guaranteed summer flows for recreational activities downstream.? Further he certainly is correct that a dominant western worldview rather than a ecological based worldview is at the root, a real problem. Josh has presented a perspective with merit as well. Since we are left in a bad situation with a handful of less then ideal solutions why not attempt to find the best alternative to an all around bad situation. Especially considering that we live in a society where, whether we like it or not, the dominant worldview? informs actions oriented around human caused environmental change. Currently I think it would be safe to assume we can and we will continue to change natural environments to suit a political/societal/economic context. So why? not attempt to find the best alternative to removing the dam, even if that means pushing human adaptation to a changing environmental context. Why not recognize we live under very specific geo-policial and economic structures that limit choice. And in doing so why not develop a constructive conversation on how to best mitigate and adapt to changing natural environments. And again, we should always recognize that this is not black and white and any choice or action will have various consequences associated with it whether it be environmental, social, political or economic. In the end we could certainly throw our arms up, cuss the situation, attack all who provide critical perspectives and contribute to a unhealthy conversation. Or we can make the choice to recognize that this issue exists in a complex structural context. And by doing so, we could recognize that each potential solution will have consequences, and that these consequences whether good or bad will require a select group of stakeholders to communicate in a healthy constructive fashion. The choice is yours, but I hope in the end more respect is brought to the table in an attempt to promote healthy discussion and an increased ability to take on the role of the other. Lou ________________________________ From: Michael Caranci To: Paul Catanese Cc: Al Smatsky ; Steve Huber ; Matt Mitchell ; John Hodges ; Greg Hector ; Mike Parker ; Matt Dover ; Brad McFall ; Chris Parsons ; Bryan Balog ; Trinity List ; Bruce McGregor ; Gabe Durand ; Aaron Grabiel ; Liam Gogan (TrinRvOut) ; Todd LeBoeuf ; Dave Morton ; Dax Messett ; Mike Corley ; Michael Charlton ; Mike Hibbard ; Zack Collins ; Dave Neal ; Dennis 'Popeye' Franco ; Chuck Volckhausen ; Matt Swan ; Bill Dickens ; Jeff Parker ; Kevin Peterson ; John Letton ; Shannon Engh ; Eric Wiseman ; Ron Purl ; Joe McCarthy ; Lonnie Boles ; Ross Wilkerson Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 10:00 AM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting It's pretty apparent that Mr. Allen really knows very little, or has very little actual, on-the-river understanding of how fish and rivers interact together, focusing more on an idealistic, uber-environmentalist, false-utopian concept that man is better than nature in our attempts to "recreate" nature, nor has he listened to or paid any attention to any of the dialogue in the past year pertaining to these topics. ?The only way to fully recreate the spawning (and rearing) habitat lost by the implementation of the dams is to remove said dams and re-open access to the hundreds of miles of habitat above the dams (something we all know is extremely unlikely to happen anytime soon, if ever). ?Destroying 40+ more miles of river habitat, to mitigate the loss of the upstream habitat, is simply a foolish idea, and one without merit from the river's, fishes', and stakeholders' standpoints. ?Only government bureaucracies can find a modicum of sense in spending billions of dollars to destroy habitat under the illusion that they're "helping the river". ? Furthermore, if you have 40 miles of spawning and rearing habitat, where exactly do you propose the adult fish hold and stage before attempting to spawn? ?If there's nowhere for adult fish, you won't have adult fish to make juvenile fish, and the end result will be no fish at all. ?Do the math. ?If you get to that point, you won't need to limit fishing in the upper river because there won't be any fish to catch anyway. ?So much of this pressure for excessive gravel and spawning habitat is intended towards the salmon populations, and the lowly steelhead, also an integral part of the ecosystem (and economy of Trinity County), is conveniently forgotten. ?Steelhead often arrive in the upper sections of river as early as September, and often don't spawn until March/April. ?Where are these fish supposed to live and survive for 6+ months with no holding water? ? --Michael Caranci? 2012/4/18 Paul Catanese Whoever Joshua is I have to say you have hit the nail on the head and confirmed everyone's fears. That fear that man himself rather than nature would dictate what transpires on this river. Moreover, a few select men who by and large do not live here or own property here would decide what's good for others based on the little knowledge they actually have about restoring a river. This year we will have close to a record return return of salmon having little to do with any restoration effort other than water. Seems to me that plenty of spawning has taken place in spite of man made efforts.? > > >Whatever caused this should be duplicated over and over because it worked. Bulldozers and gravel or man did not create the huge run we are predicting mother nature did along with restricting commercial fishing.i will bet you curtailing tribal fishing will also lead too more fish. There is not enough time in the day to address what should or shouldn't be done on this river and frankly the less that's done the more success will be achieved. Keep in mind we are going to have a record return of fish with no connection to bulldozers and gravel, just water. Peace love I am going fishing.? > > >On Apr 17, 2012, at 11:35 AM, "Joshua Allen" wrote: > > >Ok, just for discussion related purposes; I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. A lot of people keep complaining about the gravel and holes being filled in between Lewiston and Douglas City. This has a lot to do, as I see it, with ?a lack of fishing areas, and?the?river drastically changing from what it was in the past. Like it was reported, "...need to?stop?man-ipulating the river" and "what time period is?the?program trying to capture". >> >> >>Though as I see it, it is not possible to not stop manipulating the river, because there is no period in?the?river's history that is trying to be captured. Instead a brand new section is being created that never existed before. The river has already manipulated to death since?the?dams were put up in the first place.? >> >> >>~ Is not the whole point of?the?program is to create a?stretch?of river?between?Lewiston and?Douglas?City that mimics upstream spawning conditions lost by the dams?? >>~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those two communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide spawning?habitat?so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be raised in?? >>~ If the area in question does not have uniform flat areas for natural spawning of salmonids, instead has huge holes like it did in the past, then spawning can not occur, areas to raise juveniles is limited, and what is left is a dependence upon the hatchery for production?? >>~ Since this area is meant for spawning and raising of juveniles, does it also not make sense to provide shade cover, like the upper reaches, for said juveniles?? >>~ Would it also not make sense to limit access to that?stretch?of river for sport fishing/recreation and instead move such areas out of redds and habitat areas to more appropriate places downstream where there are holes for holding? (i.e potential for Douglas City and Junction City to become the "new" fishing and financial resource areas of the county, while Lewiston focuses on dam related recreation activities.) >>~ Should not people be the ones that must adapt to these changes since?the?fish have already had to?adapt?to huge changes in their environment with the installation of?the?dams which provides positive benefits to humans that are negative to natural salmonid production?? >>~ Isn't the whole point of?the?program to increase natural production while reducing man-ipulated?hatchery?production?? >>~ Can't anyone associated with?the?program just come out with this "secret" to?the?public through the?participatory?process in a way they can understand?? >> >> >>I know,?blasphemy! But to me, it seems like no one will be happy, because humans are unwilling to adapt to necessary changes, and instead are more focused on the human concepts of?recreational?use and money. Just my two cents. Though I?would?be interested in hearing from someone more?knowledgeable?about the needs of fish, who can answer these questions, and how humans can adapt to these requirements of a changing environment.?? >> >> >>2012/4/12 Tom Stokely >> >>http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-9634-0019bb30f31a.html? >>>River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting >>>By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 am >>>Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. >>>A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the program. >>>>From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to Lilleberg. >>>"I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." >>>Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you couldn't count fish fast enough ? You might not see one now." >>>Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. >>>Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the river less accessible. >>>"Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. >>>"They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it back." >>>"Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. >>>Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our county." >>>She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic development, saying, "restoration is important ? but it must be balanced." >>>Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over the past year ? that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in holes adult fish use. >>>Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late ?70s to early ?80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three steelhead." >>>Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." >>>Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of wildlife ? particularly in comparison to other rivers. >>>"This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, who lives part time in Lewiston. >>>Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity River flows is the most important way to restore the river. >>>Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion and Central Valley Project use. >>>"That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping recover the river and recover the fish." >>>"Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating the stream.'" >>>Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that law." >>>Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said. >>>The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." >>>>From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be provided within 30 days. >>>Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. >>>The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are planned for this year. >>>_______________________________________________ >>>env-trinity mailing list >>>env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >>>http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity >>> >>> >> >_______________________________________________ >>env-trinity mailing list >>env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >>http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity >> >_______________________________________________ >env-trinity mailing list >env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > -- Michael Caranci Director of Outfitters Director of Schools & Camps The Fly Shop 530-222-3555 or 800-669-3474 michael at theflyshop.com _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From JON at osisoft.com Wed Apr 18 12:18:29 2012 From: JON at osisoft.com (Jon Peterson) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 19:18:29 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net> Message-ID: Hi Josh, I thought I would take a shot at answering two of your questions. I am trying to be objective. >From the channel rehabilitation design guide (http://odp.trrp.net/FileDatabase/Documents/Trinity%20River%20Channel%20Design%20Guide%201-21-11%20reduced2.pdf ): The overall strategy of the Trinity River Flow Evaluation Final Report (TRFEFR) and the Trinity River Restoration Record of Decision (ROD) is to restore physical process and rescale the Trinity River as a foundation for fishery recovery. I will emphasize "foundation for fishery recovery". So, to answer two of your questions: ~ Is not the whole point of the program is to create a stretch of river between Lewiston and Douglas City that mimics upstream spawning conditions lost by the dams? The whole point is fishery recovery. Creating more spawning areas seems reasonable, but fishery recovery is way more complicated than just the spawning areas. Common sense is all that is needed to list a few of a myriad of other details: * Water of the right chemistry and velocity * The right coble structure and water depth * Food for the fry once they hatch * Suitable river habitat for the fry as they grow-safety, food, etc. I'll add emphasis to the food. Spend a summer watching a small section of river with salmon and steelhead fry. It's not just feather edged gravel bars where these guys hang out. * The smolts have to make it to the estuary and ocean-myriad of details here. * Proper ocean environment...food, clean water, etc. * After their ocean stint they need to make it back to the spawning grounds. Think of that journey of over 100 miles... * They need holding and staging water. Eggs need to mature, males and females need to stake out spawning areas. * Etc. Screw up any of these or any of the myriad we don't understand and potentially screw up the whole thing. No one will argue that the fry will die if they don't have a food source they can reach. Does anyone think a long contiguous stretch of spawning grounds will promote the growth of a diverse and healthy food supply? ~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those two communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide spawning habitat so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be raised in? No it is not required to fill the holes. Read the document. It does not spend much time on holes but it does discuss them-generally associated with bed rock: "The more directly the channel interacts with bedrock obstructions during high flow events, the greater the likelihood that pools, scour holes, and bars will form, thereby increasing channel and habitat complexity, and reducing the risk of future detrimental riparian encroachment." Please note the "increasing channel and habitat complexity". They paper talks extensively of pools, pool-riffle spacing, pool scouring, etc. Figure 2-1 in the document shows a hypothetical rehabilitation. Have a look-the pool is in the before and after picture. The document talks at lengths about the many features of the river. Nowhere does the document discuss the need to create "smaller pools". A couple of other comments: * I don't see a clear mission statement on TRRP website. The mission has to be clear and question everything that is done-is it supporting the mission. (I think the mission is "fishery recovery"). * Don't confuse tactics and strategy with the mission. The mission is not to augment coarse sediment-that's a tactic to create more spawning grounds which is part of a strategy for fishery recovery. * People build models-the biologists working on this have their models. You cannot forget they are models-human approximations of very complex systems they can never fully understand. The models need to be questioned, arrogance must be avoided, remind ourselves how humbling nature really is. * Reach out to other experiences. The guides make their living from the river. They spend hundreds of days on the river. This tremendous experience should be complementary to the scientists working on the program. After all, they should share the same goals. Finally Josh, I would be more than happy to show you a piece of the river that I feel has been adversely effected by TRRP work. Specifically areas that I observed redds for years had no redds this last season. Of course this does not mean the whole program is failing-just a single instance. I just saw the release schedule is based on a "Normal Year". We can be thankful for a wet March. I look forward to seeing the river next July when the water backs off. Regards, Jon Peterson (home owner on the Trinity River in Lewiston) From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Joshua Allen Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2012 11:35 AM To: Trinity List Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Ok, just for discussion related purposes; I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. A lot of people keep complaining about the gravel and holes being filled in between Lewiston and Douglas City. This has a lot to do, as I see it, with a lack of fishing areas, and the river drastically changing from what it was in the past. Like it was reported, "...need to stop man-ipulating the river" and "what time period is the program trying to capture". Though as I see it, it is not possible to not stop manipulating the river, because there is no period in the river's history that is trying to be captured. Instead a brand new section is being created that never existed before. The river has already manipulated to death since the dams were put up in the first place. ~ Is not the whole point of the program is to create a stretch of river between Lewiston and Douglas City that mimics upstream spawning conditions lost by the dams? ~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those two communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide spawning habitat so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be raised in? ~ If the area in question does not have uniform flat areas for natural spawning of salmonids, instead has huge holes like it did in the past, then spawning can not occur, areas to raise juveniles is limited, and what is left is a dependence upon the hatchery for production? ~ Since this area is meant for spawning and raising of juveniles, does it also not make sense to provide shade cover, like the upper reaches, for said juveniles? ~ Would it also not make sense to limit access to that stretch of river for sport fishing/recreation and instead move such areas out of redds and habitat areas to more appropriate places downstream where there are holes for holding? (i.e potential for Douglas City and Junction City to become the "new" fishing and financial resource areas of the county, while Lewiston focuses on dam related recreation activities.) ~ Should not people be the ones that must adapt to these changes since the fish have already had to adapt to huge changes in their environment with the installation of the dams which provides positive benefits to humans that are negative to natural salmonid production? ~ Isn't the whole point of the program to increase natural production while reducing man-ipulated hatchery production? ~ Can't anyone associated with the program just come out with this "secret" to the public through the participatory process in a way they can understand? I know, blasphemy! But to me, it seems like no one will be happy, because humans are unwilling to adapt to necessary changes, and instead are more focused on the human concepts of recreational use and money. Just my two cents. Though I would be interested in hearing from someone more knowledgeable about the needs of fish, who can answer these questions, and how humans can adapt to these requirements of a changing environment. 2012/4/12 Tom Stokely > http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-9634-0019bb30f31a.html River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 am Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the program. >From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to Lilleberg. "I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you couldn't count fish fast enough ... You might not see one now." Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the river less accessible. "Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. "They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it back." "Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our county." She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic development, saying, "restoration is important - but it must be balanced." Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over the past year - that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in holes adult fish use. Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late '70s to early '80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three steelhead." Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of wildlife - particularly in comparison to other rivers. "This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, who lives part time in Lewiston. Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity River flows is the most important way to restore the river. Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion and Central Valley Project use. "That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping recover the river and recover the fish." "Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating the stream.'" Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that law." Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said. The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." >From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be provided within 30 days. Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are planned for this year. _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Wed Apr 18 13:20:42 2012 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:20:42 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net>, Message-ID: <002b01cd1da0$bb798a90$326c9fb0$@suddenlink.net> After that morning rumination about Trinity River gravel vs. DG, I got to wondering if Ed Barnes could possibly still be around (he'd be ancient) - and found this http://articles.latimes.com/1985-07-24/news/mn-4728_1_governor-feeds-salmon, a 1985 piece about Governor Deukmejian visiting the TRRP on a campaign swing - and what Ed (who gets promoted here from civil engineer to 'state environmental scientist' - or would that be the other way around?) had to say about the program's success. We so 'live in the moment' I thought you-all might enjoy a longer view of Trinity River matters. Bill Kier -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Wed Apr 18 16:36:42 2012 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 16:36:42 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: <002b01cd1da0$bb798a90$326c9fb0$@suddenlink.net> References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net>, <002b01cd1da0$bb798a90$326c9fb0$@suddenlink.net> Message-ID: <25A65645-98B1-49A7-9F94-A97762ADDF83@fishsniffer.com> Deukmejian got in a classic quote in this article: Dan Deukmejian was followed most of the day by more than a dozen reporters and photographers. In Weaverville, the news media trailed the governor into the century- old Joss House, a temple built to keep out demons. "It didn't stop the press from going in there. I'm not sure how effective those barriers are," the governor quipped. On Apr 18, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Kier Associates wrote: > After that morning rumination about Trinity River gravel vs. DG, I > got to wondering if Ed Barnes could possibly still be around (he?d > be ancient) ? and found this http://articles.latimes.com/1985-07-24/ > news/mn-4728_1_governor-feeds-salmon, a 1985 piece about Governor > Deukmejian visiting the TRRP on a campaign swing ? and what Ed > (who gets promoted here from civil engineer to ?state environmental > scientist? - or would that be the other way around?) had to say > about the program?s success. > > > > We so ?live in the moment? I thought you-all might enjoy a longer > view of Trinity River matters. > > > > Bill Kier > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From michael at redwoods-rivers.com Wed Apr 18 17:24:33 2012 From: michael at redwoods-rivers.com (Michael Charlton) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 17:24:33 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: <1334774947.45257.YahooMailNeo@web120201.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20120419002450.39B101340247@mail.snowcrest.net> I like what Lou has to say. Mean words and condescending statements have no place in dialog. Unless of course are running for President. Peace and Love Michael Charlton Redwoods and Rivers 21690 Hwy 299 Big Bar, CA. 96010 1-800-429-0090 michael at redwoods-rivers.com _____ From: lou jacobson [mailto:acaswr at yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 11:49 AM To: Michael Caranci; Paul Catanese Cc: Al Smatsky; Steve Huber; Matt Mitchell; John Hodges; Greg Hector; Mike Parker; Matt Dover; Brad McFall; Chris Parsons; Bryan Balog; Trinity List; Bruce McGregor; Gabe Durand; Aaron Grabiel; Liam Gogan (TrinRvOut); Todd LeBoeuf; Dave Morton; Dax Messett; Mike Corley; Michael Charlton; Mike Hibbard; Zack Collins; Dave Neal; Dennis 'Popeye' Franco; Chuck Volckhausen; Matt Swan; Bill Dickens; Jeff Parker; Kevin Peterson; John Letton; Shannon Engh; Eric Wiseman; Ron Purl; Joe McCarthy; Lonnie Boles; Ross Wilkerson Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting All, Issues like these are certainly not black and white, both Michael and Josh seem to have valid points. However, it is very disconcerting that such aggressive language is being used to communicate. This is not productive nor will it afford various stakeholders an ability to find common ground. Something that is absolutely necessary should we ever want to take real steps forward in restoring the Trinity to what it once was ( what ever that means considering no point in time has been selected per this conversation, as Josh notes). Michael is certainly right, the real solution is removing the dams. And as he points out, this is most likely not going to happen any time soon--and would most likely create a very contentious situation with those who have come to enjoy the Trinity's water in the central valley or even those who depend on guaranteed summer flows for recreational activities downstream. Further he certainly is correct that a dominant western worldview rather than a ecological based worldview is at the root, a real problem. Josh has presented a perspective with merit as well. Since we are left in a bad situation with a handful of less then ideal solutions why not attempt to find the best alternative to an all around bad situation. Especially considering that we live in a society where, whether we like it or not, the dominant worldview informs actions oriented around human caused environmental change. Currently I think it would be safe to assume we can and we will continue to change natural environments to suit a political/societal/economic context. So why not attempt to find the best alternative to removing the dam, even if that means pushing human adaptation to a changing environmental context. Why not recognize we live under very specific geo-policial and economic structures that limit choice. And in doing so why not develop a constructive conversation on how to best mitigate and adapt to changing natural environments. And again, we should always recognize that this is not black and white and any choice or action will have various consequences associated with it whether it be environmental, social, political or economic. In the end we could certainly throw our arms up, cuss the situation, attack all who provide critical perspectives and contribute to a unhealthy conversation. Or we can make the choice to recognize that this issue exists in a complex structural context. And by doing so, we could recognize that each potential solution will have consequences, and that these consequences whether good or bad will require a select group of stakeholders to communicate in a healthy constructive fashion. The choice is yours, but I hope in the end more respect is brought to the table in an attempt to promote healthy discussion and an increased ability to take on the role of the other. Lou _____ From: Michael Caranci To: Paul Catanese Cc: Al Smatsky ; Steve Huber ; Matt Mitchell ; John Hodges ; Greg Hector ; Mike Parker ; Matt Dover ; Brad McFall ; Chris Parsons ; Bryan Balog ; Trinity List ; Bruce McGregor ; Gabe Durand ; Aaron Grabiel ; Liam Gogan (TrinRvOut) ; Todd LeBoeuf ; Dave Morton ; Dax Messett ; Mike Corley ; Michael Charlton ; Mike Hibbard ; Zack Collins ; Dave Neal ; Dennis 'Popeye' Franco ; Chuck Volckhausen ; Matt Swan ; Bill Dickens ; Jeff Parker ; Kevin Peterson ; John Letton ; Shannon Engh ; Eric Wiseman ; Ron Purl ; Joe McCarthy ; Lonnie Boles ; Ross Wilkerson Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 10:00 AM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting It's pretty apparent that Mr. Allen really knows very little, or has very little actual, on-the-river understanding of how fish and rivers interact together, focusing more on an idealistic, uber-environmentalist, false-utopian concept that man is better than nature in our attempts to "recreate" nature, nor has he listened to or paid any attention to any of the dialogue in the past year pertaining to these topics. The only way to fully recreate the spawning (and rearing) habitat lost by the implementation of the dams is to remove said dams and re-open access to the hundreds of miles of habitat above the dams (something we all know is extremely unlikely to happen anytime soon, if ever). Destroying 40+ more miles of river habitat, to mitigate the loss of the upstream habitat, is simply a foolish idea, and one without merit from the river's, fishes', and stakeholders' standpoints. Only government bureaucracies can find a modicum of sense in spending billions of dollars to destroy habitat under the illusion that they're "helping the river". Furthermore, if you have 40 miles of spawning and rearing habitat, where exactly do you propose the adult fish hold and stage before attempting to spawn? If there's nowhere for adult fish, you won't have adult fish to make juvenile fish, and the end result will be no fish at all. Do the math. If you get to that point, you won't need to limit fishing in the upper river because there won't be any fish to catch anyway. So much of this pressure for excessive gravel and spawning habitat is intended towards the salmon populations, and the lowly steelhead, also an integral part of the ecosystem (and economy of Trinity County), is conveniently forgotten. Steelhead often arrive in the upper sections of river as early as September, and often don't spawn until March/April. Where are these fish supposed to live and survive for 6+ months with no holding water? --Michael Caranci 2012/4/18 Paul Catanese Whoever Joshua is I have to say you have hit the nail on the head and confirmed everyone's fears. That fear that man himself rather than nature would dictate what transpires on this river. Moreover, a few select men who by and large do not live here or own property here would decide what's good for others based on the little knowledge they actually have about restoring a river. This year we will have close to a record return return of salmon having little to do with any restoration effort other than water. Seems to me that plenty of spawning has taken place in spite of man made efforts. Whatever caused this should be duplicated over and over because it worked. Bulldozers and gravel or man did not create the huge run we are predicting mother nature did along with restricting commercial fishing.i will bet you curtailing tribal fishing will also lead too more fish. There is not enough time in the day to address what should or shouldn't be done on this river and frankly the less that's done the more success will be achieved. Keep in mind we are going to have a record return of fish with no connection to bulldozers and gravel, just water. Peace love I am going fishing. On Apr 17, 2012, at 11:35 AM, "Joshua Allen" wrote: Ok, just for discussion related purposes; I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. A lot of people keep complaining about the gravel and holes being filled in between Lewiston and Douglas City. This has a lot to do, as I see it, with a lack of fishing areas, and the river drastically changing from what it was in the past. Like it was reported, "...need to stop man-ipulating the river" and "what time period is the program trying to capture". Though as I see it, it is not possible to not stop manipulating the river, because there is no period in the river's history that is trying to be captured. Instead a brand new section is being created that never existed before. The river has already manipulated to death since the dams were put up in the first place. ~ Is not the whole point of the program is to create a stretch of river between Lewiston and Douglas City that mimics upstream spawning conditions lost by the dams? ~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those two communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide spawning habitat so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be raised in? ~ If the area in question does not have uniform flat areas for natural spawning of salmonids, instead has huge holes like it did in the past, then spawning can not occur, areas to raise juveniles is limited, and what is left is a dependence upon the hatchery for production? ~ Since this area is meant for spawning and raising of juveniles, does it also not make sense to provide shade cover, like the upper reaches, for said juveniles? ~ Would it also not make sense to limit access to that stretch of river for sport fishing/recreation and instead move such areas out of redds and habitat areas to more appropriate places downstream where there are holes for holding? (i.e potential for Douglas City and Junction City to become the "new" fishing and financial resource areas of the county, while Lewiston focuses on dam related recreation activities.) ~ Should not people be the ones that must adapt to these changes since the fish have already had to adapt to huge changes in their environment with the installation of the dams which provides positive benefits to humans that are negative to natural salmonid production? ~ Isn't the whole point of the program to increase natural production while reducing man-ipulated hatchery production? ~ Can't anyone associated with the program just come out with this "secret" to the public through the participatory process in a way they can understand? I know, blasphemy! But to me, it seems like no one will be happy, because humans are unwilling to adapt to necessary changes, and instead are more focused on the human concepts of recreational use and money. Just my two cents. Though I would be interested in hearing from someone more knowledgeable about the needs of fish, who can answer these questions, and how humans can adapt to these requirements of a changing environment. 2012/4/12 Tom Stokely http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-963 4-0019bb30f31a.html River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 am Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the program. >From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to Lilleberg. "I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you couldn't count fish fast enough . You might not see one now." Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the river less accessible. "Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. "They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it back." "Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our county." She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic development, saying, "restoration is important - but it must be balanced." Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over the past year - that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in holes adult fish use. Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late '70s to early '80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three steelhead." Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of wildlife - particularly in comparison to other rivers. "This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, who lives part time in Lewiston. Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity River flows is the most important way to restore the river. Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion and Central Valley Project use. "That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping recover the river and recover the fish." "Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating the stream.'" Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that law." Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said. The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." >From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be provided within 30 days. Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are planned for this year. _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -- Michael Caranci Director of Outfitters Director of Schools & Camps The Fly Shop 530-222-3555 or 800-669-3474 michael at theflyshop.com _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ggoodyear at hotmail.com Thu Apr 19 00:26:21 2012 From: ggoodyear at hotmail.com (Gail Goodyear) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 07:26:21 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: <25A65645-98B1-49A7-9F94-A97762ADDF83@fishsniffer.com> References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net>, <002b01cd1da0$bb798a90$326c9fb0$@suddenlink.net>, <25A65645-98B1-49A7-9F94-A97762ADDF83@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: Taoist philosophy practiced in Weaverville?s Joss House may subtly or overtly deal with evil. This special place in the Trinities is where one may achieve balance in a world filled with chaos and upset. Interestingly, Taoist practitioners highly involved in working toward balance are well aware of the symbolism and philosophy of the Joss House. Yet, those unknowing may or may not realize evil is dealt with through physical and spiritual barriers. In addition to what our Chinese heritage still adds to our lives today, our Gold Rush pioneers also passed along wisdom. Judge C. A. Paulsen, whose parents arrived in the early 1850s, told me a saying he learned from his mother and father who appreciated diversity in people and opinions. I was in first grade when I first heard Judge Paulsen say, ?Never worry too much about what happens here (in the Trinities), people get along, die or leave.? CC: frank.t.emerson at gmail.com; ggoodyear at hotmail.com; trinityjosh at gmail.com; env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org; billw at pacificwatershed.com; Dannyh at pacificwatershed.com; whelang at pacificwatershed.com; amyg at trinityjournal.com; rymas at suddenlink.net; ahostler.trt at gmail.com; eli at riverbendsci.com; jderksen99 at gmail.com; mckier at sbcglobal.net; phiggins at humboldt1.com; rschrock at usbr.gov From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 16:36:42 -0700 To: kierassociates at suddenlink.net Deukmejian got in a classic quote in this article: Dan Deukmejian was followed most of the day by more than a dozen reporters and photographers. In Weaverville, the news media trailed the governor into the century-old Joss House, a temple built to keep out demons. "It didn't stop the press from going in there. I'm not sure how effective those barriers are," the governor quipped. On Apr 18, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Kier Associates wrote: After that morning rumination about Trinity River gravel vs. DG, I got to wondering if Ed Barnes could possibly still be around (he?d be ancient) ? and found this http://articles.latimes.com/1985-07-24/news/mn-4728_1_governor-feeds-salmon, a 1985 piece about Governor Deukmejian visiting the TRRP on a campaign swing ? and what Ed (who gets promoted here from civil engineer to ?state environmental scientist? - or would that be the other way around?) had to say about the program?s success. We so ?live in the moment? I thought you-all might enjoy a longer view of Trinity River matters. Bill Kier _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Apr 19 08:43:38 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 08:43:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- A wet recovery: State upgrades water year to 'normal' Message-ID: A wet recovery: State upgrades water year to 'normal' http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_05958092-8904-11e1-bc07-0019bb30f31a.html By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 6:15 am After what's been called a "miracle March," this year has been upgraded to a normal water year for the Trinity River, meaning more water will be sent down the Trinity River and more could be sent over the hill for agriculture than originally anticipated. From the Trinity River Restoration Program, Executive Director Robin Schrock said the water-year type is based on the April 1 forecast from the state Department of Water Resources on inflow to the Trinity River. That number is plugged into Trinity River Record of Decision that gives inflow figures for a range of water years from critically dry to extremely wet. "This year it was a cliffhanger," Schrock said, noting that with an inflow forecast of 1,025,000 acre-feet, the volume of water is just over the line from a dry year into a normal one. With that, under the Record of Decision 646,500 acre-feet of water is to be released to the river rather than the 452,600 acre-feet under a dry year. Also, 459,100 acre-feet of water could be diverted south for Central Valley Project uses rather than the 358,400 acre-feet available in a dry year. While the amount sent down the river is a firm one, diversions to the Central Valley over the past couple of years have been lower than what they could have been due to work on power plants and good inflow at Shasta Lake allowing Trinity to recharge. "The good part is, more water down the river" and better conditions for fish, said Bill Dickens, president of the Trinity River Guides Association. The guides hope that the promise by restoration staff to not inject spawning gravel into the river this year is honored, he said. The news is not cause for rejoice for everyone. Trinity Center resident Mike McHugh, who is active in the Trinity Lake Revitalization Alliance, said he has concerns for the fisheries and the lake level. "The economic value up here is tourists come to the lake when there's water in the lake," he said. From a fisheries perspective, McHugh feels storing more water in the lake would be the conservative approach that would allow higher flows in the future if the forecast is wrong or next year is dry. "Something's fishy," McHugh said, noting that in March the discussion was around if it would be a dry or critically dry year. "The curious thing is they hit the exact number it takes to be a normal year." With just five water year types, he said, "It's such a coarse scale that when they get borderline like this there's no way to get conservative about it." Releases will begin increasing April 21, reach the peak flow May 6 and hold for four days, then decrease to 4,500 cubic feet per second (cfs) by May 11, and to a summer base-flow of 450 cfs by July 26. A daily schedule of flow releases is available at: http://trrp.net/water/index.htm. At this Web site, the public may subscribe to automated notifications (via phone or email) of Trinity River release changes. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From curtisa at water.ca.gov Thu Apr 19 08:52:47 2012 From: curtisa at water.ca.gov (Anderson, Curtis) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 08:52:47 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: <002b01cd1da0$bb798a90$326c9fb0$@suddenlink.net> References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net>, <002b01cd1da0$bb798a90$326c9fb0$@suddenlink.net> Message-ID: <7DC173061296F944A62E8980A2B6AD7307161A9484@mrsbmapp20305.ad.water.ca.gov> Hi Bill, This email exchange has been an interesting dialog from a historical perspective. I think it illustrates one of the biggest challenges of the TRRP in that there is such a diversity of opinion of what the "limiting factor for fish production" is, what the Flow Study findings were, what the Record of Decision says, what adaptive management is, and how the ROD should be implemented by the Restoration Program. It is easy to forget all the history that happens on large projects like this that span multiple decades. One of the last tasks we had John Elko work on before he retired was to compile a historical chronology of all the restoration projects done by different agencies and entities on the Trinity River. He documented about 207 individual projects just in the 1970-2000 time frame alone. It is too bad that sometimes that we redo or undo something that had already been done or undone solely because people move on and history is forgotten. It is too easy sometimes to move on to the next project or issue before lessons learned from past projects are properly documented. All that aside, I just wanted to inform you that Ed Barnes is still alive and well. In fact he would probably take exception to being called ancient. =) We get to see him at the Northern Region Office (used to be called Northern District) Christmas luncheons, and at the occasional retirement party. It is nice to know that all of Ed's hard work on behalf of the Trinity River is still remembered. DWR is proud of Ed's legacy of work on the Trinity, and we are proud to continue his work by participating in the TRRP and continuing to work toward improving the Trinity River fisheries. Take Care, Curtis Anderson Northern Region Office Department of Water Resources From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Kier Associates Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 1:21 PM To: 'Frank Emerson'; 'Gail Goodyear'; trinityjosh at gmail.com; env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org; bill weaver at pwa; danny hagans at pac w'shed assoc; whelan gilkerson at pwa; amyg at trinityjournal.com; ryan sundberg at home; ahostler.trt at gmail.com; Eli Asarian; Jan Derksen; mary claire at home; pat higgins; rschrock at usbr.gov Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting After that morning rumination about Trinity River gravel vs. DG, I got to wondering if Ed Barnes could possibly still be around (he'd be ancient) - and found this http://articles.latimes.com/1985-07-24/news/mn-4728_1_governor-feeds-salmon, a 1985 piece about Governor Deukmejian visiting the TRRP on a campaign swing - and what Ed (who gets promoted here from civil engineer to 'state environmental scientist' - or would that be the other way around?) had to say about the program's success. We so 'live in the moment' I thought you-all might enjoy a longer view of Trinity River matters. Bill Kier -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Thu Apr 19 09:37:08 2012 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 09:37:08 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] DWR/Red Bluff's history/role Message-ID: <001d01cd1e4a$ab038440$010a8cc0$@suddenlink.net> All that DWR pride duly noted - and I wince that I so characterized Ed's situation. It's just that at my age I'm beginning to get too accustomed to old friends, er, having moved on. Please give Ed my best regards next time you see him, OK? And I would so love to see Mr Elko's work product - is it available in electronic format? If so, plz shoot me a copy. And, returning to history for just a moment, DWR was created (hmm, 1955 I believe) to develop the State Water Plan (1957) initially to define the State Water Project (water bond funded in 1960). My pt about the original purpose of your office having 'gone south' with enactment of the CA W&S Rivers Act (1972) is that it was established to plan/supervise construction of the North Coast elements of the State Water Project. Such work would, of course, be reimbursable by SWP contractors. The relevance of DWR's Red Bluff office to DWR's central SWP mission could be best measured by the amt of SWP contractor-reimbursable budget that your office has on its books. I would daresay that nearly all DWR's Red Bluff office budget is General Fund- and State environmental bond-funded When DWR sits at the TRRP table it's there to give its best technical counsel. It certainly isn't representing SWP interests - right ? 'Best,. Bill Kier From: Anderson, Curtis [mailto:curtisa at water.ca.gov] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 8:53 AM To: Kier Associates; 'Frank Emerson'; 'Gail Goodyear'; trinityjosh at gmail.com; env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org; bill weaver at pwa; danny hagans at pac w'shed assoc; whelan gilkerson at pwa; amyg at trinityjournal.com; ryan sundberg at home; ahostler.trt at gmail.com; Eli Asarian; Jan Derksen; mary claire at home; pat higgins; rschrock at usbr.gov Subject: RE: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Hi Bill, This email exchange has been an interesting dialog from a historical perspective. I think it illustrates one of the biggest challenges of the TRRP in that there is such a diversity of opinion of what the "limiting factor for fish production" is, what the Flow Study findings were, what the Record of Decision says, what adaptive management is, and how the ROD should be implemented by the Restoration Program. It is easy to forget all the history that happens on large projects like this that span multiple decades. One of the last tasks we had John Elko work on before he retired was to compile a historical chronology of all the restoration projects done by different agencies and entities on the Trinity River. He documented about 207 individual projects just in the 1970-2000 time frame alone. It is too bad that sometimes that we redo or undo something that had already been done or undone solely because people move on and history is forgotten. It is too easy sometimes to move on to the next project or issue before lessons learned from past projects are properly documented. All that aside, I just wanted to inform you that Ed Barnes is still alive and well. In fact he would probably take exception to being called ancient. =) We get to see him at the Northern Region Office (used to be called Northern District) Christmas luncheons, and at the occasional retirement party. It is nice to know that all of Ed's hard work on behalf of the Trinity River is still remembered. DWR is proud of Ed's legacy of work on the Trinity, and we are proud to continue his work by participating in the TRRP and continuing to work toward improving the Trinity River fisheries. Take Care, Curtis Anderson Northern Region Office Department of Water Resources From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Kier Associates Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 1:21 PM To: 'Frank Emerson'; 'Gail Goodyear'; trinityjosh at gmail.com; env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org; bill weaver at pwa; danny hagans at pac w'shed assoc; whelan gilkerson at pwa; amyg at trinityjournal.com; ryan sundberg at home; ahostler.trt at gmail.com; Eli Asarian; Jan Derksen; mary claire at home; pat higgins; rschrock at usbr.gov Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting After that morning rumination about Trinity River gravel vs. DG, I got to wondering if Ed Barnes could possibly still be around (he'd be ancient) - and found this http://articles.latimes.com/1985-07-24/news/mn-4728_1_governor-feeds-salmon, a 1985 piece about Governor Deukmejian visiting the TRRP on a campaign swing - and what Ed (who gets promoted here from civil engineer to 'state environmental scientist' - or would that be the other way around?) had to say about the program's success. We so 'live in the moment' I thought you-all might enjoy a longer view of Trinity River matters. Bill Kier -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Thu Apr 19 10:12:50 2012 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 10:12:50 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Resources Secretary Announces Tribal Consultation Policy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <73EE548D-4464-42F1-B626-17F9E6FB7872@fishsniffer.com> http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2012/04/19/resources-secretary- announces-tribal-consultation-policy/ Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, said, ?After reading this short little description of the California Natural Resources Tribal Policy for the departments, I find it amazing that while one would think this is a positive step forward because it sounds so determined to acknowledge and respect California Tribal peoples, it is without any real commitment other than to consult.? ? john_laird_photo_2.jpg Resources Secretary Announces Tribal Consultation Policy by Dan Bacher John Laird, the California Secretary for Natural Resources, on Wednesday announced the release of a draft policy directing the resources agency and its departments to ?increase communication and collaboration with California?s Native American tribes.? The lack of consultation by the agency with tribes on environmental programs including the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative, Delta Vision, Bay Delta Conservation Plan and other processes has led to frequent conflicts between the Tribes and the state. This failure to consult has led to many protests, including the peaceful take over of an MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force meeting in Fort Bragg on July 21, 2010 by over 300 Tribal members and their allies to protect Tribal gathering rights. The draft policy letter is available at: http://resources.ca.gov/docs/ Final_Tribal_Policy_Letterhead.pdf A news release from the agency said, ?This will help further the mission of the California Natural Resources Agency and provide meaningful input into the development of regulations, rules and policies that may affect tribal communities.? ?Native American tribes have a unique relationship with the state?s natural resources,? said Laird. ?It is only by engaging in open, inclusive and regular communication that the interests of California?s tribes will be recognized and understood.? On Sept. 19, 2011, Governor Jerry Brown issued Executive Order B-10-11, which states that ?it is the policy of the administration that every state agency and department subject to executive control is to encourage communication and consultation with California Native American tribes.? The release noted that all California native tribes ?have distinct cultural, environmental, economic, and public health interests.? The Natural Resources Agency and its departments interact frequently with tribal communities and are already working closely with them in many of these areas. The secretary?s direction is intended to build on those existing relationships, and encourage further outreach and collaboration. ?Historically, state government and California?s tribes have experienced conflict,? Laird said. ?I intend to improve the relationships between the agency responsible for the state?s wild places and the communities that have watched over them for centuries.? Secretary Laird?s direction aims to ?create informed decision making where all parties involved share a goal and can reach decisions together,? according to the agency. All parties involved should encourage respect, shared responsibility, and an open and free exchange of information. Laird noted that the policy ?is intended as guidance for employees of the Natural Resources Agency and its departments only, and does not extend to other government entities.? Craig Tucker, Klamath Coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, reacted to the announcement by stating, ?Finally California is developing a policy for consulting with tribes. This would have been a great idea before initiating things like the corrupt Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative process!? ?If this policy was in place before the MLPA process started, we probably would have realized a better outcome and have avoided the litigation that is likely to follow,? said Tucker. ?This is a step in the right direction,? said Tucker. ?It is ridiculous that tribes have had to wait 150 years for a consultation policy from California.? He added, ?One of the complaints by the tribes is that they are brought into the process is after the power point presentations are made. The Tribes should be brought into processes at the conceptual stage ? not after the plan is already developed. This new policy will help us out.? ?We should give kudos to the Brown administration for taking the initiative to develop this policy,? said Tucker. Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, said she is happy that the Governor is concerned about hearing the voices of California Indians, but criticized the draft tribal policy document for lacking any real committment to tribes other than consultation. ?After reading this short little description of the California Natural Resources Tribal Policy for the departments, I find it amazing that while one would think this is a positive step forward because it sounds so determined to acknowledge and respect California Tribal peoples, it is without any real commitment other than to consult,? said Sisk. ?The Winnemem Wintu Tribe has evaluated the consultation processes as being highly ineffective,? he stated. ?What we do want to see is how the Governor will install and use the Articles of the UN DRIP to affirm our Indigenous peoples? rights to ?free, prior, and informed consent.? I am glad to see that the Governor?s Office is concerned about the voices of the California Indians, but I would like to see some solid policies that ?cause change? because they are meant to cause change!? The document states, ?This policy defines provisions for improving Natural Resources Agency consultation, communication and collaboration with tribes to the extent that a conflict does not exist with applicable law or regulations.? Sisk responded, ?The reason we need a policy that has some clout for change is because there are inappropriate laws and regulations that ignore or suppress the rights of California Tribal peoples that are all ready causing ?conflicts.?? ?I do hope for the best to come of this attempt to develop ?inclusive and regular communication efforts that the interests of California?s tribes and tribal communities will be recognized and understood in the larger context of complex decision-making.? It would also be important for the Governor to provide a budget for this effort on the part of the California Tribal peoples, who are always expected to volunteer their time when everyone else at the table is on the payroll," Sisk concluded. The lack of any tribal consultation policy has been a persistent problem in not only the privately funded Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative process to create ?marine protected areas? along the California Coast, but in the Delta Vision and Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) processes designed to build a peripheral canal or tunnel and other programs managed by the Natural Resources Agency. Under pressure from fishermen, tribal members and environmentalists, the Schwarzenegger administration finally appointed one tribal representative, Gary Mulcahy of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, to the Delta Vision stakeholders group in 2005. However, the Resources Agency has refused to date to appoint any tribal representatives, as well any fishermen, Delta residents and family farmers, to the Bay Delta Conservation Plan Management Committee. Indian Tribes, fishermen, Delta residents, family farmers, grassroots environmentalists and scores of elected officials are opposed to the construction of the peripheral canal because they and the government?s own scientists believe that it will hasten the extinction of Central Valley chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt and other species. The policy will be circulated for comment, with a comment deadline of July 15, 2012. A public meeting will be held on June 26 at 1:30 pm, at Thunder Valley Resort, 1200 Athens Avenue, Lincoln, California 95648. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: unknown.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 27551 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Apr 19 11:49:22 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 11:49:22 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Newswatch 12, KDTV- Klamath Restoration Opposed Message-ID: <6FCF6359-37A2-4B6E-AC04-351093B2BFCE@att.net> If you go to this link and click on the video, there is a clip showing the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors and their County Counsel Thomas Guarino talking about the Klamath Dams deal. http://kdrv.com/news/local/244443 By Ron Brown YREKA, Calif. -- Plans to remove four California dams from the upper Klamath River drew fire again Tuesday from Siskiyou County officials. County legal counsel, Thomas Guarino, reported to county supervisors that the county is challenging Pacific Corps plans to bill ratepayers at a higher rate for possible dam removal. He says with the uncertainty that seems to be growing over whether the dams will be removed, it doesn't make sense to raise fees being charged to ratepayers. Guarino also blasted an upcoming PBS documentary on the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, saying it is biased in favor of dam removal. Commissioners are hosting a guest speaker May 8th, Dr. Hauser, who is known as whistleblower in the Interior Department, to speak on the government's role in the dam removal process. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Apr 19 13:23:57 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:23:57 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Reclamation Announces Final Schedule for Releases into Trinity River as Part of Restoration Program References: Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: From: "Fernando Ponce" Date: April 19, 2012 1:19:34 PM PDT To: tstokely at att.net Subject: Reclamation Announces Final Schedule for Releases into Trinity River as Part of Restoration Program Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, CA MP-12-050 Media Contact: Pete Lucero, 916-978-5100, plucero at usbr.gov For Release On: April 19, 2012 Reclamation Announces Final Schedule for Releases into Trinity River as Part of Restoration Program The Bureau of Reclamation announced today that releases from Lewiston Dam into the Trinity River will increase to a peak flow of 6,000 cubic feet per second for four days as part of the Trinity River Restoration Program. Releases will begin increasing April 21, reach the peak flow May 6 and hold for four days, then decrease to 4,500 cubic feet per second (cfs) by May 11, and to a summer base-flow of 450 cfs by July 26. The public should take appropriate safety precautions whenever river flows are high. Landowners are advised to clear personal items and debris from the floodplain prior to the releases. A daily schedule of flow releases is available at: http://trrp.net/water/index.htm. At this website, the public may subscribe to automated notifications (via phone or email) of Trinity River release changes. For additional information, please contact the Trinity River Restoration Program at 530-623-1800. The program's office is located at 1313 South Main Street in Weaverville, California. # # # Reclamation is the largest wholesale water supplier and the second largest producer of hydroelectric power in the United States, with operations and facilities in the 17 Western States. Its facilities also provide substantial flood control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. Visit our website at http://www.usbr.gov. If you would rather not receive future communications from Bureau of Reclamation, let us know by clicking here. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver Federal Center, Alameda & Kipling Street PO Box 25007, Denver, CO 80225 United States -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From curtisa at water.ca.gov Thu Apr 19 13:37:36 2012 From: curtisa at water.ca.gov (Anderson, Curtis) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:37:36 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] DWR/Red Bluff's history/role In-Reply-To: <001d01cd1e4a$ab038440$010a8cc0$@suddenlink.net> References: <001d01cd1e4a$ab038440$010a8cc0$@suddenlink.net> Message-ID: <7DC173061296F944A62E8980A2B6AD7307161A94EF@mrsbmapp20305.ad.water.ca.gov> Hi Bill, No problem about the age thing, Ed would just laugh at the comment. Here is a link to John's compilation of projects on the Trinity River and Tributaries as a PDF: ftp://ftpdpla.water.ca.gov/pub/Eng/Trinity/Historical_Projects/ We did have all of this working in an ArcView GIS with spatial locations links at one point, but now it needs some significant work. I was reviewing a Northern District history book that Linton Brown and others produced for our 25 year anniversary back in 1991. When Northern District moved to Red Bluff on December 6, 1965 the main programs were: "planning on the North Coast and in the Upper Sacramento Valley, with the Eel River project formulation being the centerpiece; operating maintaining the Sacramento flood control project and Davis-Grunsky loans and grants" Yes there was quite a shift after the passage of the wild and scenic rivers act on the North Coast. We had significant reductions in staff from 1970-1975 due to a reduction in funding from SWP. Our office went from 113 people in 1966 down to 59 people in 1986. This shift in focus allowed us to diversify our work, and led to Ed Barnes and others working on behalf of North State Fisheries. We continue this diversity of work to this day by providing engineering services, flood and watershed work, stream gage information, watermaster service, reservoir investigations, environmental restoration and compliance, water quality assessment, groundwater measurements and management, and land & water use surveys. (Notice the plug for the work we do) DWR's Mission is: To manage the water resources of California in cooperation with other agencies, to benefit the State's people, and to protect, restore, and enhance the natural and human environments. http://www.water.ca.gov/about/mission.cfm As you can see, NRO's work on the Trinity is consistent with DWR's Mission. Our broader focus these days is to help promote and implement Integrated Regional Water Management in California. To answer your last question specifically, DWR acts in different capacities for the TRRP: * On the TMC, the State of California representative is the Secretary of the California Natural Resources Agency. DWR and DFG are both under this agency, and Agency has delegated their TMC responsibility to DFG and DWR. Currently DFG is the TMC representative in coordination with DWR (Teresa Connor). When I was involved in the TMC I saw my charge as working with the TRRP staff, the TAMWG, and the public to implement the Record of Decision in an adaptive management environment, not to implement DWR or SWP policy. I would however keep DWR and SWP managers aware of issues on the Trinity that could have a broader impacts such as flows and temperatures on the Sacramento River. The only time (that I can remember) I really represented DWR's SWP interest specifically in regards to the Trinity was when I provided comments to the EIR/EIS for the ROD. There may have been other times that we represented SWP interests, but hopefully we identified that we were doing so or abstained from voting. * When DWR is under contract to provide services for the TRRP (surveying, site design, environmental permitting, etc), we work solely for the TRRP. The short answer to your question is yes, we give the best technical counsel we can for the TRRP. Take Care, Curtis From: Kier Associates [mailto:kierassociates at suddenlink.net] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 9:37 AM To: Anderson, Curtis; 'Frank Emerson'; 'Gail Goodyear'; trinityjosh at gmail.com; env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org; 'bill weaver at pwa'; 'danny hagans at pac w'shed assoc'; 'whelan gilkerson at pwa'; amyg at trinityjournal.com; 'ryan sundberg at home'; ahostler.trt at gmail.com; 'Eli Asarian'; 'Jan Derksen'; 'mary claire at home'; 'pat higgins'; rschrock at usbr.gov Subject: DWR/Red Bluff's history/role All that DWR pride duly noted - and I wince that I so characterized Ed's situation. It's just that at my age I'm beginning to get too accustomed to old friends, er, having moved on. Please give Ed my best regards next time you see him, OK? And I would so love to see Mr Elko's work product - is it available in electronic format? If so, plz shoot me a copy. And, returning to history for just a moment, DWR was created (hmm, 1955 I believe) to develop the State Water Plan (1957) initially to define the State Water Project (water bond funded in 1960). My pt about the original purpose of your office having 'gone south' with enactment of the CA W&S Rivers Act (1972) is that it was established to plan/supervise construction of the North Coast elements of the State Water Project. Such work would, of course, be reimbursable by SWP contractors. The relevance of DWR's Red Bluff office to DWR's central SWP mission could be best measured by the amt of SWP contractor-reimbursable budget that your office has on its books. I would daresay that nearly all DWR's Red Bluff office budget is General Fund- and State environmental bond-funded When DWR sits at the TRRP table it's there to give its best technical counsel. It certainly isn't representing SWP interests - right ? 'Best,. Bill Kier From: Anderson, Curtis [mailto:curtisa at water.ca.gov] Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 8:53 AM To: Kier Associates; 'Frank Emerson'; 'Gail Goodyear'; trinityjosh at gmail.com; env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org; bill weaver at pwa; danny hagans at pac w'shed assoc; whelan gilkerson at pwa; amyg at trinityjournal.com; ryan sundberg at home; ahostler.trt at gmail.com; Eli Asarian; Jan Derksen; mary claire at home; pat higgins; rschrock at usbr.gov Subject: RE: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Hi Bill, This email exchange has been an interesting dialog from a historical perspective. I think it illustrates one of the biggest challenges of the TRRP in that there is such a diversity of opinion of what the "limiting factor for fish production" is, what the Flow Study findings were, what the Record of Decision says, what adaptive management is, and how the ROD should be implemented by the Restoration Program. It is easy to forget all the history that happens on large projects like this that span multiple decades. One of the last tasks we had John Elko work on before he retired was to compile a historical chronology of all the restoration projects done by different agencies and entities on the Trinity River. He documented about 207 individual projects just in the 1970-2000 time frame alone. It is too bad that sometimes that we redo or undo something that had already been done or undone solely because people move on and history is forgotten. It is too easy sometimes to move on to the next project or issue before lessons learned from past projects are properly documented. All that aside, I just wanted to inform you that Ed Barnes is still alive and well. In fact he would probably take exception to being called ancient. =) We get to see him at the Northern Region Office (used to be called Northern District) Christmas luncheons, and at the occasional retirement party. It is nice to know that all of Ed's hard work on behalf of the Trinity River is still remembered. DWR is proud of Ed's legacy of work on the Trinity, and we are proud to continue his work by participating in the TRRP and continuing to work toward improving the Trinity River fisheries. Take Care, Curtis Anderson Northern Region Office Department of Water Resources From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Kier Associates Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 1:21 PM To: 'Frank Emerson'; 'Gail Goodyear'; trinityjosh at gmail.com; env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org; bill weaver at pwa; danny hagans at pac w'shed assoc; whelan gilkerson at pwa; amyg at trinityjournal.com; ryan sundberg at home; ahostler.trt at gmail.com; Eli Asarian; Jan Derksen; mary claire at home; pat higgins; rschrock at usbr.gov Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting After that morning rumination about Trinity River gravel vs. DG, I got to wondering if Ed Barnes could possibly still be around (he'd be ancient) - and found this http://articles.latimes.com/1985-07-24/news/mn-4728_1_governor-feeds-salmon, a 1985 piece about Governor Deukmejian visiting the TRRP on a campaign swing - and what Ed (who gets promoted here from civil engineer to 'state environmental scientist' - or would that be the other way around?) had to say about the program's success. We so 'live in the moment' I thought you-all might enjoy a longer view of Trinity River matters. Bill Kier -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ema.berol at yahoo.com Thu Apr 19 14:46:39 2012 From: ema.berol at yahoo.com (Emelia Berol) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 14:46:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net>, <002b01cd1da0$bb798a90$326c9fb0$@suddenlink.net>, <25A65645-98B1-49A7-9F94-A97762ADDF83@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <1334871999.98940.YahooMailNeo@web46215.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> I am really enjoying all these conversations and concerns about the effectiveness of messing with Mother Nature. In Buddhism there is a teaching about "compounded misery." This is where you perceive that you have a problem, or that there is something you would like to improve on ... and you end up with something worse ... sort of like the Sorcerer's Apprentice in the Disney film, Fantasia. So first we built the dams, so that someone somewhere else could have more water, and then after a while we perceived that perhaps it had been a mistake, from the perspective of the river and its fisheries, wildlife, and local human residents. But instead of taking the dams down, which would have been good, we decided to "fix" the problems with RESTORATION. Whatever that is ... ? I guess we are all still trying to understand that. In the meantime, we have compounded our misery. I can't help but wonder why it is that we are trying to turn good adult pools into spawning habitat while refusing to acknowledge the existence of ?prime spawning habitat in the tributaries, which continue to be ignored by the TRRP, at the instruction of the BOR.? Emelia Berol Trinity River Advocate Willow Creek, CA 95573 ? ???Act as if what you do makes a difference. It does.??? William James ________________________________ From: Gail Goodyear To: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com; frank.t.emerson at gmail.com Cc: env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org; mckier at sbcglobal.net; jderksen99 at gmail.com; dannyh at pacificwatershed.com; billw at pacificwatershed.com; whelang at pacificwatershed.com; amyg at trinityjournal.com; eli at riverbendsci.com; rymas at suddenlink.net; ahostler.trt at gmail.com Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 12:26 AM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Taoist philosophy practiced in Weaverville?s Joss House may subtly or overtly deal with evil. This special place in the Trinities is where one may achieve balance in a world filled with chaos and upset. ? Interestingly, Taoist practitioners highly involved in working toward balance are well aware of the symbolism and philosophy of the Joss House. Yet, those unknowing may or may not realize evil is dealt with through physical and spiritual barriers. ? In addition to what our Chinese heritage still adds to our lives today, our Gold Rush pioneers also passed along wisdom. Judge C. A. Paulsen, whose parents arrived in the early 1850s, told me a saying he learned from his mother and father who appreciated diversity in people and opinions. I was in first grade when I first heard Judge Paulsen say, ?Never worry too much about what happens here (in the Trinities), people get along, die or leave.? ? ________________________________ CC: frank.t.emerson at gmail.com; ggoodyear at hotmail.com; trinityjosh at gmail.com; env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org; billw at pacificwatershed.com; Dannyh at pacificwatershed.com; whelang at pacificwatershed.com; amyg at trinityjournal.com; rymas at suddenlink.net; ahostler.trt at gmail.com; eli at riverbendsci.com; jderksen99 at gmail.com; mckier at sbcglobal.net; phiggins at humboldt1.com; rschrock at usbr.gov From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 16:36:42 -0700 To: kierassociates at suddenlink.net Deukmejian got in a classic quote in this article: Dan Deukmejian was followed most of the day by more than a dozen reporters and photographers. In Weaverville, the news media trailed the governor into the century-old Joss House, a temple built to keep out demons. "It didn't stop the press from going in there. I'm not sure how effective those barriers are," the governor quipped. On Apr 18, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Kier Associates wrote: After that morning rumination about Trinity River gravel vs. DG, I got to wondering if Ed Barnes could possibly still be around (he?d be ancient) ? and found this http://articles.latimes.com/1985-07-24/news/mn-4728_1_governor-feeds-salmon, a 1985 piece about Governor Deukmejian visiting the TRRP on a campaign swing ?? and what Ed (who gets promoted here from civil engineer to ?state environmental scientist? - or would that be the other way around?) had to say about the program?s success. >? >We so ?live in the moment? I thought you-all might enjoy a longer view of Trinity River matters.? >? >Bill Kier >_______________________________________________ >env-trinity mailing list >env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Apr 20 07:37:15 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 07:37:15 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Commission adopts river and ocean salmon season regulations References: <1BE5A458-0495-4C4D-BA39-4293EAC36B3B@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <8723DBCD-E220-4FD1-8E4C-9D0BE7980E76@att.net> From: Dan Bacher Date: April 19, 2012 5:38:03 PM PDT Subject: Commission adopts river and ocean salmon season regulations http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2012/04/19/commission-adopts-river-and-ocean-salmon-season-regulations/ Photo: The big return of jack (two-year-old) chinook salmon like these to the Central Valley and Klamath rivers in 2011 points to large numbers of adult salmon coming back to spawn this year. Photo by Dan Bacher. 640_img_3865.jpg Commission adopts river and ocean salmon season regulations by Dan Bacher The California Fish and Game Commission on April 18 voted 3 to 0 to approve a Klamath-Trinity River recreational salmon season with the highest adult fall chinook quota since 1986, 67,600 fish, and increased bag and possession limits due to the projected high abundance on the river this year. The Commission also approved the generous ocean salmon sportfishing regulations adopted by the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) at its April meeting in Seattle. The Commission adopted Central Valley river salmon seasons last week. These seasons are similar to last year's regulations, except that anglers can fish the Mokelumne River and the area on the Feather River below the Thermalito Afterbay Outlet this year. Wade Simmen, DFG fishery biologist, said the daily bag limit on the Klamath and Trinity Rivers will be increased to 4 adult chinooks over 22 inches and the possession limit will be raised to 8 adult chinooks. In the Klamath River, biologists are forecasting four times more salmon than last year ? and an astounding 15 times more than in 2006. The ocean salmon population is estimated to be 1.6 million adult Klamath River fall Chinook, compared to last year's forecast of 371,100. "The projected natural adult spawning escapement after harvest is 86,300 fish, more than double the conservation floor of 40,700 fish," noted Simmen. However, Commissioner Michael Sutton cautioned, ?I want to remain on record with my concern that just because we have a bumper year in the system, that not everything is hunky-dory in the Klamath. I will be happier when we remove the dams, restore habitat and have all wild fish returning to the Klamath.? After both proposals were adopted, Comissioner Jim Kellogg, said, ?It?s awesome for everybody to be back on the water and to enjoy what nature has made available.? The DFG announced that the generous seasons and increased fishing opportunities are the hallmarks of what is expected to be a ?banner season? for ocean and river anglers. ?We are optimistic that excellent ocean and inland salmon seasons lie ahead for California anglers,? said Department of Fish and Game (DFG) Director Charlton H. Bonham. ?This could be one of the best salmon seasons in a decade, supporting both recreational and commercial fishermen and their communities.? Golden Gate Salmon Association President Victor Gonella also responded to the California Fish and Game Commission?s adoption of ocean and inland salmon seasons. "We're looking forward to better salmon fishing this year thanks in part to a more balanced use of Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta waters in recent years which has left enough water to grow a healthy salmon run,? said Gonella. ?Consumers can look forward to the best salmon in the world at their local markets. Both sport and commercial salmon fishermen will be out fishing and contributing to the economic vitality of the state, especially the coastal regions and the Sacramento Valley. He noted, ?We expect a lot of salmon to swim into San Francisco Bay on their way to spawn in Central Valley rivers this summer and fall. Water managers will need to retain enough cold water to help this valuable fish reproduce." ?If you want to go fishing, contact one our many fine charter boats and they'll do their best to get you on the fish,? added Gonella. The Golden Gate Salmon Association (GGSA) is a coalition of salmon advocates that includes commercial and recreational salmon fishermen, businesses, restaurants, tribes, environmentalists, elected officials, families and communities that rely on salmon. GGSA has a board composed of representatives of this diverse community, which reaches from Oregon to the California Central Coast, through the Bay-Delta and up a dozen rivers in the Central Valley. While anglers look forward to a banner salmon season, the Brown administration is fast-tracking the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build a peripheral canal or tunnel, an enormously expensive and environmentally destructive government boondoggle that is expected to hasten the extinction of Central Valley salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail and other fish species. The Fish & Game Commission press release is available at http://cdfgnews.wordpress.com/2012/04/19/commission-adopts-salmon-season-regulation-packages. 2012 Ocean and River Salmon Seasons: The newly adopted ocean salmon sport fishing regulations conform to those adopted by the Pacific Fisheries Management Council. The opening date in the Klamath Management Zone is May 1. All other zones are currently open. Complete ocean salmon regulations are posted at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/oceansalmon.asp On all Central Valley rivers, the daily bag and possession limit is two Chinook salmon. On the Trinity and Klamath rivers the daily bag limit is four Chinook of any size and eight in possession prior to reaching the quota. All anglers must have Salmon Harvest Cards in their possession when fishing for salmon on the Klamath and Trinity rivers. Other enhanced salmon fishing opportunities are available on the Mokelumne River and portions of the Feather River from the unimproved boat ramp above the Thermalito Afterbay Outfall down river. Key elements of the newly adopted inland salmon seasons and regulations for Central Valley rivers and the Klamath and Trinity rivers are listed below. The full regulations package approved by the Commission is available at http://www.fgc.ca.gov/regulations/2012/index.aspx SACRAMENTO RIVER Open Aug. 1 through Dec.16 from the Deschutes Road Bridge near Anderson downstream to 500 feet upstream from Red Bluff Diversion Dam. Open July 16 through Dec. 16 from 150 feet below the Lower Red Bluff (Sycamore) boat ramp to the Highway 113 Bridge near Knights Landing. Open July 16 through Dec. 16 from the Highway 113 Bridge near Knights Landing downstream to the Carquinez Bridge. FEATHER RIVER Open July 16 through Oct. 15 from unimproved boat launch ramp above the Thermalito Afterbay Outfall downstream to 200 yards above the Live Oak boat ramp. Open July 16 through Dec. 16 from 200 yards above Live Oak boat ramp to the mouth. AMERICAN RIVER Open from July 16 through Dec. 31 from Nimbus Dam to Hazel Avenue Bridge. Open from July 16 through Aug. 15 from Hazel Avenue Bridge to the United States Geological Survey (USGS) gauging station cable crossing near Nimbus Hatchery. Open July 16 through Oct. 31 from the USGS gauging station cable crossing near Nimbus Hatchery to the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) power line crossing the southwest boundary of Ancil Hoffman Park. Open from July 16 through Dec. 16 from the SMUD power line crossing at the southwest boundary of Ancil Hoffman Park to the Jibboom Street Bridge. Open July 16 through Dec. 16. from the Jibboom Street Bridge to the mouth. MOKELUMNE RIVER Open July 16 through Oct. 15 from Camanche Dam to the Highway 99 Bridge. Open July 16 through Dec. 31 from the Highway 99 Bridge to the Woodbridge Irrigation District Dam, including Lodi Lake. Open July 16 through Dec. 16 from the Lower Sacramento Road Bridge to the mouth. (For purposes of this regulation, this river segment is defined as Mokelumne River and its tributary sloughs downstream of the Lower Sacramento Road Bridge, east of Highway 160 and north of Highway 12.) KLAMATH RIVER Open to fall-run Chinook salmon fishing from Aug. 15 through Dec. 31 with a daily bag limit of four Chinook salmon of any size. The possession limit is eight Chinook salmon of any size. The 2012 quota for the Klamath River basin is 67,600 fall-run salmon more than 22 inches long. Once this quota has been met, no Chinook salmon greater than 22 inches long may be retained (anglers may still retain a limit of Chinook salmon under 22 inches). A weekly DFG status report will be available by calling 1-800-564-6479. Open to spring-run Chinook salmon fishing from Jan. 1 through Aug. 14 with a daily bag and possession limit of two salmon. The take of salmon is prohibited on the Klamath River from Iron Gate Dam downstream to Weitchpec from Jan. 1 through Aug. 14. TRINITY RIVER Open to fall-run Chinook salmon fishing from Sept. 1 through Dec. 31 with a daily bag limit of four Chinook salmon of any size. The possession limit is eight Chinook salmon of any size. The 2012 quota for the Klamath River basin is 67,600 fall-run salmon more than 22 inches long. Once this quota has been met, no Chinook salmon greater than 22 inches long may be retained (anglers may still retain a limit of Chinook salmon under 22 inches). A weekly DFG status report will be available by calling 1-800-564-6479. The Trinity River main stem downstream of the Highway 299 Bridge at Cedar Flat to the Denny Road Bridge in Hawkins Bar is closed to all fishing Sept. 1 through Dec. 31. Open to spring-run Chinook salmon fishing from Jan. 1 through Aug. 31. The daily bag and possession limit is two Chinook salmon. The take of salmon is prohibited from the confluence of the South Fork Trinity River downstream to the confluence of the Klamath River from Jan. 1 through Aug. 31. All other regulations for bag and possession limits for trout, salmon and other species, as well as general information about restrictions on fishing methods and gear on the above rivers, are available on the DFG website at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/regulations -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: unknown.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 216046 bytes Desc: not available URL: From curtisa at water.ca.gov Fri Apr 20 10:13:48 2012 From: curtisa at water.ca.gov (Anderson, Curtis) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 10:13:48 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity/Klamath Historical Information Message-ID: <7DC173061296F944A62E8980A2B6AD7307161A9572@mrsbmapp20305.ad.water.ca.gov> Colleagues, I was pleased to learn that DWR's historical ArcView project has been available for some time on the TRRP's Online Data Portal: http://odp.trrp.net/Data/Packages/PackageDetails.aspx?package=4 Another good historical document for the Klamath/Trinity basin was produced by Kier Associates: http://www.krisweb.com/biblio/gen_usfws_kierassoc_1991_lrp.pdf It is nice that information like this are available to all, I remember for awhile there was a section of the Trinity County Library where we tried to maintain a copy of all documents related to the Program. It is good to know that the work maintaining the historical record is still a priority. Take Care, Curtis ????????????????????????????????????? Curtis Anderson Northern Region Office Chief Department of Water Resources 2440 Main Street Red Bluff, CA 96080 Office: (530) 529-7348 Cell: (530) 570-6315 Fax: (530) 529-7322 ????????????????????????????????????? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dpa4 at sonic.net Thu Apr 19 10:33:09 2012 From: dpa4 at sonic.net (Douglas Parkinson) Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2012 10:33:09 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net>, <002b01cd1da0$bb798a90$326c9fb0$@suddenlink.net>, <25A65645-98B1-49A7-9F94-A97762ADDF83@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <25B6F2C5EB2A4456A180B7E116C31329@DPA> Were not the ?Tong Wars? entertainment for the miners? From: Gail Goodyear Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 12:26 AM To: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com ; frank.t.emerson at gmail.com Cc: env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org ; mckier at sbcglobal.net ; jderksen99 at gmail.com ; dannyh at pacificwatershed.com ; billw at pacificwatershed.com ; whelang at pacificwatershed.com ; amyg at trinityjournal.com ; eli at riverbendsci.com ; rymas at suddenlink.net ; ahostler.trt at gmail.com Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Taoist philosophy practiced in Weaverville?s Joss House may subtly or overtly deal with evil. This special place in the Trinities is where one may achieve balance in a world filled with chaos and upset. Interestingly, Taoist practitioners highly involved in working toward balance are well aware of the symbolism and philosophy of the Joss House. Yet, those unknowing may or may not realize evil is dealt with through physical and spiritual barriers. In addition to what our Chinese heritage still adds to our lives today, our Gold Rush pioneers also passed along wisdom. Judge C. A. Paulsen, whose parents arrived in the early 1850s, told me a saying he learned from his mother and father who appreciated diversity in people and opinions. I was in first grade when I first heard Judge Paulsen say, ?Never worry too much about what happens here (in the Trinities), people get along, die or leave.? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC: frank.t.emerson at gmail.com; ggoodyear at hotmail.com; trinityjosh at gmail.com; env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org; billw at pacificwatershed.com; Dannyh at pacificwatershed.com; whelang at pacificwatershed.com; amyg at trinityjournal.com; rymas at suddenlink.net; ahostler.trt at gmail.com; eli at riverbendsci.com; jderksen99 at gmail.com; mckier at sbcglobal.net; phiggins at humboldt1.com; rschrock at usbr.gov From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 16:36:42 -0700 To: kierassociates at suddenlink.net Deukmejian got in a classic quote in this article: Dan Deukmejian was followed most of the day by more than a dozen reporters and photographers. In Weaverville, the news media trailed the governor into the century-old Joss House, a temple built to keep out demons. "It didn't stop the press from going in there. I'm not sure how effective those barriers are," the governor quipped. On Apr 18, 2012, at 1:20 PM, Kier Associates wrote: After that morning rumination about Trinity River gravel vs. DG, I got to wondering if Ed Barnes could possibly still be around (he?d be ancient) ? and found this http://articles.latimes.com/1985-07-24/news/mn-4728_1_governor-feeds-salmon, a 1985 piece about Governor Deukmejian visiting the TRRP on a campaign swing ? and what Ed (who gets promoted here from civil engineer to ?state environmental scientist? - or would that be the other way around?) had to say about the program?s success. We so ?live in the moment? I thought you-all might enjoy a longer view of Trinity River matters. Bill Kier _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dpa4 at sonic.net Wed Apr 18 09:34:07 2012 From: dpa4 at sonic.net (Douglas Parkinson) Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:34:07 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net> Message-ID: Gentlemen please do not exhale yet. The fish are not in the river..yet. Parky From: Paul Catanese Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 5:47 AM To: Joshua Allen Cc: Trinity List Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Whoever Joshua is I have to say you have hit the nail on the head and confirmed everyone's fears. That fear that man himself rather than nature would dictate what transpires on this river. Moreover, a few select men who by and large do not live here or own property here would decide what's good for others based on the little knowledge they actually have about restoring a river. This year we will have close to a record return return of salmon having little to do with any restoration effort other than water. Seems to me that plenty of spawning has taken place in spite of man made efforts. Whatever caused this should be duplicated over and over because it worked. Bulldozers and gravel or man did not create the huge run we are predicting mother nature did along with restricting commercial fishing.i will bet you curtailing tribal fishing will also lead too more fish. There is not enough time in the day to address what should or shouldn't be done on this river and frankly the less that's done the more success will be achieved. Keep in mind we are going to have a record return of fish with no connection to bulldozers and gravel, just water. Peace love I am going fishing. On Apr 17, 2012, at 11:35 AM, "Joshua Allen" wrote: Ok, just for discussion related purposes; I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. A lot of people keep complaining about the gravel and holes being filled in between Lewiston and Douglas City. This has a lot to do, as I see it, with a lack of fishing areas, and the river drastically changing from what it was in the past. Like it was reported, "...need to stop man-ipulating the river" and "what time period is the program trying to capture". Though as I see it, it is not possible to not stop manipulating the river, because there is no period in the river's history that is trying to be captured. Instead a brand new section is being created that never existed before. The river has already manipulated to death since the dams were put up in the first place. ~ Is not the whole point of the program is to create a stretch of river between Lewiston and Douglas City that mimics upstream spawning conditions lost by the dams? ~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those two communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide spawning habitat so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be raised in? ~ If the area in question does not have uniform flat areas for natural spawning of salmonids, instead has huge holes like it did in the past, then spawning can not occur, areas to raise juveniles is limited, and what is left is a dependence upon the hatchery for production? ~ Since this area is meant for spawning and raising of juveniles, does it also not make sense to provide shade cover, like the upper reaches, for said juveniles? ~ Would it also not make sense to limit access to that stretch of river for sport fishing/recreation and instead move such areas out of redds and habitat areas to more appropriate places downstream where there are holes for holding? (i.e potential for Douglas City and Junction City to become the "new" fishing and financial resource areas of the county, while Lewiston focuses on dam related recreation activities.) ~ Should not people be the ones that must adapt to these changes since the fish have already had to adapt to huge changes in their environment with the installation of the dams which provides positive benefits to humans that are negative to natural salmonid production? ~ Isn't the whole point of the program to increase natural production while reducing man-ipulated hatchery production? ~ Can't anyone associated with the program just come out with this "secret" to the public through the participatory process in a way they can understand? I know, blasphemy! But to me, it seems like no one will be happy, because humans are unwilling to adapt to necessary changes, and instead are more focused on the human concepts of recreational use and money. Just my two cents. Though I would be interested in hearing from someone more knowledgeable about the needs of fish, who can answer these questions, and how humans can adapt to these requirements of a changing environment. 2012/4/12 Tom Stokely http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-9634-0019bb30f31a.html River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 am Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the program. >From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to Lilleberg. "I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you couldn't count fish fast enough ? You might not see one now." Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the river less accessible. "Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. "They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it back." "Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our county." She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic development, saying, "restoration is important ? but it must be balanced." Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over the past year ? that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in holes adult fish use. Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late ?70s to early ?80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three steelhead." Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of wildlife ? particularly in comparison to other rivers. "This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, who lives part time in Lewiston. Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity River flows is the most important way to restore the river. Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion and Central Valley Project use. "That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping recover the river and recover the fish." "Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating the stream.'" Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that law." Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said. The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." >From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be provided within 30 days. Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are planned for this year. _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jgrunbaum at fs.fed.us Fri Apr 20 12:01:12 2012 From: jgrunbaum at fs.fed.us (Grunbaum, Jon B -FS) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 19:01:12 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: <1334774947.45257.YahooMailNeo@web120201.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net> <1334774947.45257.YahooMailNeo@web120201.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I think Lou is on the right track ?.. From: env-trinity-bounces+jgrunbaum=fs.fed.us at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces+jgrunbaum=fs.fed.us at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of lou jacobson Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 11:49 AM To: Michael Caranci; Paul Catanese Cc: Al Smatsky; Steve Huber; Matt Mitchell; John Hodges; Greg Hector; Mike Parker; Matt Dover; Brad McFall; Chris Parsons; Bryan Balog; Trinity List; Bruce McGregor; Gabe Durand; Aaron Grabiel; Liam Gogan (TrinRvOut); Todd LeBoeuf; Dave Morton; Dax Messett; Mike Corley; Michael Charlton; Mike Hibbard; Zack Collins; Dave Neal; Dennis 'Popeye' Franco; Chuck Volckhausen; Matt Swan; Bill Dickens; Jeff Parker; Kevin Peterson; John Letton; Shannon Engh; Eric Wiseman; Ron Purl; Joe McCarthy; Lonnie Boles; Ross Wilkerson Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting All, Issues like these are certainly not black and white, both Michael and Josh seem to have valid points. However, it is very disconcerting that such aggressive language is being used to communicate. This is not productive nor will it afford various stakeholders an ability to find common ground. Something that is absolutely necessary should we ever want to take real steps forward in restoring the Trinity to what it once was ( what ever that means considering no point in time has been selected per this conversation, as Josh notes). Michael is certainly right, the real solution is removing the dams. And as he points out, this is most likely not going to happen any time soon--and would most likely create a very contentious situation with those who have come to enjoy the Trinity's water in the central valley or even those who depend on guaranteed summer flows for recreational activities downstream. Further he certainly is correct that a dominant western worldview rather than a ecological based worldview is at the root, a real problem. Josh has presented a perspective with merit as well. Since we are left in a bad situation with a handful of less then ideal solutions why not attempt to find the best alternative to an all around bad situation. Especially considering that we live in a society where, whether we like it or not, the dominant worldview informs actions oriented around human caused environmental change. Currently I think it would be safe to assume we can and we will continue to change natural environments to suit a political/societal/economic context. So why not attempt to find the best alternative to removing the dam, even if that means pushing human adaptation to a changing environmental context. Why not recognize we live under very specific geo-policial and economic structures that limit choice. And in doing so why not develop a constructive conversation on how to best mitigate and adapt to changing natural environments. And again, we should always recognize that this is not black and white and any choice or action will have various consequences associated with it whether it be environmental, social, political or economic. In the end we could certainly throw our arms up, cuss the situation, attack all who provide critical perspectives and contribute to a unhealthy conversation. Or we can make the choice to recognize that this issue exists in a complex structural context. And by doing so, we could recognize that each potential solution will have consequences, and that these consequences whether good or bad will require a select group of stakeholders to communicate in a healthy constructive fashion. The choice is yours, but I hope in the end more respect is brought to the table in an attempt to promote healthy discussion and an increased ability to take on the role of the other. Lou ________________________________ From: Michael Caranci > To: Paul Catanese > Cc: Al Smatsky >; Steve Huber >; Matt Mitchell >; John Hodges >; Greg Hector >; Mike Parker >; Matt Dover >; Brad McFall >; Chris Parsons >; Bryan Balog >; Trinity List >; Bruce McGregor >; Gabe Durand >; Aaron Grabiel >; Liam Gogan (TrinRvOut) >; Todd LeBoeuf >; Dave Morton >; Dax Messett >; Mike Corley >; Michael Charlton >; Mike Hibbard >; Zack Collins >; Dave Neal >; Dennis 'Popeye' Franco >; Chuck Volckhausen >; Matt Swan >; Bill Dickens >; Jeff Parker >; Kevin Peterson >; John Letton >; Shannon Engh >; Eric Wiseman >; Ron Purl >; Joe McCarthy >; Lonnie Boles >; Ross Wilkerson > Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 10:00 AM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting It's pretty apparent that Mr. Allen really knows very little, or has very little actual, on-the-river understanding of how fish and rivers interact together, focusing more on an idealistic, uber-environmentalist, false-utopian concept that man is better than nature in our attempts to "recreate" nature, nor has he listened to or paid any attention to any of the dialogue in the past year pertaining to these topics. The only way to fully recreate the spawning (and rearing) habitat lost by the implementation of the dams is to remove said dams and re-open access to the hundreds of miles of habitat above the dams (something we all know is extremely unlikely to happen anytime soon, if ever). Destroying 40+ more miles of river habitat, to mitigate the loss of the upstream habitat, is simply a foolish idea, and one without merit from the river's, fishes', and stakeholders' standpoints. Only government bureaucracies can find a modicum of sense in spending billions of dollars to destroy habitat under the illusion that they're "helping the river". Furthermore, if you have 40 miles of spawning and rearing habitat, where exactly do you propose the adult fish hold and stage before attempting to spawn? If there's nowhere for adult fish, you won't have adult fish to make juvenile fish, and the end result will be no fish at all. Do the math. If you get to that point, you won't need to limit fishing in the upper river because there won't be any fish to catch anyway. So much of this pressure for excessive gravel and spawning habitat is intended towards the salmon populations, and the lowly steelhead, also an integral part of the ecosystem (and economy of Trinity County), is conveniently forgotten. Steelhead often arrive in the upper sections of river as early as September, and often don't spawn until March/April. Where are these fish supposed to live and survive for 6+ months with no holding water? --Michael Caranci 2012/4/18 Paul Catanese > Whoever Joshua is I have to say you have hit the nail on the head and confirmed everyone's fears. That fear that man himself rather than nature would dictate what transpires on this river. Moreover, a few select men who by and large do not live here or own property here would decide what's good for others based on the little knowledge they actually have about restoring a river. This year we will have close to a record return return of salmon having little to do with any restoration effort other than water. Seems to me that plenty of spawning has taken place in spite of man made efforts. Whatever caused this should be duplicated over and over because it worked. Bulldozers and gravel or man did not create the huge run we are predicting mother nature did along with restricting commercial fishing.i will bet you curtailing tribal fishing will also lead too more fish. There is not enough time in the day to address what should or shouldn't be done on this river and frankly the less that's done the more success will be achieved. Keep in mind we are going to have a record return of fish with no connection to bulldozers and gravel, just water. Peace love I am going fishing. On Apr 17, 2012, at 11:35 AM, "Joshua Allen" > wrote: Ok, just for discussion related purposes; I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. A lot of people keep complaining about the gravel and holes being filled in between Lewiston and Douglas City. This has a lot to do, as I see it, with a lack of fishing areas, and the river drastically changing from what it was in the past. Like it was reported, "...need to stop man-ipulating the river" and "what time period is the program trying to capture". Though as I see it, it is not possible to not stop manipulating the river, because there is no period in the river's history that is trying to be captured. Instead a brand new section is being created that never existed before. The river has already manipulated to death since the dams were put up in the first place. ~ Is not the whole point of the program is to create a stretch of river between Lewiston and Douglas City that mimics upstream spawning conditions lost by the dams? ~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those two communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide spawning habitat so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be raised in? ~ If the area in question does not have uniform flat areas for natural spawning of salmonids, instead has huge holes like it did in the past, then spawning can not occur, areas to raise juveniles is limited, and what is left is a dependence upon the hatchery for production? ~ Since this area is meant for spawning and raising of juveniles, does it also not make sense to provide shade cover, like the upper reaches, for said juveniles? ~ Would it also not make sense to limit access to that stretch of river for sport fishing/recreation and instead move such areas out of redds and habitat areas to more appropriate places downstream where there are holes for holding? (i.e potential for Douglas City and Junction City to become the "new" fishing and financial resource areas of the county, while Lewiston focuses on dam related recreation activities.) ~ Should not people be the ones that must adapt to these changes since the fish have already had to adapt to huge changes in their environment with the installation of the dams which provides positive benefits to humans that are negative to natural salmonid production? ~ Isn't the whole point of the program to increase natural production while reducing man-ipulated hatchery production? ~ Can't anyone associated with the program just come out with this "secret" to the public through the participatory process in a way they can understand? I know, blasphemy! But to me, it seems like no one will be happy, because humans are unwilling to adapt to necessary changes, and instead are more focused on the human concepts of recreational use and money. Just my two cents. Though I would be interested in hearing from someone more knowledgeable about the needs of fish, who can answer these questions, and how humans can adapt to these requirements of a changing environment. 2012/4/12 Tom Stokely > http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-9634-0019bb30f31a.html River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 am Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the program. >From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to Lilleberg. "I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you couldn't count fish fast enough ? You might not see one now." Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the river less accessible. "Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. "They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it back." "Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our county." She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic development, saying, "restoration is important ? but it must be balanced." Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over the past year ? that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in holes adult fish use. Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late ?70s to early ?80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three steelhead." Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of wildlife ? particularly in comparison to other rivers. "This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, who lives part time in Lewiston. Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity River flows is the most important way to restore the river. Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion and Central Valley Project use. "That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping recover the river and recover the fish." "Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating the stream.'" Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that law." Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said. The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." >From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be provided within 30 days. Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are planned for this year. _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -- Michael Caranci Director of Outfitters Director of Schools & Camps The Fly Shop 530-222-3555 or 800-669-3474 michael at theflyshop.com _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely for the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of this message or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law and subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the email immediately. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pcatanese at dhscott.com Fri Apr 20 14:40:03 2012 From: pcatanese at dhscott.com (Paul Catanese) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 14:40:03 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net> <1334774947.45257.YahooMailNeo@web120201.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Yes perhaps a more civil tone could be in order but some things re worth fighting for, and this is one of those and it nothing personal against any individual. What Joshua has pointed out happens to be what the government and in particular the restoration project has gone to great lengths to convince the guides, property owners and citizens of trinity county would never be the case, and that is using the upper 40 miles below the dam as a salmon hatchery at the expense of the aforementioned stakeholders. Lets just say that a major nerve has been touched on an open sore on a grizzly bear. Sorry for any feelings that might have been hurt but there is a long history here with many promises made. Peace love. Paul From: Grunbaum, Jon B -FS [mailto:jgrunbaum at fs.fed.us] Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 12:01 PM To: lou jacobson; Michael Caranci; Paul Catanese Cc: Al Smatsky; Steve Huber; Matt Mitchell; John Hodges; Greg Hector; Mike Parker; Matt Dover; Brad McFall; Chris Parsons; Bryan Balog; Trinity List; Bruce McGregor; Gabe Durand; Aaron Grabiel; Liam Gogan (TrinRvOut); Todd LeBoeuf; Dave Morton; Dax Messett; Mike Corley; Michael Charlton; Mike Hibbard; Zack Collins; Dave Neal; Dennis 'Popeye' Franco; Chuck Volckhausen; Matt Swan; Bill Dickens; Jeff Parker; Kevin Peterson; John Letton; Shannon Engh; Eric Wiseman; Ron Purl; Joe McCarthy; Lonnie Boles; Ross Wilkerson Subject: RE: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting I think Lou is on the right track ?.. From: env-trinity-bounces+jgrunbaum=fs.fed.us at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces+jgrunbaum=fs.fed.us at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of lou jacobson Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 11:49 AM To: Michael Caranci; Paul Catanese Cc: Al Smatsky; Steve Huber; Matt Mitchell; John Hodges; Greg Hector; Mike Parker; Matt Dover; Brad McFall; Chris Parsons; Bryan Balog; Trinity List; Bruce McGregor; Gabe Durand; Aaron Grabiel; Liam Gogan (TrinRvOut); Todd LeBoeuf; Dave Morton; Dax Messett; Mike Corley; Michael Charlton; Mike Hibbard; Zack Collins; Dave Neal; Dennis 'Popeye' Franco; Chuck Volckhausen; Matt Swan; Bill Dickens; Jeff Parker; Kevin Peterson; John Letton; Shannon Engh; Eric Wiseman; Ron Purl; Joe McCarthy; Lonnie Boles; Ross Wilkerson Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting All, Issues like these are certainly not black and white, both Michael and Josh seem to have valid points. However, it is very disconcerting that such aggressive language is being used to communicate. This is not productive nor will it afford various stakeholders an ability to find common ground. Something that is absolutely necessary should we ever want to take real steps forward in restoring the Trinity to what it once was ( what ever that means considering no point in time has been selected per this conversation, as Josh notes). Michael is certainly right, the real solution is removing the dams. And as he points out, this is most likely not going to happen any time soon--and would most likely create a very contentious situation with those who have come to enjoy the Trinity's water in the central valley or even those who depend on guaranteed summer flows for recreational activities downstream. Further he certainly is correct that a dominant western worldview rather than a ecological based worldview is at the root, a real problem. Josh has presented a perspective with merit as well. Since we are left in a bad situation with a handful of less then ideal solutions why not attempt to find the best alternative to an all around bad situation. Especially considering that we live in a society where, whether we like it or not, the dominant worldview informs actions oriented around human caused environmental change. Currently I think it would be safe to assume we can and we will continue to change natural environments to suit a political/societal/economic context. So why not attempt to find the best alternative to removing the dam, even if that means pushing human adaptation to a changing environmental context. Why not recognize we live under very specific geo-policial and economic structures that limit choice. And in doing so why not develop a constructive conversation on how to best mitigate and adapt to changing natural environments. And again, we should always recognize that this is not black and white and any choice or action will have various consequences associated with it whether it be environmental, social, political or economic. In the end we could certainly throw our arms up, cuss the situation, attack all who provide critical perspectives and contribute to a unhealthy conversation. Or we can make the choice to recognize that this issue exists in a complex structural context. And by doing so, we could recognize that each potential solution will have consequences, and that these consequences whether good or bad will require a select group of stakeholders to communicate in a healthy constructive fashion. The choice is yours, but I hope in the end more respect is brought to the table in an attempt to promote healthy discussion and an increased ability to take on the role of the other. Lou ________________________________ From: Michael Caranci > To: Paul Catanese > Cc: Al Smatsky >; Steve Huber >; Matt Mitchell >; John Hodges >; Greg Hector >; Mike Parker >; Matt Dover >; Brad McFall >; Chris Parsons >; Bryan Balog >; Trinity List >; Bruce McGregor >; Gabe Durand >; Aaron Grabiel >; Liam Gogan (TrinRvOut) >; Todd LeBoeuf >; Dave Morton >; Dax Messett >; Mike Corley >; Michael Charlton >; Mike Hibbard >; Zack Collins >; Dave Neal >; Dennis 'Popeye' Franco >; Chuck Volckhausen >; Matt Swan >; Bill Dickens >; Jeff Parker >; Kevin Peterson >; John Letton >; Shannon Engh >; Eric Wiseman >; Ron Purl >; Joe McCarthy >; Lonnie Boles >; Ross Wilkerson > Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 10:00 AM Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting It's pretty apparent that Mr. Allen really knows very little, or has very little actual, on-the-river understanding of how fish and rivers interact together, focusing more on an idealistic, uber-environmentalist, false-utopian concept that man is better than nature in our attempts to "recreate" nature, nor has he listened to or paid any attention to any of the dialogue in the past year pertaining to these topics. The only way to fully recreate the spawning (and rearing) habitat lost by the implementation of the dams is to remove said dams and re-open access to the hundreds of miles of habitat above the dams (something we all know is extremely unlikely to happen anytime soon, if ever). Destroying 40+ more miles of river habitat, to mitigate the loss of the upstream habitat, is simply a foolish idea, and one without merit from the river's, fishes', and stakeholders' standpoints. Only government bureaucracies can find a modicum of sense in spending billions of dollars to destroy habitat under the illusion that they're "helping the river". Furthermore, if you have 40 miles of spawning and rearing habitat, where exactly do you propose the adult fish hold and stage before attempting to spawn? If there's nowhere for adult fish, you won't have adult fish to make juvenile fish, and the end result will be no fish at all. Do the math. If you get to that point, you won't need to limit fishing in the upper river because there won't be any fish to catch anyway. So much of this pressure for excessive gravel and spawning habitat is intended towards the salmon populations, and the lowly steelhead, also an integral part of the ecosystem (and economy of Trinity County), is conveniently forgotten. Steelhead often arrive in the upper sections of river as early as September, and often don't spawn until March/April. Where are these fish supposed to live and survive for 6+ months with no holding water? --Michael Caranci 2012/4/18 Paul Catanese > Whoever Joshua is I have to say you have hit the nail on the head and confirmed everyone's fears. That fear that man himself rather than nature would dictate what transpires on this river. Moreover, a few select men who by and large do not live here or own property here would decide what's good for others based on the little knowledge they actually have about restoring a river. This year we will have close to a record return return of salmon having little to do with any restoration effort other than water. Seems to me that plenty of spawning has taken place in spite of man made efforts. Whatever caused this should be duplicated over and over because it worked. Bulldozers and gravel or man did not create the huge run we are predicting mother nature did along with restricting commercial fishing.i will bet you curtailing tribal fishing will also lead too more fish. There is not enough time in the day to address what should or shouldn't be done on this river and frankly the less that's done the more success will be achieved. Keep in mind we are going to have a record return of fish with no connection to bulldozers and gravel, just water. Peace love I am going fishing. On Apr 17, 2012, at 11:35 AM, "Joshua Allen" > wrote: Ok, just for discussion related purposes; I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. A lot of people keep complaining about the gravel and holes being filled in between Lewiston and Douglas City. This has a lot to do, as I see it, with a lack of fishing areas, and the river drastically changing from what it was in the past. Like it was reported, "...need to stop man-ipulating the river" and "what time period is the program trying to capture". Though as I see it, it is not possible to not stop manipulating the river, because there is no period in the river's history that is trying to be captured. Instead a brand new section is being created that never existed before. The river has already manipulated to death since the dams were put up in the first place. ~ Is not the whole point of the program is to create a stretch of river between Lewiston and Douglas City that mimics upstream spawning conditions lost by the dams? ~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those two communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide spawning habitat so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be raised in? ~ If the area in question does not have uniform flat areas for natural spawning of salmonids, instead has huge holes like it did in the past, then spawning can not occur, areas to raise juveniles is limited, and what is left is a dependence upon the hatchery for production? ~ Since this area is meant for spawning and raising of juveniles, does it also not make sense to provide shade cover, like the upper reaches, for said juveniles? ~ Would it also not make sense to limit access to that stretch of river for sport fishing/recreation and instead move such areas out of redds and habitat areas to more appropriate places downstream where there are holes for holding? (i.e potential for Douglas City and Junction City to become the "new" fishing and financial resource areas of the county, while Lewiston focuses on dam related recreation activities.) ~ Should not people be the ones that must adapt to these changes since the fish have already had to adapt to huge changes in their environment with the installation of the dams which provides positive benefits to humans that are negative to natural salmonid production? ~ Isn't the whole point of the program to increase natural production while reducing man-ipulated hatchery production? ~ Can't anyone associated with the program just come out with this "secret" to the public through the participatory process in a way they can understand? I know, blasphemy! But to me, it seems like no one will be happy, because humans are unwilling to adapt to necessary changes, and instead are more focused on the human concepts of recreational use and money. Just my two cents. Though I would be interested in hearing from someone more knowledgeable about the needs of fish, who can answer these questions, and how humans can adapt to these requirements of a changing environment. 2012/4/12 Tom Stokely > http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-9634-0019bb30f31a.html River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 am Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the program. >From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to Lilleberg. "I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you couldn't count fish fast enough ? You might not see one now." Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the river less accessible. "Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. "They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it back." "Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our county." She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic development, saying, "restoration is important ? but it must be balanced." Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over the past year ? that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in holes adult fish use. Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late ?70s to early ?80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three steelhead." Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of wildlife ? particularly in comparison to other rivers. "This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, who lives part time in Lewiston. Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity River flows is the most important way to restore the river. Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion and Central Valley Project use. "That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping recover the river and recover the fish." "Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating the stream.'" Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that law." Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said. The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." >From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be provided within 30 days. Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are planned for this year. _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -- Michael Caranci Director of Outfitters Director of Schools & Camps The Fly Shop 530-222-3555 or 800-669-3474 michael at theflyshop.com _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely for the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of this message or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law and subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the email immediately. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Fri Apr 20 16:56:34 2012 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 16:56:34 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Commission adopts river and ocean salmon season regulations (revised) In-Reply-To: <000601cd1f0e$9d38f010$d7aad030$@suddenlink.net> References: <000601cd1f0e$9d38f010$d7aad030$@suddenlink.net> Message-ID: http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2012/04/19/commission-adopts- river-and-ocean-salmon-season-regulations/ Photo: The big return of jack (two-year-old) chinook salmon like these to the Sacramento River and its tributaries in 2011 points to large numbers of adult salmon coming back to spawn this year. Photo by Dan Bacher. ? 640_img_3865.jpg Commission adopts river and ocean salmon season regulations by Dan Bacher The California Fish and Game Commission on April 18 voted 3 to 0 to approve a Klamath-Trinity River recreational salmon season with the highest adult fall chinook quota since 1986, 67,600 fish, and increased bag and possession limits due to the projected high abundance on the river this year. The Commission also approved the generous ocean salmon sportfishing regulations adopted by the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) at its April meeting in Seattle. The Commission adopted Central Valley river salmon seasons last week. These seasons are similar to last year?s regulations, except that anglers can fish the Mokelumne River and the area on the Feather River below the Thermalito Afterbay Outlet this year. Wade Sinnen, senior environmental scientist for the Department of Fish and Game?s Klamath Trinity Program, said the daily bag limit on the Klamath and Trinity Rivers will be increased to 4 adult chinooks over 22 inches and the total possession limit will be raised to 8 adult chinooks. In the Klamath River, biologists are forecasting four times more salmon than last year ? and an astounding 15 times more than in 2006. The ocean salmon population is estimated to be 1.6 million adult Klamath River fall Chinook, compared to last year?s forecast of 371,100. ?The projected natural adult spawning escapement after harvest is 86,300 fish, more than double the conservation floor of 40,700 fish,? noted Sinnen. However, Commissioner Michael Sutton cautioned, ?I want to remain on record with my concern that just because we have a bumper year in the system, that not everything is hunky-dory in the Klamath. I will be happier when we remove the dams, restore habitat and have all wild fish returning to the Klamath.? After both proposals were adopted, Comissioner Jim Kellogg, said, ?It?s awesome for everybody to be back on the water and to enjoy what nature has made available.? The DFG announced that the generous seasons and increased fishing opportunities are the hallmarks of what is expected to be a ?banner season? for ocean and river anglers. ?We are optimistic that excellent ocean and inland salmon seasons lie ahead for California anglers,? said Department of Fish and Game (DFG) Director Charlton H. Bonham. ?This could be one of the best salmon seasons in a decade, supporting both recreational and commercial fishermen and their communities.? Golden Gate Salmon Association President Victor Gonella also responded to the California Fish and Game Commission?s adoption of ocean and inland salmon seasons. ?We?re looking forward to better salmon fishing this year thanks in part to a more balanced use of Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta waters in recent years which has left enough water to grow a healthy salmon run,? said Gonella. ?Consumers can look forward to the best salmon in the world at their local markets. Both sport and commercial salmon fishermen will be out fishing and contributing to the economic vitality of the state, especially the coastal regions and the Sacramento Valley." He noted, ?We expect a lot of salmon to swim into San Francisco Bay on their way to spawn in Central Valley rivers this summer and fall. Water managers will need to retain enough cold water to help this valuable fish reproduce.? ?If you want to go fishing, contact one our many fine charter boats and they?ll do their best to get you on the fish,? added Gonella. The Golden Gate Salmon Association (GGSA) is a coalition of salmon advocates that includes commercial and recreational salmon fishermen, businesses, restaurants, tribes, environmentalists, elected officials, families and communities that rely on salmon. GGSA has a board composed of representatives of this diverse community, which reaches from Oregon to the California Central Coast, through the Bay- Delta and up a dozen rivers in the Central Valley. While anglers look forward to a banner salmon season, the Brown administration is fast-tracking the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build a peripheral canal or tunnel, an enormously expensive and environmentally destructive government boondoggle that is expected to hasten the extinction of Central Valley salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail and other fish species. The Fish & Game Commission press release is available at http://cdfgnews.wordpress.com/2012/04/19/commission-adopts-salmon- season-regulation-packages. 2012 Ocean and River Salmon Seasons: The newly adopted ocean salmon sport fishing regulations conform to those adopted by the Pacific Fisheries Management Council. The opening date in the Klamath Management Zone is May 1. All other zones are currently open. Complete ocean salmon regulations are posted athttp://www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/oceansalmon.asp On all Central Valley rivers, the daily bag and possession limit is two Chinook salmon. On the Trinity and Klamath rivers the daily bag limit is four Chinook of any size and eight in possession prior to reaching the quota. All anglers must have Salmon Harvest Cards in their possession when fishing for salmon on the Klamath and Trinity rivers. Other enhanced salmon fishing opportunities are available on the Mokelumne River and portions of the Feather River from the unimproved boat ramp above the Thermalito Afterbay Outfall down river. Key elements of the newly adopted inland salmon seasons and regulations for Central Valley rivers and the Klamath and Trinity rivers are listed below. The full regulations package approved by the Commission is available at http://www.fgc.ca.gov/regulations/2012/ index.aspx SACRAMENTO RIVER Open Aug. 1 through Dec.16 from the Deschutes Road Bridge near Anderson downstream to 500 feet upstream from Red Bluff Diversion Dam. Open July 16 through Dec. 16 from 150 feet below the Lower Red Bluff (Sycamore) boat ramp to the Highway 113 Bridge near Knights Landing. Open July 16 through Dec. 16 from the Highway 113 Bridge near Knights Landing downstream to the Carquinez Bridge. FEATHER RIVER Open July 16 through Oct. 15 from unimproved boat launch ramp above the Thermalito Afterbay Outfall downstream to 200 yards above the Live Oak boat ramp. Open July 16 through Dec. 16 from 200 yards above Live Oak boat ramp to the mouth. AMERICAN RIVER Open from July 16 through Dec. 31 from Nimbus Dam to Hazel Avenue Bridge. Open from July 16 through Aug. 15 from Hazel Avenue Bridge to the United States Geological Survey (USGS) gauging station cable crossing near Nimbus Hatchery. Open July 16 through Oct. 31 from the USGS gauging station cable crossing near Nimbus Hatchery to the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) power line crossing the southwest boundary of Ancil Hoffman Park. Open from July 16 through Dec. 16 from the SMUD power line crossing at the southwest boundary of Ancil Hoffman Park to the Jibboom Street Bridge. Open July 16 through Dec. 16. from the Jibboom Street Bridge to the mouth. MOKELUMNE RIVER Open July 16 through Oct. 15 from Camanche Dam to the Highway 99 Bridge. Open July 16 through Dec. 31 from the Highway 99 Bridge to the Woodbridge Irrigation District Dam, including Lodi Lake. Open July 16 through Dec. 16 from the Lower Sacramento Road Bridge to the mouth. (For purposes of this regulation, this river segment is defined as Mokelumne River and its tributary sloughs downstream of the Lower Sacramento Road Bridge, east of Highway 160 and north of Highway 12.) KLAMATH RIVER Open to fall-run Chinook salmon fishing from Aug. 15 through Dec. 31 with a daily bag limit of four Chinook salmon of any size. The possession limit is eight Chinook salmon of any size. The 2012 quota for the Klamath River basin is 67,600 fall-run salmon more than 22 inches long. Once this quota has been met, no Chinook salmon greater than 22 inches long may be retained (anglers may still retain a limit of Chinook salmon under 22 inches). A weekly DFG status report will be available by calling 1-800-564-6479. Open to spring-run Chinook salmon fishing from Jan. 1 through Aug. 14 with a daily bag and possession limit of two salmon. The take of salmon is prohibited on the Klamath River from Iron Gate Dam downstream to Weitchpec from Jan. 1 through Aug. 14. TRINITY RIVER Open to fall-run Chinook salmon fishing from Sept. 1 through Dec. 31 with a daily bag limit of four Chinook salmon of any size. The possession limit is eight Chinook salmon of any size. The 2012 quota for the Klamath River basin is 67,600 fall-run salmon more than 22 inches long. Once this quota has been met, no Chinook salmon greater than 22 inches long may be retained (anglers may still retain a limit of Chinook salmon under 22 inches). A weekly DFG status report will be available by calling 1-800-564-6479. The Trinity River main stem downstream of the Highway 299 Bridge at Cedar Flat to the Denny Road Bridge in Hawkins Bar is closed to all fishing Sept. 1 through Dec. 31. Open to spring-run Chinook salmon fishing from Jan. 1 through Aug. 31. The daily bag and possession limit is two Chinook salmon. The take of salmon is prohibited from the confluence of the South Fork Trinity River downstream to the confluence of the Klamath River from Jan. 1 through Aug. 31. All other regulations for bag and possession limits for trout, salmon and other species, as well as general information about restrictions on fishing methods and gear on the above rivers, are available on the DFG website at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/regulations -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 640_img_3865.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 216046 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sweettrinity at live.com Mon Apr 23 08:27:48 2012 From: sweettrinity at live.com (travis michel) Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 08:27:48 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net>, , Message-ID: Enough BS I think the time is coming to take the gloves off, pick a side and quit playing nice. After dealing with the TRRP and the BOR for a couple years now, from my point of view, they tell you what you want to hear, then do what they want. I feel strongly about what is happening to the river, and think it is time to get ready to fight for what you believe. Peace and love???? Save it for a BBQ or something!! Travis From: dpa4 at sonic.net To: pcatanese at dhscott.com; trinityjosh at gmail.com Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:34:07 -0700 CC: env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Gentlemen please do not exhale yet. The fish are not in the river..yet. Parky From: Paul Catanese Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 5:47 AM To: Joshua Allen Cc: Trinity List Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Whoever Joshua is I have to say you have hit the nail on the head and confirmed everyone's fears. That fear that man himself rather than nature would dictate what transpires on this river. Moreover, a few select men who by and large do not live here or own property here would decide what's good for others based on the little knowledge they actually have about restoring a river. This year we will have close to a record return return of salmon having little to do with any restoration effort other than water. Seems to me that plenty of spawning has taken place in spite of man made efforts. Whatever caused this should be duplicated over and over because it worked. Bulldozers and gravel or man did not create the huge run we are predicting mother nature did along with restricting commercial fishing.i will bet you curtailing tribal fishing will also lead too more fish. There is not enough time in the day to address what should or shouldn't be done on this river and frankly the less that's done the more success will be achieved. Keep in mind we are going to have a record return of fish with no connection to bulldozers and gravel, just water. Peace love I am going fishing. On Apr 17, 2012, at 11:35 AM, "Joshua Allen" wrote: Ok, just for discussion related purposes; I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. A lot of people keep complaining about the gravel and holes being filled in between Lewiston and Douglas City. This has a lot to do, as I see it, with a lack of fishing areas, and the river drastically changing from what it was in the past. Like it was reported, "...need to stop man-ipulating the river" and "what time period is the program trying to capture". Though as I see it, it is not possible to not stop manipulating the river, because there is no period in the river's history that is trying to be captured. Instead a brand new section is being created that never existed before. The river has already manipulated to death since the dams were put up in the first place. ~ Is not the whole point of the program is to create a stretch of river between Lewiston and Douglas City that mimics upstream spawning conditions lost by the dams? ~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those two communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide spawning habitat so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be raised in? ~ If the area in question does not have uniform flat areas for natural spawning of salmonids, instead has huge holes like it did in the past, then spawning can not occur, areas to raise juveniles is limited, and what is left is a dependence upon the hatchery for production? ~ Since this area is meant for spawning and raising of juveniles, does it also not make sense to provide shade cover, like the upper reaches, for said juveniles? ~ Would it also not make sense to limit access to that stretch of river for sport fishing/recreation and instead move such areas out of redds and habitat areas to more appropriate places downstream where there are holes for holding? (i.e potential for Douglas City and Junction City to become the "new" fishing and financial resource areas of the county, while Lewiston focuses on dam related recreation activities.) ~ Should not people be the ones that must adapt to these changes since the fish have already had to adapt to huge changes in their environment with the installation of the dams which provides positive benefits to humans that are negative to natural salmonid production? ~ Isn't the whole point of the program to increase natural production while reducing man-ipulated hatchery production? ~ Can't anyone associated with the program just come out with this "secret" to the public through the participatory process in a way they can understand? I know, blasphemy! But to me, it seems like no one will be happy, because humans are unwilling to adapt to necessary changes, and instead are more focused on the human concepts of recreational use and money. Just my two cents. Though I would be interested in hearing from someone more knowledgeable about the needs of fish, who can answer these questions, and how humans can adapt to these requirements of a changing environment. 2012/4/12 Tom Stokely http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-9634-0019bb30f31a.html River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 am Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the program. >From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to Lilleberg. "I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you couldn't count fish fast enough ? You might not see one now." Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the river less accessible. "Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. "They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it back." "Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our county." She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic development, saying, "restoration is important ? but it must be balanced." Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over the past year ? that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in holes adult fish use. Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late ?70s to early ?80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three steelhead." Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of wildlife ? particularly in comparison to other rivers. "This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, who lives part time in Lewiston. Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity River flows is the most important way to restore the river. Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion and Central Valley Project use. "That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping recover the river and recover the fish." "Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating the stream.'" Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that law." Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said. The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." >From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be provided within 30 days. Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are planned for this year. _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Tue Apr 24 09:28:38 2012 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 09:28:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning surveys - New report available Message-ID: A lot of you have tuned in to the weekly updates during Chinook salmon spawning season. You may be interested in a report just produced by the USFWS, Yurok Tribe, and Hoopa Valley Tribe on mainstem Trinity River Chinook salmon spawning distributions 2002-2011. The report is posted at http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/reportsDisplay.html Scroll down the page to Technical Reports. Looking forward to fall 2012! Charlie ----- Forwarded by Charles Chamberlain/AFWO/R1/FWS/DOI on 04/24/2012 08:45 AM ----- Charles Chamberlain/AFWO/R1/FWS/DOI 12/21/2011 12:39 PM To env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us cc Subject Trinity River spawning survey -update December 12 to 20, 2011 Hi all, Thank you for tuning in this fall. We've reached the end of our Fall 2011 Trinity River spawning survey season. Our final 2011 update is available here: http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries Numbers will adjust slightly as our data undergo some QA/QC but preliminarily our crews mapped 6,763 mainstem Trinity River salmon redds! Wishing you all a fantastic 2012, Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Jay_Glase at nps.gov Wed Apr 25 09:45:26 2012 From: Jay_Glase at nps.gov (Jay_Glase at nps.gov) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 11:45:26 -0500 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting In-Reply-To: References: <9393E63F-22C4-41DB-BDCC-25B7501C0648@att.net>, , Message-ID: Seems like the gloves have been off, back on, then off again about 10 or 12 times over the last 20 years. And that's only going back to 1992. All of this sounds familiar - just different current issues. The debate has gone back and forth for decades, not just a couple of years. So, a couple of thoughts. First, linked below are a couple of documents that perhaps some folks have forgotten about, some have never heard of, and others will remember but will just once again thumb their noses at - these are the Flow Evaluation Final Reports that helped guide the mainstem EIS. Some of you should read at least parts of these, it'll help with all the arguments. These and a tonne of other reports are available at the TRRP website (yes, I like metric tonne over domestic ton). http://odp.trrp.net/Data/Documents/Details.aspx?document=225 http://odp.trrp.net/Data/Documents/Details.aspx?document=226 Next, maybe the chinook salmon redd and spawner distribution paper recently posted on this listserve by Charlie Chamberlain will shed a little light on what the adult fish have actually been up to for the last 10 years. The following is from the document abstract. Though spawning distribution responded to physical alterations on a local feature scale (salmon constructed redds in newly created side channels for example), the proportion of redds constructed within the up and downstream boundaries of these rehabilitation sites had not yet significantly changed at broader reach scales. High density spawning area locations remained consistent year to year with little exception. We observed an increase in the mean distance from Lewiston Dam for construction of natural origin Chinook salmon redds over the course of this study. Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but to me this sounds like redds are still being constructed in those places where they've always been constructed (or at least for the last 10 years, but in all likelihood, a lot longer). It also sounds like restoration sites aren't changing the distribution over the broader reach, which if I recall correctly wasn't the primary intent of the restoration sites; the main objective is creation of fry (and some juvenile) rearing habitat because that's what was determined to be limiting populations way back when. However, at the same time, natural chinook have produced proportionately more redds over the last few years than hatchery chinook and are spawning further from the dam than they have in the recent past. Again, maybe I'm reading into this what I'd like to think, but perhaps there's increased survival of naturally produced fish, leading to a higher proportion of natural spawners and a greater downstream distribution from the dam. it's only been 10 years - not a lot of chinook generational turnover - so there's probably no significant change to be seen just yet. But to me it sounds possibly like good news. There's so much more in that report - and I should really get back to work, so I'll just say y'all should read it and see what you come away with. The results might not influence how anyone will "pick sides", but it's a thorough and informative document - nice work guys. cheers, jay p.s. one last thought, there's obviously value in rafting the river and knowing where to catch adult salmon and steelhead (and maybe the occasional brown trout if they still persist), but if you want to know about the other half of their in-river life, the best thing a person can do to is put on a mask and snorkel and see where their progeny are hanging out - you'll get wet, it'll be cold, and you'll have to look really hard to find all the places where they'll be hiding, but it's really rewarding! travis michel To Sent by: , Cat Man env-trinity-bounc , es at velocipede.dcn .davis.ca.us cc env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org Subject 04/23/2012 10:27 Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- AM River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Enough BS I think the time is coming to take the gloves off, pick a side and quit playing nice. After dealing with the TRRP and the BOR for a couple years now, from my point of view, they tell you what you want to hear, then do what they want. I feel strongly about what is happening to the river, and think it is time to get ready to fight for what you believe. Peace and love???? Save it for a BBQ or something!! Travis From: dpa4 at sonic.net To: pcatanese at dhscott.com; trinityjosh at gmail.com Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:34:07 -0700 CC: env-trinity at mailman.dcn.org Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Gentlemen please do not exhale yet. The fish are not in the river..yet. Parky From: Paul Catanese Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 5:47 AM To: Joshua Allen Cc: Trinity List Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting Whoever Joshua is I have to say you have hit the nail on the head and confirmed everyone's fears. That fear that man himself rather than nature would dictate what transpires on this river. Moreover, a few select men who by and large do not live here or own property here would decide what's good for others based on the little knowledge they actually have about restoring a river. This year we will have close to a record return return of salmon having little to do with any restoration effort other than water. Seems to me that plenty of spawning has taken place in spite of man made efforts. Whatever caused this should be duplicated over and over because it worked. Bulldozers and gravel or man did not create the huge run we are predicting mother nature did along with restricting commercial fishing.i will bet you curtailing tribal fishing will also lead too more fish. There is not enough time in the day to address what should or shouldn't be done on this river and frankly the less that's done the more success will be achieved. Keep in mind we are going to have a record return of fish with no connection to bulldozers and gravel, just water. Peace love I am going fishing. On Apr 17, 2012, at 11:35 AM, "Joshua Allen" wrote: Ok, just for discussion related purposes; I'm going to play devil's advocate for a moment. A lot of people keep complaining about the gravel and holes being filled in between Lewiston and Douglas City. This has a lot to do, as I see it, with a lack of fishing areas, and the river drastically changing from what it was in the past. Like it was reported, "...need to stop man-ipulating the river" and "what time period is the program trying to capture". Though as I see it, it is not possible to not stop manipulating the river, because there is no period in the river's history that is trying to be captured. Instead a brand new section is being created that never existed before. The river has already manipulated to death since the dams were put up in the first place. ~ Is not the whole point of the program is to create a stretch of river between Lewiston and Douglas City that mimics upstream spawning conditions lost by the dams? ~ If so, isn't it then required that the holes and areas between those two communities be filled in flat with smaller pools behind them to provide spawning habitat so redds can be laid and juveniles have shallows to be raised in? ~ If the area in question does not have uniform flat areas for natural spawning of salmonids, instead has huge holes like it did in the past, then spawning can not occur, areas to raise juveniles is limited, and what is left is a dependence upon the hatchery for production? ~ Since this area is meant for spawning and raising of juveniles, does it also not make sense to provide shade cover, like the upper reaches, for said juveniles? ~ Would it also not make sense to limit access to that stretch of river for sport fishing/recreation and instead move such areas out of redds and habitat areas to more appropriate places downstream where there are holes for holding? (i.e potential for Douglas City and Junction City to become the "new" fishing and financial resource areas of the county, while Lewiston focuses on dam related recreation activities.) ~ Should not people be the ones that must adapt to these changes since the fish have already had to adapt to huge changes in their environment with the installation of the dams which provides positive benefits to humans that are negative to natural salmonid production? ~ Isn't the whole point of the program to increase natural production while reducing man-ipulated hatchery production? ~ Can't anyone associated with the program just come out with this "secret" to the public through the participatory process in a way they can understand? I know, blasphemy! But to me, it seems like no one will be happy, because humans are unwilling to adapt to necessary changes, and instead are more focused on the human concepts of recreational use and money. Just my two cents. Though I would be interested in hearing from someone more knowledgeable about the needs of fish, who can answer these questions, and how humans can adapt to these requirements of a changing environment. 2012/4/12 Tom Stokely http://www.trinityjournal.com/sports/outdoors/article_dcf01834-83e8-11e1-9634-0019bb30f31a.html River dwellers share views at Lewiston meeting By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 8:15 am Appreciation of the Trinity River and its wildlife was a common theme last week at the second in a series of outreach meetings, this one held in Lewiston, to get public input on the Trinity River Restoration Program. A small group of about a dozen people attended the meeting April 4 at One Maple Winery put on by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, under contract with the restoration program. The meeting was run by RCD employees Alex Cousins and Donna Rupp, and contractor Jeff Morris, who made clear they were not representatives of the restoration program but were there to bring concerns and questions back to agencies involved in the program. >From Napa, Al Lilleberg said he has been visiting Lewiston four to five days a month since he was a teenager, and the river was basically his biology lab in college majoring in biology. The river has declined since construction of Trinity and Lewiston dams in the early 1960s, according to Lilleberg. "I quit fishing because the river is dead," Lilleberg said. "I know people fish in it all the time, but it's dead by comparison." Lilleberg said when the sun went down and fish were jumping for food, "you couldn't count fish fast enough ? You might not see one now." Several residents expressed concerns about restoration program activities. Tom and Diane Gannon questioned the planting of willows which make the river less accessible. "Somebody -- in my estimate -- is insane," Tom Gannon said, noting that at one time the program goal was to push the vegetation back. "They did that," he said, "and now they've replanted where they pushed it back." "Pre-dam there weren't all the willows they just planted," he said. Describing herself as a "river lifer," Lewiston resident and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler said, "The river is the lifeblood of our county." She spoke of the importance of the river for recreation and economic development, saying, "restoration is important ? but it must be balanced." Her husband, Bob Tyler, shared a concern that has come up repeatedly over the past year ? that spawning gravels added to the river have filled in holes adult fish use. Bob Tyler said he's fished along the river since childhood (the late ?70s to early ?80s), and "you'd come home with five salmon or two or three steelhead." Below the Lewiston Bridge the hole was so deep, he said, "you used to be able to jump off the bridge into that hole. You can't do that anymore." Others said the river is "not dead" and continues to support a variety of wildlife ? particularly in comparison to other rivers. "This is one of the best rivers left. We have a chance," said Dale Davey, who lives part time in Lewiston. Davey said the Trinity River Record of Decision which increased Trinity River flows is the most important way to restore the river. Under the Record of Decision river flows are determined based on water-year type, but over multiple years 49 percent of inflow to Trinity Lake is to be released to the river and 51 percent available for diversion and Central Valley Project use. "That's the thing we can never let bury," he said. "That's what's helping recover the river and recover the fish." "Let the water flow do it," Davey said. "Eventually, we've got to stop bulldozing and injecting gravel and say, 'We're going to stop man-ipulating the stream.'" Regarding the river flows and the Record of Decision, Lilleberg said, "We are facing a challenge. The four biggest farms in California can crack that law." Supporters of the river must be "rabid" about how rivers function, he said. The audience also asked about goals of the program, what time frame the program is attempting to recapture in the river's history, and if there will be an endpoint to the mechanical restoration projects. County Sup. Judy Pflueger requested that the answers be "in terms we understand." >From the RCD, Morris said written answers to the questions would be provided within 30 days. Also, several more outreach meetings in communities along the river are planned. The locations, dates and times will be announced. The outreach meetings began after the Trinity River Guide Association and California Water Impact Network requested a moratorium on channel restoration projects until a scientific review of earlier projects is complete. Gravel injections were of particular concern to the guides, and the restoration program has since announced that no gravel injections are planned for this year. _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity From TWashburn at usbr.gov Wed Apr 25 13:38:24 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 14:38:24 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change order - Trinity River Division Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River: Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) May 05, 2012 0700 2,500 3,000 May 05, 2012 0900 3,000 3,500 May 05, 2012 1100 3,500 4,000 May 06, 2012 0700 4,000 5,000 May 06, 2012 0900 5,000 6,000 May 10, 2012 0700 6,000 5,600 May 10, 2012 1100 5,600 5,200 May 10, 2012 1500 5,200 5,000 May 11, 2012 0700 5,000 4,750 May 11, 2012 1100 4,750 4,500 May 16, 2012 0700 4,500 4,380 May 17, 2012 0700 4,380 4,270 May 18, 2012 0700 4,270 4,160 May 19, 2012 0700 4,160 4,050 May 20, 2012 0700 4,050 3,940 May 21, 2012 0700 3,940 3,830 May 22, 2012 0700 3,830 3,720 May 23, 2012 0700 3,720 3,630 May 24, 2012 0700 3,630 3,550 May 25, 2012 0700 3,550 3,500 May 29, 2012 0700 3,500 3,420 May 30, 2012 0700 3,420 3,320 May 31, 2012 0700 3,320 3,220 Ordered by: Thuy Washburn Note: ROD flows -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sbower at wildblue.net Fri Apr 27 22:08:20 2012 From: sbower at wildblue.net (Susan Bower) Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 22:08:20 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Tom Stokely Kin to the Earth Message-ID: Greetings, Our wonderful Tom Stokely has been recognized as a Kin to the Earth by the North Coast Environmental Center. Below is the article that tells a few of his feats, and has a very cool photo of him. Kindly circulate. Thanks, Susan Bower http://yournec.org/content/kin-earth-tom-stokely-friend-trinity-river -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Apr 28 21:26:45 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2012 21:26:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Greg King- Upper Klamath Basin Refuge crisis will not be solved by restoration agreement: Message-ID: Upper Klamath Basin Refuge crisis will not be solved by restoration agreement: Time to take another path Greg King/For the Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Posted: http://www.times-standard.com/guest_opinion/ci_20485040/upper-klamath-basin-refuge-crisis-will-not-be Times-Standard.com Thanks to the Times-Standard for the April 10 AP article covering the Upper Klamath Basin water supply crisis on the National Wildlife Refuges (?Scarce Water Spreads Disease on Waterfowl Refuge?) and the related commentary by Erik Bergren (?Restoration Pact Offers Klamath Basin Hope,? Times-Standard, April 12). As Executive Director of the Northcoast Environmental Center, I was engaged in Klamath Settlement negotiations from 2007 through 2009. The AP article and Begren's piece both state that the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) would resolve water supply problems for the Lower Klamath and Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuges. This is not true. The Klamath Refuges constitute one of the world's most important migratory bird habitats, with 40 percent of the birds on the Pacific Flyway over-wintering there. The recent death of an estimated 10,000 ducks, geese and other waterfowl due to avian cholera can be expected to recur regularly if the KBRA is implemented. Mr. Bergen and the AP article incorrectly state that the Tule Lake and Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuges have junior water rights. In fact, the lands within the Refuges used for agriculture (?lease lands?) have 1905 water rights that should be transferred to fish and wildlife purposes through adjudication. Furthermore, other parts of the Lower Klamath Refuge have a 1908 water right, and the Tule Lake Refuge has a 1928 water right. These water rights are senior to most others; the adjudication now underway in Oregon should result in more water delivery to Lower Klamath Lake and Tule Lake without the KBRA. The AP story also states that allocation for the refuges worked fine until ?more water had to be allocated to the river for endangered salmon, and to Upper Klamath Lake for endangered suckers.? Storing more winter water in Upper Klamath Lake is actually a water security measure for the Klamath Project irrigators and doesn't materially benefit Lost River and shortnose sucker recovery due to poor water quality in the lake. Conditions are often lethal to suckers because not enough is being done to restore the marshes that once bordered the lake and maintained its ecological balance. Ironically, Upper Klamath Lake is filled by holding back water that would otherwise flow into the lower Klamath River and benefit coho salmon, which violates Endangered Species Act (ESA) flow requirements defined in the Biological Opinion (B.O.) between the National Marine Fisheries Service and the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), which operates the Klamath Project. On April 22, 2010, less than 90 days after the KBRA was signed, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a modified B.O. that gave the BOR permission to allow Tule Lake levels to drop to where they would no longer support the two sucker species. The BOR subsequently removed more than 400 endangered Lost River and shortnose suckers from Tule Lake, violating both the federal and California ESA, under which both species are listed and receive the highest level of protection. At this point, extinction could be just around the corner for these critical indicator species, thanks to an unwillingness of federal and State officials to uphold environmental laws. The losses suffered by the formerly magnificent lakes in the Klamath National Wildlife Refuges are almost biblical. Tule Lake, which was formerly 110,000 acres, has been reduced to the 9,000-13,000 acre Tule Sump. Lower Klamath Lake, formerly 85,000 acres, is now only 4,000-7,000 acres, depending on the water year. Today, 22,000 acres of the former lake beds in these wildlife refuges are leased for industrial agriculture, a situation that does not occur anywhere else in the nation. Under the KBRA, this agricultural use of the refuges would continue for 50 years. To restore health to this system, we need to let the Klamath River flow into Lower Klamath Lake, as it did historically. Unless we expand marshes in the National Wildlife Refuges, effluent from the Klamath Project will continue to cause the Klamath River within Keno Reservoir to remain an anoxic dead zone for weeks each year. Disastrous ripple impacts for salmon downstream will continue and will offset benefits of dam removal. This, among several other failings, would be the legacy of the KBRA. Greg King is executive director of the Siskiyou Land Conservancy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Apr 29 06:51:38 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 06:51:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times- Standard- Scientists to test new acoustical hydrophones on Trinity River Message-ID: <201D5685-BC37-4AE6-975E-D31E0B0F8BC9@att.net> Scientists to test new acoustical hydrophones on Trinity River http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_20508299/scientists-test-new-acoustical-hydrophones-trinity-river The Times-Standard Posted: 04/29/2012 02:07:38 AM PDT During the upcoming peak of the restoration releases in early May, a group of scientists will be testing acoustical hydrophones as a potential tool for monitoring sediment transport in rivers. ?The Trinity River's managed high flow releases, combined with a world-class sediment monitoring program, make the Trinity a unique platform for outside researches to test new technologies to measure sediment transport,? according to a press release from the Trinity River Restoration Program. Acoustical hydrophones are microphones designed for underwater recording or listening. They are typically used for finding submarines or listening to whale songs, but in 2006, a doctoral student at Penn State University experimented with using hydrophones to measure sediment transport in rivers based on the knowledge that as rocks roll down the river during floods, they hit each other and make a clanging sound. The Trinity River Restoration Program currently uses traditional methods for measuring sediment transport that are labor intensive, cost prohibitive, produce a small number of samples and require high-risk work conditions. Technology like hydrophones could provide a safe, low-cost alternative that would produce continuous sediment measurement, the release said. If successful, it would greatly benefit not only the Trinity but the study and management of rivers around the world, according to the program. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation in Denver Advertisement recently secured funding through a science and technology grant program to further pursue the research and development of hydrophone technology to measure sediment transport. The research is a collaborative effort with the National Center for Physical Acoustics at the University of Mississippi. The Trinity River Restoration Program is contributing by sharing sediment transport data that is already collected during their current work processes. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Apr 29 19:19:33 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 19:19:33 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune Opinion- E.B. Duggan, Willow Creek, CA Message-ID: Opinions (E. B. Duggan?Willow Creek, CA) http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2012/02/opinions-e-b-duggan-willow-creek-ca/ For years the Hupa people have been good neighbors with the surrounding communities. On Dec. 8, 2011, I was informed that the Tish Tang area access was closed and that the Hoopa Reservation was closed to trespassing by non-tribal members by posting. On December 10, I physically verified this by observation. On December 11, I contacted Tribal Chairman Leonard Masten and asked about this closure and he confirmed said denial of trespass and gave me several valid reasons but that I should contact him during regular business hours at his office. The purpose of this contact was to try and secure some kind of meeting with responsible Tribal members of his choosing so we could sit down and discuss the problem and possible solutions. Since the above listed dates I have repeatedly contacted Billy Colegrove, the chairman?s administrative assistant; Darin Jarnaghan, Hoopa Forestry Supervisor; and tried to contact the Hoopa Tribal Chairman again to see if there wasn?t some way to meet and discuss the problem to some type of resolution. At some point in the last couple of weeks a meeting was set with the Willow Creek Community Services District Manager, Steve Paine and Director Bruce Nelson. I was unable to attend due to a prior commitment with the Trinity River Restoration Program. At this meeting it was determined that sport fishermen would be allowed to trespass to fish by ?use permit? but rafters and fishing guides would be resolved at a later date. Try as I may I have been unable to find a way to apply for a sport fishing ?use permit? to date to fish on the reservation. This has created a great economic hardship to the communities of Willow Creek, Hoopa and Orleans due to many fishermen canceling their reservations to not come up to the area and fish the Trinity for winter steelhead. We have already lost fishing for January, February and March, a 12 to 15 percent economic loss to these communities and ensuing businesses. With a predicted great salmon return this fishing season it could be an even greater economic loss to these communities if this problem is not resolved. As I have continued to request a meeting with someone of the Tribal Chairman?s choice I have yet to be invited to such a meeting to try and resolve this problem. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Apr 29 19:22:30 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 19:22:30 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune Opinion- Felice Pace Message-ID: <7043DDEE-F69D-4A90-8E86-B8EA768180F3@att.net> http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2012/04/opinions-felice-pace-klamath-ca-7/ Opinions (Felice Pace?Klamath, CA) By Felice Pace, Author of KlamBlog.blogspot.com Who is responsible for 10,000 geese, ducks and other birds dying on Lower Klamath and Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuges this winter and spring? To read the local Herald and News ? the Upper Klamath River Basin?s newspaper of record ? one would think the event was the unfortunate consequence of a dry winter?an act of nature which humans could not prevent. That editorial position reflects spin which the Klamath Water Users Association and other ?parties? to the KBRA Water Deal have put out in response to the deaths. But it does not reflect reality. To find those responsible, we need to go back to the fall and winter of 2011. The KBRA was newly signed and the National Marine Fisheries Service had recently issued a new Biological Opinion for Klamath Coho Salmon. The ?Bi-Op? prescribes how much water the Bureau of Reclamation?s Klamath Irrigation Project must allow to flow in the Klamath River each month of the year. Bi-Op prescribed river flows closely reflect flows negotiated in the KBRA Water Deal; NMFS managers intentionally delayed the Bi-Op until the KBRA was finalized and signed. Like the KBRA, the Bi-Op called for higher winter and spring Klamath River flows and lower summer and fall flows. BOR manager Jason Phillips was implementing the Bi-Op as written. That is until the Klamath Water Users Association (KWUA) and the Klamath County Chamber of Commerce (KCCC) launched a public campaign to pressure Phillips ? a campaign which was reported by the Herald and News. KWUA and KCCC wanted Phillips to make filling Upper Klamath Lake early inthe year the Bureau?s top priority. Filling Upper Klamath Lake as early in the year as possible would result in maximum irrigation deliveries the following summer. Under intense pressure, Jason Phillips went to the responsible NMFS manager ? Irma Lagomarcino ? for help. Lagomarcino agreed to cut winter flows in the Klamath to facilitate early filling of Upper Klamath Lake (UKL). With that agreement in hand, Phillips was able to comply with the KWUA/KCCC demand. In press releases and news reports, the BOR spun the new operational priority as necessary to provide for ESA-listed Lost River and Shortnose Sucker fish. However, the Sucker Bi-Op does not call for filling the lake early and prior to snowmelt as demanded by KWUA/KCCC. Filling UKL early was easy in 2010 ? a wet year ? but not so easy this winter. Nevertheless, Phillips did not deviate from the priority demanded by Klamath Project irrigation interests. In order to fill UKL before spring snow melt began, Phillips cut-off water to the Lower Klamath and Tule Lake Refuges for 2 ? months beginning on January 2nd. That cut-off dried up 15,000 acres of wetlands resulting in severe overcrowding as 80 percent of Pacific Flyway birds stopped over in the Basin on their way north. Under those conditions, an epidemic of avian cholera was likely if not inevitable. In a recently published news report, a BOR spokesperson claimed that Phillips and the rest of the BOR did not know about the bird deaths until mid-March. If that is true why didn?t refuge manager Ron Cole pick up the phone? And why didn?t the Klamath Basin Coordinating Council ? set up as part of KBRA implementation specifically to deal with water conflicts ? get involved? The Karuk Tribe?s Craig Tucker and other promoters of the KBRA are now saying that the refuges were dewatered because KBRA legislation has not passed Congress. But the recent publication of a 106 page report detailing ?progress? made implementing the KBRA puts the lie to that claim. Hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars have already been expended implementing KBRA provisions. The KBRA has been advertized as providing a new era of balanced water management; no longer, we were told, would one interest be sacrificed in order to advance another interest; the refuges were valued and would be cared for by Klamath Project Irrigators. It is true that in this new KBRA era there is nothing that prevents irrigation interests and the BOR from making sure that the refuges are not sacrificed to maximize irrigation deliveries?nothing, that is, except the insistence of the Klamath?s Irrigation Elite that their interests be prioritized over all others. This new KBRA era is looking a lot like the good old days when federal irrigation was always the priority no matter what the consequences for fish and wildlife. The Second Annual Report on KBRA implementation has a picture of Lower Klamath Wildlife refuge on its cover. We see the iconic view with thousands of snow geese and Mt. Shasta in the background. The report even has a section on the refuges which talks about ?negotiations? with irrigation interests over refuge water rights in Oregon?s Klamath Adjudication. My guess is those negotiations between federal irrigation interests and refuge folks were part of advancing another of the Irrigation Elite?s objectives ? preventing the refuges from obtaining an independent water right under Oregon law and from using groundwater. That would effectively keep the refuges dependent on the BOR?s Klamath Project for a water supply. Who is responsible for an estimated 10,000 bird deaths on Lower Klamath and Tule Lake Refuges? Now that you have the facts and not just the spin, I think you can decide for yourself. ### -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Apr 29 19:30:34 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 19:30:34 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- What's Up the Trinity? Message-ID: <4F06E18D-146F-4854-B8A0-01339B510596@att.net> What?s Up the Trinity? http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2012/04/whats-up-the-trinity/ The South Fork of the Trinity River discharged massive amounts of sediment into the mainstem Trinity River as a result of large landslides. Although the sediments made it all the way to Hoopa, the Tribe?s drinking water treatment system is resilient enough to easily handle the turbidity and maintain high quality drinking water. / Photo courtesy of Hoopa Tribal EPA. Water Quality on the River By CURTIS MILLER, Hoopa Tribal Environmental Protection Agency (TEPA) In summer 2011 the Hoopa Tribal EPA completed the third year of the Lower Trinity Source Water Assessment Project (SWAP). Funded by the U.S. EPA, the Tribal EPA (TEPA) has been conducting assessments of the Trinity River from the South fork on down to the tribe?s drinking water intake in Hoopa since 2007. Over the last four years TEPA has documented multiple sources of possible contaminants highlighting the most prevalent ones such as forest roads, landslides, septic tanks, pesticides, highway run-off, illegal open dumps and marijuana growing. Most of the lands of the Trinity River watershed are managed by the Six Rivers and Shasta-Trinity National Forests. Both Forests have been actively working to reduce miles of forest roads contributing to sediment run-off for the past 10 years and continue to reduce sediment run-off by restoring degraded roads and erosive lands. However, the South Fork Trinity watershed is plagued by three major landslides totaling 136 acres. These landslides are the major contributors to sediments in the watershed. In the summer 2011 from July 18 to July 20, mid-summer rainfall caused a large landslide to give way and discharge hundreds of tons of sediment into the river below. These landslides are extremely steep and very active and will continue to purge sediment into the Trinity for years to come. Septic tanks are the only form of waste water treatment throughout the Klamath-Trinity watersheds. Along the Lower Trinity, TEPA conducts tests for bacteria from waters seeping out of the banks of the river from underneath home sites where people live. A total of 26 sites are tested for fecal bacteria and as of 2011 all of the seeps tested well below levels regulated by the State of California water quality control. TEPA will continue to test these sites in summer 2012 and report on results to the County public health if any results show high readings. Although pesticides are used along the Trinity, the total number of pesticides has reduced since 2007. Most pesticides used along the Lower Trinity are on the Sun Valley Bulb Farm which does not grow food crops but only flowers and ornamental plants. Most other farms are registered organic and do not use any pesticides except Trinity River Farm which uses round-up for weed control but does not spray any pesticides on crops. Highway run-off from 299 and Highway 96 can contain oil and grease residuals from parking lots and the thousands of vehicles that travel along the Trinity during the year. However, because these contaminants float on top of the water, they are much less likely to be sucked up from underneath the gravel be in the river and contaminate the Tribes drinking water. Illegal open dumps are a well known source of contaminants to the watershed. One of the most prevalent and threatening dump is the one that keeps showing up off Telescope road in Hoopa. This notorious illegal dump site drains a noxious cocktail of seepage into a stream that flows into lower Campbell creek. The mouth of Campbell creek is a favorite swimming spot for many Hupa people including families with small children. Also, Campbell creek drains into the Trinity River only 3 miles upstream of the tribe?s drinking water intake. Continued use of this site by illegal dumpers not only threatens swimmers directly, but also threatens one of the most important beneficial uses of the river which is for a drinking water source. Since 2005 TEPA has cleaned up the site three times costing tens of thousands of dollars. Finally as a last resort the Tribe authorized the installation of a gate to limit access and keep people from continued dumping. This method of abatement will continue as long people continue to dump trash illegally and threaten the health and welfare of the Hupa people and their environment. As all of us are well aware, large scale marijuana growing by drug cartels and others has caused multiple problems throughout the Trinity watershed. The most obvious and impactful to the River has been the massive blooms of green algae resulting from hundreds of pounds of chemical fertilizers used in pot gardens containing thousands of plants. In 2009, the algae was so bad that it covered the entire bottom of the River from the South fork all the way through the Hoopa Valley. Fortunately, due to the sophisticated filtering system of the tribe?s drinking water plant, algae was mostly a nuisance causing fouling of certain instruments that had to be flushed occasionally. In 2010 and 2011 state, federal, and local law enforcement stepped up CAMP operations to eradicate these large grows and keep them from expanding operations. Combined with the late spring rains and abundant snow-pack in 2011, water quality in the Trinity was dramatically improved and algae blooms were literally non-existent. This allowed the Trinity to remain crystal clear and refreshing throughout the summer. ### -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1816tepapic.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 70209 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Apr 30 11:20:09 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 11:20:09 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com Opinion- Mike Connor: Examine the costs of leaving Klamath's dams Message-ID: http://www.redding.com/news/2012/apr/28/mike-connor-examine-the-costs-of-leaving-dams/?print=1 Mike Connor: Examine the costs of leaving Klamath's dams Mike Connor is commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation in Washington D.C. Saturday, April 28, 2012 In little more than a month, the Bureau of Reclamation will celebrate 110 years of reclaiming the arid west. For 105 of these 110 years, we have been in this basin constructing, operating and maintaining the Klamath Project, which helps inject more than $600 million a year into the local economy and supports thousands of jobs. I am proud of our work in the Klamath Basin, and I look forward to many more years of partnership between the Klamath Project and the communities it serves. On Thursday, I will have the honor of celebrating the installation of the Klamath Irrigation District's C-Drop Hydropower Project, which will generate hydropower from the drop that occurs when water is moved between canals on the Klamath Project. This small hydropower project is one more example of Reclamation's commitment to the long-term viability of irrigated agriculture in the Klamath Basin. As we look forward, we must not forget the lessons of the past. Irrigated agriculture, tribal fisheries in Upper Klamath Lake and the Klamath River, our wildlife refuges, and the commercial fishery, all continue to suffer from variable hydrology, an over-allocation of resources, and lack of a firm water supply. This uncertainty in water supplies jeopardizes the economy built on this complex ecosystem and creates strife and conflict that cut at the core of our communities. While we cannot make it rain, we can collaborate on solutions that address the Basin's interests. This is, of course, the purpose of the Klamath Agreements that are the subject of bills before Congress. On my trips to the basin, I have heard concerns about the costs of implementing the Klamath Agreements. I agree that we should have a vigorous discussion about the costs of the agreements, but this discussion must also consider the costs of not implementing these agreements ? costs which are significant and real. Whether it is continuing uncertainty and limitations on water supplies and increased power costs for farmers, a continuation of fishing restrictions for the commercial, recreational and tribal fisheries (the Klamath Tribes, for example, have not had an open and sustainable lake fishery for more than 25 years), or more impacts on our wildlife refuges, maintaining the status quo would not be without significant cost. A very real example of the cost of not implementing the agreements is one that would fall on all PacifiCorp ratepayers. PacifiCorp's dams are now operating under an expired license. Under well-established law, if the facilities are relicensed, ratepayers will pay at least $460 million for legally required modifications to address fish passage and water quality needs, yet the facilities will generate 20% less power because of operational changes that would also be required. In other words, if the dams are not removed, the rate-paying public will pay more for less. Because of this, the public utilities Commissions of Oregon and California found that the settlement alternative, embodied in the Klamath Agreements, is in the best interests of ratepayers. Add to this the continued litigation, conflict in the community, costs associated with drought and fisheries closures, and disaster relief payments to keep working families whole, and suddenly the cost of doing nothing is very high. Notwithstanding the broad range of benefits of the Klamath Agreements, I understand the concerns in some communities about the agreements' potential impacts, and we are working hard to identify and evaluate all costs as well as ways to mitigate for these impacts. As committed to by Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, our science and environmental review process continues to be open and transparent. The process is still ongoing as we evaluate and review the analysis in light of comments from the public and independent peer reviews. While we anticipate the release of additional documents this summer, the Secretary will make no determination regarding PacifiCorp facilities until federal legislation is enacted authorizing the Klamath Agreements. In closing, I want to reiterate Reclamation's commitment to the communities of the Klamath Basin. As Commissioner, I see the challenges that face farmers and ranchers throughout the west, and tribal communities as well. We will continue to work with you and do our best to manage those challenges in a constructive and realistic way that will serve the interests of all who depend on the water resources of the Klamath Basin. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: header_print.gif Type: image/gif Size: 5276 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon May 7 13:04:19 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 13:04:19 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] NCRWQCB Press Release- Matt St. John named new Executive Officer Message-ID: <1A95CF75-4304-4671-A6CE-D6BE8CA1A699@att.net> http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/northcoast/press_room/pdf/2012/PressReleaseSJ.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed May 9 12:24:38 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 12:24:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Capital Press- Fired scientist says Klamath dam removal 'extreme' Message-ID: <9C46EF2D-1EAE-4C8E-9747-E7AF7E00D79D@att.net> http://www.capitalpress.com/content/TH-klamath-whistleblower-w-photos-infobox-050712 Fired scientist says Klamath dam removal 'extreme' By TIM HEARDEN Capital Press YREKA, Calif. - The former U.S. Bureau of Reclamation senior science adviser who claims he was fired in February for speaking out about the Klamath River dam removal process said removing the dams should be an "extreme" last resort. Paul Houser told about 200 people here May 7 that removing the four dams from the river is "an uncontrolled experiment" with impacts such as poor water quality that could have dire consequences for fisheries. He said much further study is needed of alternatives such as fish passage, adding that scientists should truck in fish above the dams to see if they can find suitable habitat. "We don't know what would happen if we did nothing, so for me, taking the dams out is the most extreme option," said Houser, 41, a George Mason University professor and former National Aeronautics and Space Administration scientist who was hired last year to oversee the Klamath scientific studies. "For me as a scientist, I'd like to know more about those less extreme options," he said. Houser filed federal whistleblower and scientific-integrity complaints after he says superiors told him his "skills weren't a match for the position" and terminated him, he said in an interview. He alleges officials wrote a summary and news release to elicit support for dam removal while downplaying negative remarks from scientists that were in the full reports. He said superiors told him to be quiet about his concerns, then he faced increasing scrutiny on his job. Interior spokeswoman Kate Kelly said May 8 that Houser's complaints are still being reviewed. The Department of the Interior "has established a rigorous and transparent scientific process that is ongoing and will inform the decision about potential removal of the four Klamath River dams," she said in an email. Work has been proceeding on a final environmental document that will choose a "preferred alternative" among five options, which range from doing nothing to fully dismantling the four dams in Southern Oregon and Northern California. Other alternatives being considered include partial removal of the dams while keeping some structures behind, removing only two of the four dams, and installing fish passages around the dams, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service spokesman Matthew Baun has said. Houser said in his speech that it appears top Interior officials have already decided they want the dams out and are seeking the science to back up their decision. "Scientists often do their work based on who they're paid by," he said, adding that they stop short of examining all available options. "That happens all the time in science ... and you don't get the unbiased science you need." Houser's speech came during a three-day swing through the region, where he also was slated to address the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors on May 8 and a tea party meeting later in the evening. In speaking out, Houser has become a darling of dam-removal opponents and tea party activists, many of whom attended his speech. His appearance was sponsored by the Bi-State Alliance, a recently formed group fighting for water rights issues. Hearing Houser's story provides "an assurance that there are honest people in this world and honest people in government," said Leo Bergeron of Montague, Calif., one of the organizers. "We've been dealing with liars and thieves." Houser acknowledged in the interview he is concerned that his message may be co-opted by people with political agendas, but he was willing to speak to anyone who would listen. He said he did not initially intend to go public but that others, including Siskiyou County officials, forwarded his complaint letter to the media. "I wanted to make sure that by moving forward on this that I wasn't doing it as a benefit to me," he told the audience. "A lot of scientists in government are doing good work and are afraid to come forward with these kinds of reports because the same thing would happen with them that did with me." Online Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement studies and EIS/EIR: http://klamathrestoration.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Wed May 9 13:12:57 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 14:12:57 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change order - Trinity River Division REVISED in RED Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River: Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) May 05, 2012 0700 2,500 3,000 May 05, 2012 0900 3,000 3,500 May 05, 2012 1100 3,500 4,000 May 06, 2012 0700 4,000 5,000 May 06, 2012 0900 5,000 6,000 May 10, 2012 0000 6,000 5,600 May 10, 2012 0400 5,600 5,200 May 10, 2012 2000 5,200 5,000 May 11, 2012 0700 5,000 4,750 May 11, 2012 1100 4,750 4,500 May 16, 2012 0700 4,500 4,380 May 17, 2012 0700 4,380 4,270 May 18, 2012 0700 4,270 4,160 May 19, 2012 0100 4,160 4,050 May 20, 2012 0700 4,050 3,940 May 21, 2012 0700 3,940 3,830 May 22, 2012 0700 3,830 3,720 May 23, 2012 0700 3,720 3,630 May 24, 2012 0700 3,630 3,550 May 25, 2012 0700 3,550 3,500 May 29, 2012 0700 3,500 3,420 May 30, 2012 0700 3,420 3,320 May 31, 2012 0700 3,320 3,220 Ordered by: Thuy Washburn Note: ROD flows -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed May 9 15:41:11 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 15:41:11 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal Guest Column- Tom Stokely: Peripheral Canal a greater threat to Trinity lake, river Message-ID: <57EA8653-A7A1-4BE6-98A0-761483CE98C8@att.net> I meant to say in the first sentence of the second paragraph that "...Reclamation will take more water out of Trinity Lake during a NORMAL year than a dry or critically dry year. The two other Trinity Journal pieces referenced below are located at: http://www.trinityjournal.com/opinion/editorials/article_53b5d21e-9411-11e1-bd03-0019bb30f31a.html and http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_05958092-8904-11e1-bc07-0019bb30f31a.html The Trinity Journal no longer embargoes its articles for 2 weeks. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org Peripheral Canal a greater threat to Trinity lake, river By Tom Stokely Mt. Shasta, Calif. California Water Impact Network Posted: Wednesday, May 9, 2012 6:15 am http://www.trinityjournal.com/opinion/guest_columnists/article_3e398a28-9995-11e1-b179-0019bb30f31a.html Thank you for your editorial of May 2 ?Water-year determinations need better flexibility.? I do not write to refute your opinion and that of Mr. McHugh that the five water year types are ?coarse? and are not flexible for years like this when the water year determination is on the cusp between water years. However, I would like to take the opportunity to point out that there are some erroneous assumptions inferred in your editorial as well as in the April 18 article ?A wet recovery: State upgrades water year to ?normal;? More Trinity Lake water to flow to Central Valley.? First, your editorial and the April 18 article continue the myth that the Bureau of Reclamation will take more water out of Trinity Lake during a wet year than a dry or critically dry year. This is simply not true! A comparison of BOR?s wet and dry forecasts for April and February illustrates that Reclamation will take more water from Trinity Lake in a critically dry year than a dry year or a normal year. The February critically dry forecast called for April-December exports through the Clear Creek Tunnel to Whiskeytown of 576,000 acre-feet of water. The February dry forecast called for Clear Creek Tunnel exports during the same period at 567,000 AF, 9,000 AF less than a critically dry year! The same logic applies to the April forecast where the drier forecast would export 557,000 AF and the normal forecast calls for an export of 539,000 AF, 18,000 AF less. In summary, the February critically dry forecast called for Clear Creek Tunnel exports of 37,000 AF more than the April normal year forecast, clearly refuting the myth that more Trinity Lake water will go to the Central Valley because the water year is normal instead of dry or critically dry. The second myth inferred from your editorial is that somehow the normal water year designation on the Trinity would also directly trigger more water going to farmers. This is not true either ? water contract allocations for CVP water contractors are governed by inflow to Shasta Reservoir, not Trinity Lake. The bottom line good news is that even with the normal year flows down the Trinity River, predicted Trinity Lake storage at the end of September 2012 under a normal water year will be 41 feet than higher it would have been under a critically dry year forecast. Nonetheless, I do agree with the editor and Mr. McHugh that the need for higher Trinity Lake carryover storage is vital for the Trinity River?s fisheries as well as the Trinity Lake economy and Trinity PUD?s low electric rates. However, rather than arguing over fishery flows, I think the real culprit is how much water the Bureau of Reclamation will take out of Trinity Lake when we have consecutive years of dry and critically dry years, as well as during the wetter years when there is a chance to rebuild storage. FYI, the Bureau of Reclamation and its water contractors are planning on taking MORE water from Trinity Lake in the future with a Peripheral Canal. The Administrative Draft EIS/EIR for the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan (code for Peripheral Canal or Tunnel) calls for increased water deliveries south of the Delta by over a million acre-feet, and some of that water will come from Trinity Lake. The document predicts with a Peripheral Canal or Tunnel, there will be a 10 percent increase in the frequency of Trinity Lake ?dead pool? where the water level is so low that water cannot be released by gravity from the bottom outlet on Trinity Dam. Amazingly enough, the documents state that there will be no harm to Trinity River fisheries even if the river dries up and there is no cold water left in Trinity Lake! I hope that The Trinity Journal will focus its efforts on exposing the real threats to Trinity Lake, the Trinity River and Trinity PUD electric rates in an effort to unite local interests against those who plan on taking even more Trinity Lake water. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed May 9 15:43:40 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 15:43:40 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Reclamation plans Trinity water export total Message-ID: <760E87DB-E663-4B1C-99DF-164797F4907D@att.net> Reclamation plans Trinity water export total Posted: Wednesday, May 9, 2012 6:15 am http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_f5496f24-9992-11e1-a283-0019bb30f31a.html By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | 0 comments The federal Bureau of Reclamation anticipates exporting 547,000 acre-feet of water that flows into Trinity Lake from April 2012 through March 2013 for Central Valley Project use. "It could vary from that," said Brian Person, area manager for the Northern California Bureau of Reclamation Office. Inflow to the reservoir for the year is forecast to be 1,025,000 acre-feet. In addition to the 547,000 acre-feet of water anticipated to be exported for CVP use, 647,000 acre-feet is to be released to the Trinity River for fisheries. The figure for the river release is a firm one under the Trinity River Record of Decision, because a normal water year is forecast for the river. Person said in addition to inflow at the Trinity reservoir, the situation at the Shasta reservoir and other factors go into decisions about how much to export from Trinity. If there is no change, Trinity Lake is expected to be at 2,349 feet elevation at the end of June, or 21 feet from the crest; and 2,332 feet at the end of August or 38 feet from crest. The past two years Trinity Lake rose as exports were low due to work on power plants and good conditions at Shasta Lake allowing more water to be taken from that reservoir. Person said the anticipated exports this year do factor in work at the Spring Creek and Carr power plants. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu May 10 09:34:49 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 09:34:49 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Job opportunity- Project Coordination Specialist References: Message-ID: From: "Schrock, Robin M" Date: May 10, 2012 8:53:28 AM PDT To: Carrie Nichols , David Steinhauser , "Denn, Sandy " , Ed Duggan , Elizebeth Hadley , Emelia Berol , Gilbert Saliba , Jeffrey Sutton , 'Joseph McCarthy' , Kelli Gant , Kim Mattson , Liam Gogan , Paul Hauser , Richard Lorenz , Tiffany Hayes , Tom Stokely , Travis Michel Subject: opportunity Several functions in the program office have been combined in a new position that covers realty, compliance and rehabilitation project coordination. Please distribute as appropriate. The Northern California Area Office, Trinity River Restoration Division, is currently recruiting for a Project Coordination Specialist in Weaverville, CA. The following announcement has been prepared via Reclamation?s Hire Me on-line application system. BR-MP-2012-119, Project Coordination Specialist GS-1101-7/9/11 Interested applicants can view the announcement through USAJOBS at the following link: http://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/316382700 First time applicants must register with USAJOBS at https://my.usajobs.gov/Account/Account.aspx to create an account. For additional information regarding this vacancy, please call Joan Russell at 916-978-5498 or email jrussell at usbr.gov. Robin M. Schrock Executive Director Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street Weaverville, CA 96093 TEL: (530) 623-1800 FAX: (530) 623-5944 CELL: (530) 945-7489 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Thu May 10 15:54:50 2012 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 15:54:50 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Job opportunity- Project Coordination Specialist In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Tom & Robin, Thanks for the job posting and notification. Though after spending an hour to set up a usajobs.gov profile and answering all the questions, I was told by the system that I don't qualify, as the position is only open to current federal employees and veterans, and I have no hiring preference. Even with a masters degree in Public Adminstration, B.S. in Natural Resources Planning, and experience working as a planner on Trinity River restoration for Trinity County. Just how does one get their foot in the door with the federal government? It's a shame really, as qualified applicants, such as myself who is knowledgeable about the program, history, and people involved, just can't get past the system. In this economic climate, people like me are really in need of employment, especially meaningful work, and looking for opportunity that is closed off to the general public is disheartening. Good luck on filling this position though! Joshua Allen On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > *From: *"Schrock, Robin M" > *Date: *May 10, 2012 8:53:28 AM PDT > *To: *Carrie Nichols , David Steinhauser < > splash at trinityriverrafting.com>, "Denn, Sandy " , > Ed Duggan , Elizebeth Hadley < > ehadley at ci.redding.ca.us>, Emelia Berol , Gilbert > Saliba , Jeffrey Sutton , 'Joseph > McCarthy' , Kelli Gant , Kim > Mattson , Liam Gogan < > krista at trinityriveroutfitters.com>, Paul Hauser , > Richard Lorenz , Tiffany Hayes < > tiffany.hayes at ca.usda.gov>, Tom Stokely , Travis Michel > > *Subject: **opportunity* > > Several functions in the program office have been combined in a new > position that covers realty, compliance and rehabilitation project > coordination. Please distribute as appropriate.**** > ** ** > The Northern California Area Office, Trinity River Restoration Division, > is currently recruiting for a Project Coordination Specialist in > Weaverville, CA. The following announcement has been prepared via > Reclamation?s Hire Me on-line application system.**** > * * > *BR-MP-2012-119, Project Coordination Specialist GS-1101-7/9/11* > ** ** > Interested applicants can view the announcement through USAJOBS at the > following link: http://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/316382700**** > ** ** > First time applicants must register with USAJOBS at > https://my.usajobs.gov/Account/Account.aspx to create an account.**** > ** ** > For additional information regarding this vacancy, please call Joan > Russell at 916-978-5498 or email jrussell at usbr.gov.**** > ** ** > ** ** > *Robin M. Schrock* > Executive Director**** > Trinity River Restoration Program**** > PO Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street**** > Weaverville, CA 96093**** > TEL: (530) 623-1800**** > FAX: (530) 623-5944**** > CELL: (530) 945-7489**** > ** ** > > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rschrock at usbr.gov Thu May 10 16:06:15 2012 From: rschrock at usbr.gov (Schrock, Robin M) Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 17:06:15 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Job opportunity- Project Coordination Specialist In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Josh, Most jobs on USAjobs are advertized both as Internal (current federal employees) and External (non federal employees). I forwarded the notice I received and did not notice it did not include both announcements. In the future, if an announcement says "Current federal employees" and you do not see the External announcement use the USAjobs search tool and look that job title or search by key words and location and you will see the External announcement. Here are direct links to both. The vacancy announcement for the new Project Coordination Specialist is out on USA JOBS. Please forward this to others you know that may be interested in applying. Please take a look at the announcement to get a feel for the duties of the position. External (non federal employees): http://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/316386200 Internal (current federal employees only): http://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/316382700 From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Joshua Allen Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 3:55 PM To: Trinity List Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Job opportunity- Project Coordination Specialist Tom & Robin, Thanks for the job posting and notification. Though after spending an hour to set up a usajobs.gov profile and answering all the questions, I was told by the system that I don't qualify, as the position is only open to current federal employees and veterans, and I have no hiring preference. Even with a masters degree in Public Adminstration, B.S. in Natural Resources Planning, and experience working as a planner on Trinity River restoration for Trinity County. Just how does one get their foot in the door with the federal government? It's a shame really, as qualified applicants, such as myself who is knowledgeable about the program, history, and people involved, just can't get past the system. In this economic climate, people like me are really in need of employment, especially meaningful work, and looking for opportunity that is closed off to the general public is disheartening. Good luck on filling this position though! Joshua Allen On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Tom Stokely > wrote: From: "Schrock, Robin M" > Date: May 10, 2012 8:53:28 AM PDT To: Carrie Nichols >, David Steinhauser >, "Denn, Sandy " >, Ed Duggan >, Elizebeth Hadley >, Emelia Berol >, Gilbert Saliba >, Jeffrey Sutton >, 'Joseph McCarthy' >, Kelli Gant >, Kim Mattson >, Liam Gogan >, Paul Hauser >, Richard Lorenz >, Tiffany Hayes >, Tom Stokely >, Travis Michel > Subject: opportunity Several functions in the program office have been combined in a new position that covers realty, compliance and rehabilitation project coordination. Please distribute as appropriate. The Northern California Area Office, Trinity River Restoration Division, is currently recruiting for a Project Coordination Specialist in Weaverville, CA. The following announcement has been prepared via Reclamation's Hire Me on-line application system. BR-MP-2012-119, Project Coordination Specialist GS-1101-7/9/11 Interested applicants can view the announcement through USAJOBS at the following link: http://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/316382700 First time applicants must register with USAJOBS at https://my.usajobs.gov/Account/Account.aspx to create an account. For additional information regarding this vacancy, please call Joan Russell at 916-978-5498 or email jrussell at usbr.gov. Robin M. Schrock Executive Director Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street Weaverville, CA 96093 TEL: (530) 623-1800 FAX: (530) 623-5944 CELL: (530) 945-7489 _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu May 10 16:14:16 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 16:14:16 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: job opportunity - links to internal and external announcements References: Message-ID: From: "Schrock, Robin M" Date: May 10, 2012 4:10:37 PM PDT To: Carrie Nichols , David Steinhauser , "Denn, Sandy " , Ed Duggan , Elizebeth Hadley , Emelia Berol , Gilbert Saliba , Jeffrey Sutton , 'Joseph McCarthy' , Kelli Gant , Kim Mattson , Liam Gogan , Paul Hauser , Richard Lorenz , Tiffany Hayes , Tom Stokely , Travis Michel Subject: opportunity - links to internal and external announcements The vacancy announcement for the new Project Coordination Specialist is out on USA JOBS. Please forward this to others you know that may be interested in applying. Please take a look at the announcement to get a feel for the duties of the position. External (non federal employees): http://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/316386200 Internal (current federal employees only): http://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/316382700 Robin M. Schrock Executive Director Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street Weaverville, CA 96093 TEL: (530) 623-1800 FAX: (530) 623-5944 CELL: (530) 945-7489 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri May 11 22:07:45 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 22:07:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] CBB: Study Looks At Ecological, Behavioral Factors Prompting Wild Salmon To Stray From Natal Areas References: <008001cd2fd8$139e1120$3ada3360$@sisqtel.net> Message-ID: <650C3A5C-1128-41EC-9C87-14C9085688E3@att.net> From: Sari Sommarstrom [mailto:sari at sisqtel.net] Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 5:41 PM To: Trinity River e-news (env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us ) Subject: CBB: Study Looks At Ecological, Behavioral Factors Prompting Wild Salmon To Stray From Natal Areas THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN: Weekly Fish and Wildlife News www.cbbulletin.com May 11, 2012 Issue No. 620 Study Looks At Ecological, Behavioral Factors Prompting Wild Salmon To Stray From Natal Areas The straying of wild salmon from their specific natal water can be a good thing in many cases, according to a research paper produced by University of Idaho scientists and published recently in the April edition of the Ecological Society of America?s journal, Ecology. ?Juvenile dispersal affects straying behaviors of adults in a migratory population? is authored by Ellen J. Hamann and Brian Kennedy of the departments of Fish and Wildlife Sciences and Biological Sciences at the University of Idaho in Moscow. The fish can fill biological gaps that help their species maintain genetic diversity and survive, the study says. Genetic, life cycle diversity buffers a species across ages and against ecological changes that occur. Straying generally has a negative connotation, hatchery fish wandering into places not of their origin and polluting the native, wild stock and reducing their natural ability to survive and thrive. Most straying studies have concentrated on hatchery stocks because of the ability to identify them and their origins. The UI study uses analysis of otoliths ? tree ring-like calcium accumulations in fish that collect a running history of the fishes? comings and goings. The article can be found at: http://www.esajournals.org/loi/ecol The researchers studied a salmon population in Big Creek, a tributary of the Middle Fork Salmon River in central Idaho. Spawning habitat is characteristically patchy and adult salmon returning to Big Creek tend to aggregate in six distinct spawning clusters. The areas are located almost entirely in designated wilderness area. The basin encompasses some of the most pristine aquatic habitat in the contiguous United States, and each spring and summer, threatened chinook salmon return after navigating more than 1,000 river kilometers to access natal rearing sites. ?Considering that major alterations have occurred along the mainstem migratory corridor, the life history diversity related to juvenile and adult migration behaviors expressed in these remnant populations has likely contributed to species perseverance despite, at times, drastic declines from historical abundance,? the article says According to the researchers the study is the first spatially explicit treatment of straying in a wild salmon population that links the propensity of straying from natal areas to individually based factors. The researchers used genetic analysis of isotopes in those otoliths to find higher straying in male fish, particularly if they were prone to disperse as juveniles. ?It has important implications for our understanding of colonization or range expansion dynamics, such as in the case of the major dam removal projects occurring in North America for which scientists would like to have a better idea of salmon straying rates to estimate colonization timing,? the paper says. Following is the abstract for the article: ?The resilience of organisms to large-scale environmental and climatic change depends, in part, upon the ability to colonize and occupy new habitats. While previous efforts to describe homing, or natal site fidelity, of migratory organisms have been hindered by the confounding effects of fragmented landscapes and management practices, realistic conservation efforts must include considerations of the behavioral diversity represented by animal movements and dispersal. The study uses ?natural isotopic signatures (87Sr/86Sr) to reconstruct the migratory behaviors of unhandled individuals over their entire life cycle. We identify ecological and behavioral factors influencing the propensity to stray.? The paper says that such things as food availability during adolescence, sex and other factors may affect where, within that basin, a fish decides to spawn. ?While knowledge of the spatial scale at which migratory fish populations home accurately is limited and unresolved (Quinn 2005, Quinn et al. 2006), our findings offer definitive support for the ability of wild chinook salmon to distinguish natal sites with high spatial precision while providing clearer definition to the scale at which straying occurs,? the paper says. ?Fine-scale straying was common in Big Creek, occurring with relatively high frequency between the adjacent spawning clusters in the upper basin. Further, the existence of straying varied between the two sites in the upper basin where carcasses were collected, with more fine-scale straying occurring from upstream origins to downstream spawning than the reverse pattern. ?At river reaches of increasingly fine scale, it is likely that final spawning decisions may be determined by local-scale site factors rather than precise homing ability, and it remains possible that salmon in this study accurately recognized natal scents but chose alternative sites in the nearby cluster based on physical habitat attributes conducive to reproductive success,? the study says. ?These findings lend support for the conservation of behavioral diversity for population persistence, and we propose straying as a mechanism for maintaining genetic diversity at low population densities,? according to the article?s abstract. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Sat May 12 13:31:14 2012 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 13:31:14 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Master Hooding Ceremony May 18th Online Message-ID: Trinity River Enthusiasts & Friends, Just wanted to inform you all that I will be receiving my Masters Hood this Friday at CSU Chico. This ceremony is for my completion of a Masters of Public Administration. The topic of my professional paper concerned bringing about social justice through the increase of public participation. I just wanted to invite you, if you so desire, to watch me receive my Master Hood. Understandably many of you live far away and can not make it to the ceremony, such as Stokely, and due to limited tickets I have no more to offer for attendance. Therefore, I just wanted to let you know that you can watch it live via an online stream at http://www.csuchico.edu/graduatestudies/commencement at 4:30pm Friday May 18. I would not be here today without the experience I garnered from many of you involved in the restoration of the Trinity River. It is my hope that I can use my education and skills to continue working on the betterment of the environment for the public good! Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Cheers, Joshua Allen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From BGutermuth at usbr.gov Fri May 18 16:16:41 2012 From: BGutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F. Brandt) Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 17:16:41 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City Channel Rehabilitation Sites: Final Environmental document Available! In-Reply-To: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF73D219BC549@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> References: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF73D219BC549@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Message-ID: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF73D28416975@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Sorry for any cross postings on this one - I didn't want to miss anyone. Dear Trinity River Enthusiasts, Agency Reviewers, and Interested Parties, The Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP), with federal co-lead agencies, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, and with the California State lead agency, the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, is working together to inform all interested parties about this year's proposed Trinity River restoration work at Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City sites. The public review period for the DRAFT Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Sites: Lower Steiner Flat (River Mile 90.2-91.3) and Upper Junction City (River Mile 79.8-80.4), Environmental Assessment/Initial Study (EA/IS), ended on March 21, 2012. The Final Environmental Assessment / Initial Study, which meets the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), is now available at: http://www.trrp.net/?p=3843 The Final EA/IS includes response to 6 written comment letters in Appendix B and several changes. More information has been added concerning mining, the presence and planned treatment of dyer's woad (a non-native species of concern in Trinity County), and river access during the proposed construction period. Changes to update information concerning mining operations at the Lower Steiner Flat site have been added to page 62 of the Geology, Fluvial Morphology, Minerals, and Soils section, under Impact 3.3-3. The Final EA/IS has been updated to show that mining claims in this area have been located on lands withdrawn for powersite purposes and that the claims are subject to BLM review under Public Law 359 - Mining in Powersite Withdrawals Act of 1955. BLM has determined that placer mining operations on these claims would substantially interfere with the restoration project and that mining operations should not be allowed within the boundaries of the restoration project. Changes to update weed information have been made in Section 3.7, Vegetation, Wildlife, and Wetlands, starting at page 104 and continuing throughout applicable sections. Dyer's woad, has been identified as a priority noxious weed of concern at the Upper Junction City site, and the measures to prevent spread of this species have been included in the project mitigation plans. Construction at Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City is scheduled to start in summer 2012. Please contact me if you have any questions concerning these projects. Sincerely, Brandt Gutermuth Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Scientist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S Main St Weaverville, CA 96093 530.623.1806 (voice) 530.623.5944 (fax) www.trrp.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From BGutermuth at usbr.gov Fri May 18 16:24:40 2012 From: BGutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F. Brandt) Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 17:24:40 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] FW: Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City Channel Rehabilitation Sites: Final Environmental document Available! Message-ID: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF73D28416987@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Sorry for any cross postings on this one - I didn't want to miss anyone. Dear Trinity River Enthusiasts, Agency Reviewers, and Interested Parties, The Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP), with federal co-lead agencies, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, and with the California State lead agency, the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, is working together to inform all interested parties about this year's proposed Trinity River restoration work at Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City sites. The public review period for the DRAFT Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Sites: Lower Steiner Flat (River Mile 90.2-91.3) and Upper Junction City (River Mile 79.8-80.4), Environmental Assessment/Initial Study (EA/IS), ended on March 21, 2012. The Final Environmental Assessment / Initial Study, which meets the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), is now available at: http://www.trrp.net/?p=3843 The Final EA/IS includes response to 6 written comment letters in Appendix B and several changes. More information has been added concerning mining, the presence and planned treatment of dyer's woad (a non-native species of concern in Trinity County), and river access during the proposed construction period. Changes to update information concerning mining operations at the Lower Steiner Flat site have been added to page 62 of the Geology, Fluvial Morphology, Minerals, and Soils section, under Impact 3.3-3. The Final EA/IS has been updated to show that mining claims in this area have been located on lands withdrawn for powersite purposes and that the claims are subject to BLM review under Public Law 359 - Mining in Powersite Withdrawals Act of 1955. BLM has determined that placer mining operations on these claims would substantially interfere with the restoration project and that mining operations should not be allowed within the boundaries of the restoration project. Changes to update weed information have been made in Section 3.7, Vegetation, Wildlife, and Wetlands, starting at page 104 and continuing throughout applicable sections. Dyer's woad, has been identified as a priority noxious weed of concern at the Upper Junction City site, and the measures to prevent spread of this species have been included in the project mitigation plans. Construction at Lower Steiner Flat and Upper Junction City is scheduled to start in summer 2012. Please contact me if you have any questions concerning these projects. Sincerely, Brandt Gutermuth Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Scientist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S Main St Weaverville, CA 96093 530.623.1806 (voice) 530.623.5944 (fax) www.trrp.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon May 21 11:04:13 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 11:04:13 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Fish finding their way to Weaverville creeks Message-ID: http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_bd5eb2aa-9f0e-11e1-9f36-0019bb30f31a.html Fish finding their way to Weaverville creeks Trinity Journal staff | Posted: Wednesday, May 16, 2012 6:15 am Although they face many challenges, anadromous fish can still be found in Weaverville's creeks. "Some years we don't see any," said Mark Lancaster, program director for the Five Counties Salmonid Conservation Program (5C). "The more there are the more likely we are to see them, and this year we saw a lot in Sidney Gulch." Sidney Gulch flows behind the U.S. Forest Service ranger station in Weaverville, past the post office and through Lee Fong Park before joining Weaver Creek. "Weaver Creek, and its flatter tributary streams seem to be very important spawning and rearing habitat for the threatened coho salmon and the more common steelhead," Lancaster said. West Weaver Creek has also been a productive stream for steelhead, he added. Lancaster said increased use by fish of Sidney Gulch and West Weaver Creek may be due to bad conditions displacing fish from East Weaver Creek. "The East Branch landslide of last March (2011) is dumping lots of sediment into East Weaver and smothering good spawning areas," Lancaster said. "Just when we are seeing good fish returns we lose habitat due to nature's processes." "It just points to why we need to restore as many of these creeks as we can," he said, "because you never know when one is going to blink out." Although the habitat eventually recovers from a landslide and downstream areas benefit from the added wood and gravels, Lancaster said the natural losses coming on top of habitat permanently removed by human development can overwhelm species. The 5C program, Trinity County Resource Conservation District, U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Bureau of Land Management Trinity River Restoration Program and other organizations are pursuing restoration projects in Weaver Creek and surrounding tributary streams. In Sidney Gulch there are three projects in the planning stages. Within Lee Fong Park engineers and hydrologists are looking at opening the floodplain up and giving the creek more room to meander. Sidney Gulch was moved and straightened in the past to accommodate development, and the open space in Lee Fong Park is one of the few places that a more natural channel can be restored. That design team plans to present some ideas to the Park and Recreation District in June with a goal to have a complete design done this year. If that happens an environmental review will be completed next year and construction could begin in 2014 or 2015. Upstream in the Forest Service compound a similar design team will be looking at the feasibility of modifying the channel to allow fish to move upstream. Currently the water moves too fast and is too shallow within the concrete channel for most fish to get upstream. Concrete resting structures added to the channel in 2005 help, but still most fish can not make it above the concrete channel. Even farther up, a culvert with a drop on the downstream side is a complete migration barrier that is being evaluated to be removed at Bally View Loop. Even as these three projects are being addressed the dying tree cover between Oregon Street and Forest Avenue presents a problem for fish and the County Department of Transportation. The loss of canopy cover will increase sunlight and heat into the creek, which is already too warm in summer. For the road crews trees present a hazard to parked cars and pedestrians. Farther upstream the 5C with Trinity County is hoping to work with Caltrans to address its culverts on both Sidney Gulch and Garden Gulch. The county is concerned with flooding in the Courthouse because the undersized culvert backwaters and the banks have overflowed to the basement of the Courthouse. Garden Gulch is also yielding a large quantity of sediment. "It is not apparent to us why Garden Gulch, which did not burn in the Oregon Fire, has in the past year started producing so much sediment," said fisheries biologist Eric Wiseman of the Forest Service. "Sidney Gulch should be more turbid than Garden Gulch but we watch both streams from our office and Garden is much more turbid on the same storms." Lancaster agreed, noting that residents on Barbara Avenue have asked him to look into the sudden and dramatic increase in sediment. "We have found some sources" Lancaster said noting that natural channel erosion, small landslides and trees falling in the creek are contributing fine red clay, but failed trail crossings, new roads and pads, and grading all seem to be contributing sediment. The project planned for East Weaver Creek upstream of the confluence with West Weaver at Mill Street is a fish habitat improvement project that will also protect a major sewer line that crosses the stream. The project will install a series of log and rock ribbons across the stream to encourage natural channel rebuilding over the sewer line, while increasing the number of pools and hiding places for fish. A steep and eroding stream bank will also be laid back and replanted with willows intermixed with rock slope protection to prevent it eroding back farther and exposing more of the pipeline. The work is expected to be done in early fall when the stream is at its lowest levels. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon May 21 11:19:49 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 11:19:49 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle Editorial-'Chunnel' plan to bypass delta is falling down Message-ID: <9F10B184-E9FD-4A30-A225-708876DD6E1B@att.net> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/05/17/INAT1MO0SH.DTL 'Chunnel' plan to bypass delta is falling down Sunday, May 20, 2012 After six years in the making, the blueprint for authorizing a giant canal or tunnel to move water 45 miles around the delta to avoid saltwater intrusions and the fish-unfriendly south delta pumps appears unlikely to win approval. And no wonder: The implied goal - unlimited water for all when resources are limited - is not realistic. The Bay Delta Conservation Plan set out to meet the "co-equal" goals of conserving habitat for precipitously declining fish species in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and providing a more reliable water supply for farms and cities in Central and Southern California. Gov. Jerry Brown has pushed vigorously to get the plan done, and its outcome affects 25 million Californians, including 3 million in the San Francisco Bay Area who receive at least some of their water from the delta. Yet "co-equal" cannot translate as more water for some at the expense of the environment. The south delta water contractors - primarily Kern County Water Agency, Westlands Water District and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California - have spent $150 million so far on scientific studies on a project slated for 2013. Scientific studies show that to restore fish habitat and wetlands, the state needs to reduce delta water exports. The Academy of Sciences National Research Council also found that restoring freshwater flows through the delta is a necessary, but not sole, condition for restoring fish populations. Despite these findings, south-of-delta water contractors are seeking increased water exports. Federal agencies cannot authorize the 50-year permit for the "chunnel" unless the BDCP lays out scientifically supported steps to restore the delta ecosystem and avoid the fish-killing pumps (which violate the Endangered Species Act). This month, California Secretary of Natural Resources John Laird announced that the BDCP planners would deliver the public draft late - in September, not June 29 as agreed. Federal wildlife agencies had red flagged the document, saying the science "was not well integrated" into the plan. Laird then added a puzzling note: Brown and U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar still would make their planned announcement on the project framework in mid to late July. Meanwhile, water agencies are getting restless, if not pushy. In a May 2 letter to state secretary Laird, the Kern County Water Agency said its board was awaiting the description of the BDCP "preferred project" before deciding whether to continue funding the plan. The letter stated that the Kern board expected the state to "deliver a preferred project in time for the announcement by the governor and the secretary" (Salazar). The Kern board is expected to vote Thursday. So it appears, six years and $150 million later, the Bay Delta Conservation Plan might come to nothing. Why? Because the project is struggling to justify what its backers want - new plumbing to increase water exports from the delta at an affordable price - but cannot deliver. The law authorizing the BDCP calls for a plan for "a more reliable water supply for California," not for more water for south of delta water contractors. To calm these roiling waters, the governor should have the state focus on providing reliable - as in predictable - deliveries to contractors. That would put an end to congressional efforts to overturn the Endangered Species Act and other political high-jinks aimed at getting around current law. Brown has reminded Californians that we must to learn to live within in our means - and that applies as much to water supplies as to the state budget. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/05/20/EDAT1MO0SH.DTL This article appeared on page L - 10 of the San Francisco Chronicle -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon May 21 11:22:24 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 11:22:24 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Bacher- Brown slashes budget while promoting $14 billion canal Message-ID: <2C4E3481-30FA-4DC8-97D3-5FA36D997FFC@att.net> Brown slashes budget while promoting $14 billion canal by Dan Bacher Saturday May 19th, 2012 7:47 AM http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/05/19/18713772.php While Jerry Brown plans to slash the state budget, he is fast-tracking a government boondoggle that will deliver more subsidized water to corporate agribusiness interests so they can market the water back to the public for an enormous profit. jerry-brown1.jpg Brown slashes budget while promoting $14 billion canal by Dan Bacher In an interview with Charlie Rose on "CBS This Morning" May 18, Governor Jerry Brown called for tax hikes to bring down a budget deficit of nearly $16 billion - while promoting the construction of a budget-busting $14 billion peripheral canal or tunnel. Brown's estimate of the cost of the canal at $14 billion is up from the "over $10 billion" estimate he made in January. However, the real cost of the canal, proposed under the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to divert more water from the California Delta to corporate agribusiness and Southern California, is much larger. Economist Jerry Kasower in 2009 estimated that the actual cost of the project would range from $23 billion to $53.8 billion, depending on whether a canal or tunnel is chosen. The Governor defended both the canal project and his $68-billion plan to build a high-speed rail system, in spite of $15.7-billion deficit, as he promoted his November ballot initiative to raise taxes and defended his revised state budget. He claimed the $14-billion water project was necessary to "make sure we have a reliable water supply." "California is growing. This is not Europe," Brown told Rose. "We're very entrepreneurial, very innovative, and people are still coming here." "You know, this is where they put in, they invented Facebook," he claimed. "Not in Texas, not in Arizona. Not in Manhattan, and certainly not under the White House or the Congress. This is still the Wild West, and we're going to prove to the rest of this country and the world that we know how to do 'it'" Rose countered that Facebook was invented in Cambridge, Massachusetts, not California. Brown responded that after inventing Facebook there, "they learned fast to get on a plane and get out to California, where all the other innovative people are." Brown said his budget plan would increase the sales tax to 7.5 percent from 7.25 percent and raise income taxes on people making over $250,000. "Combined with that, we're making some very drastic cuts in almost every area of state government," said Brown. "So we are going to start living within our means - something that hasn't truly happened for the better part of 30 years." While Jerry Brown slashes the state budget, he is fast-tracking a government boondoggle that will deliver more subsidized water to corporate agribusiness interests so they can sell the water back to the public for an enormous profit. Not only will this canal put Californians in debt for decades to come, it will hasten the extinction of Sacramento River chinook salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt and other fish species, according to agency and independent scientists alike. This will lead to the loss of thousands of economically valuable jobs in the recreational and commercial fishing industries. While the canal will result in unprecedented ecological destruction, Southern California ratepayers are alarmed by the canal's enormous cost. The Metropolitan Water District (MWD) has admitted it would pay at least 25% of the cost of the project, which could go over $50 billion. MWD has already admitted that it will need to increase water rates every year for the foreseeable future. Rose's interview with Jerry Brown was one of the greatest examples of political cognitive dissonance I've ever witnessed. How can one call for draconian budget cuts and tax hikes while promoting a canal that will indebt Californians for generations to come? Brown claimed in his interview that "We're not some tired country of Europe. We're a buoyant, dynamic society that will both discipline itself on a daily basis but it will on the long-term plant the seeds of future growth." Unfortunately, Brown's description applies of "tired" accurately describes his proposal to build a canal or tunnel, a Nineteenth Century solution to Twenty-First Century problems. In light of Brown's renewed call for the canal's construction, it is crucial for everybody concerned about California's future to support AB 2421 (B. Berryhill). This bill supports an independent cost-benefit analysis before committing the public to pay tens of billions of dollars to build a peripheral canal or tunnel to divert more Delta water under the Bay Delta Conservation Plan. To watch the interview, go to: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505267_162-57436905/gov-jerry-brown-says-california-is-not-a-tired-european-country/ For more information about the campaign to stop the canal, go to http://www.restorethedelta.org. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jerry-brown1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 231131 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon May 21 17:09:29 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 17:09:29 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Hoopa Valley Tribe Gets Funding to Improve Fish Passage Message-ID: <8DD59603-B420-4244-BBC5-6C561A34E8DE@att.net> Tribe Gets Funding to Improve Fish Passage http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2012/05/tribe-gets-funding-to-improve-fish-passage/ The Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries Department secured grant funding to remove a fish passage barrier on Hostler Creek in an effort to restore about three miles of fish habitat. The project is expected to begin in August of this year. / Photo courtesy of Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries. PRESS RELEASE, Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries Thanks to a final piece of grant funding awarded through partnership funds from American Rivers and the NOAA Restoration Center, salmon and steelhead will soon be able to stretch their fins into the upper reaches of Hostler Creek, a tributary to the Trinity River located on the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation. Currently, an antiquated, artificial waterfall that once served as part of an irrigation diversion limits fish access to just one mile of Hostler Creek. As a result, salmon and steelhead are cut off from high quality spawning and rearing habitat further upstream, just beyond reach. ?Removing fish passage barriers is an essential tool to restoring the salmon and steelhead populations of the Trinity River basin. We are honored to be one of only six projects selected for funding nationwide,? said Andrea Hilton, Senior Hydrologist for the Hoopa Valley Tribe?s Fisheries Department This funding was matched by an award made by the Pacific Coast Salmon Recovery Fund through the Klamath River Intertribal Fish and Water Commission to make the project possible. The project will be implemented during August and September 2012 and is anticipated to restore an additional two to three miles of fish habitat to Hostler Creek. The total cost of the project is approximately $250,000. ### -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1820fishbarrier.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 106085 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue May 22 11:01:49 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 11:01:49 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Reclamation Issues New Water Forecast for the Klamath Project References: <6e447a5552084ad5aa5065bbd36967fc@usbr.gov> Message-ID: <161A340B-DA21-4D6E-8B3D-D55992AF5A10@att.net> From: "Fernando Ponce" Date: May 22, 2012 9:27:09 AM PDT To: tstokely at att.net Subject: Reclamation Issues New Water Forecast for the Klamath Project Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, CA MP-12-075 Media Contact: Pete Lucero, 916-978-5100, plucero at usbr.gov For Release On: May 22, 2012 Reclamation Issues New Water Forecast for the Klamath Project KLAMATH FALLS, Ore. ? The Bureau of Reclamation reports that although the upper Klamath Basin received a large influx of snow in March and early April, warmer than normal conditions have caused an early melt off, resulting in the loss of much of the projected Upper Klamath Lake inflows due to operational requirements. The most recent calculation of available water supply suggests a shortage of approximately 70,000 acre-feet of expected demand through the end of the irrigation season. It is possible that a significant amount of this shortage could be mitigated with incentives through Klamath Water and Power Agency's (KWAPA) mitigation programs, to both pump groundwater and to fallow certain lands later in the irrigation season. However, at this time, not enough lands have been identified for fallowing to avoid having to curtail water deliveries later in the year. The deadline for the land fallowing program is June 1 and Klamath Project contractors are encouraged to apply if they wish to be considered. If water shortages are expected after consideration of the applications received, Klamath Project contractors will be notified in accordance with the 2012 Drought Plan. Current water conditions and the Drought Plan are available at www.usbr.gov/mp/kbao. For more information, please contact Kevin Moore at 541-880-2557 or klmoore at usbr.gov. # # # Reclamation is the largest wholesale water supplier and the second largest producer of hydroelectric power in the United States, with operations and facilities in the 17 Western States. Its facilities also provide substantial flood control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. Visit our website at www.usbr.gov. If you would rather not receive future communications from Bureau of Reclamation, let us know by clicking here. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver Federal Center, Alameda & Kipling Street PO Box 25007, Denver, CO 80225 United States -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed May 23 10:37:08 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 10:37:08 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Constitutional Sheriffs say excessive regulation puts public safety at risk Message-ID: http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_000b9fba-a495-11e1-b292-0019bb30f31a.html Posted: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 6:15 am Constitutional Sheriffs say excessive regulation puts public safety at risk By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | 0 comments Some like-minded North State sheriffs, including Trinity County Sheriff Bruce Haney, have banded together to take on issues they say affect public safety such as overgrown forests and intrusion by the federal government. They?ve been referred to as the Constitutional Sheriffs, and a panel of six of them spoke Saturday at the Support Rural America conference hosted by the Trinity County Patriots at Mountain Chapel in Weaverville. In addition to Haney, the sheriffs who spoke to the crowd of about 150 included Jon Lopey of Siskiyou County, Tom Allman of Mendocino County, Dave Hencratt of Tehama County, Mike Poindexter of Modoc County and Dean Wilson of Del Norte County. "A lot of the issues facing rural America aren?t just happening here, they?re happening everywhere and that?s why we?re here today," Haney said. The effort was kicked off with the Defend Rural America conference in Yreka in October that Haney participated in. More events are planned in June and July in other counties. Haney said federal and state agencies are making decisions of concern to law enforcement because they affect public safety, such as decommissioning of U.S. Forest Service roads without properly coordinating with local governments. That word "coordination" would come up frequently during Saturday?s conference. Not in the context of assessing a potential drunken driver, as Haney joked, but as a requirement before government action. "We?re asking them to follow their own regulations," Haney said. "We didn?t make it up." "We got involved because our job is public safety," Haney said. "As we enter a new fire season our forests are of grave concern to me as public safety officer." He noted that last year the number of searches for missing people in the national forest was "unprecedented and said roads are needed for access during such searches and for firefighting. "There?s no reason we can?t responsibly harvest and thin our forests," he added. Haney is forming a Sheriff?s Public Safety and Coordination Advisory Team and said he wants a diverse membership for that group. The other sheriffs also expressed concerns about the Forest Service?s Travel Management Plan, dense forests, possible expansion of spotted owl habitat and removal of dams on the Klamath River. Hencratt, of Tehama, said the Travel Management Plan on that side of the Shasta-Trinity forest called for less decommissioning of roads as a result of a coordination committee involving county supervisors, planning, and himself. The sheriff's is a powerful office, Hencratt said, "but we have zero power without the backing of the people." A couple of the sheriffs said they have gone to bat for residents having problems with natural resources agencies. "Who knows how to protect the natural resources better than the people who have been living off that land for four or five generations?" Poindexter asked. Sheriff Wilson said in these rural communities, "We have everything we need. We have all the resources we need" to have a vibrant economy. Government rules are preventing that and interfering with citizens' rights in the process, he said. "As sheriff it?s my duty to see those rights are protected," he said. Allman, of Mendocino, said the sheriffs are not affiliated with extreme groups. "We?re just saying we believe our role as sheriffs is to be the watch keeper in our counties," he said. Likewise, Haney said someone saw him on You Tube after he participated in the Yreka event and asked what kooky group he was in. "I considered that just being a good neighbor," he said. "If that makes me a little kooky and a little loony I?ll accept that." Lopey, of Siskiyou, spoke of the importance of honoring the U.S. Constitution. "We?re under attack," he said. "What's more important than growing food?" he asked, saying there is a concerted effort to take water from ranchers and farmers for endangered species. When plans were made to take out four dams on the Klamath River, "they didn?t coordinate properly with us," he said, adding that 70 percent of the people in Siskiyou County say they don?t want the dams removed, "but they aren?t listening." In response to a question from the audience, Haney repeated a question Lopey asked of the sheriffs and his own response: "If we have to protect these dams, are you guys willing to stand with me?" and "I said, ?Yes.?" Ronny Rardin, commissioner of Otero County, N.M., was a guest speaker at the event. Citing writings of James Madison, the Tenth Amendment and items from the Federalist Papers, he said those who think the federal government is the most powerful followed by the state and then local governments have it wrong. "Your local government is the most powerful government," he said. Rardin talked about efforts to thin the forest in Otero County ? "the driest in the nation," he said. In May 2011, the Otero commission passed a resolution declaring a state of emergency due to extreme fire hazards and stating it is empowered to clear and thin the area as necessary under state law. Rardin said with the support of the sheriff and district attorney, the commission announced plans to go to the forest and cut one acre on Sept. 17. "Our congressman said he?d cut the first tree," Rardin added. The initial response from the U.S. attorney was that anyone who went on Forest Service land and broke the law would be arrested, Rardin said, but the sheriff responded he?s the only one with arrest powers and would use them, for kidnap, on anyone trying to arrest the congressman or chair of the commission. Ultimately, Rardin said, an agreement was reached. The tree-cutting took place, each side agreed not to arrest the other, and Rardin?s side agreed to provide insurance, police the area and tape it off. In February, the federal government sued the commission and state of New Mexico in district court, asking that the court declare that the state law and Otero resolution are pre-empted by federal legislation and regulations. Rardin said he welcomes the court battle. Trinity County could also make a stand, he said, noting that the county has a vegetation ordinance, a larger budget than Otero's and fewer people. On coordination The words coordination and coordinate came up frequently at Saturday's Support Rural America conference. The origin is the text of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 which directed the federal Bureau of Land Management. It states that in the development and revision of land use plans, to the extent consistent with the laws governing the administration of the public lands, the Interior Secretary shall coordinate with state, tribal and local governments by considering their plans, "assist in resolving, to the extent practical, inconsistencies between Federal and non-Federal Government plans, and shall provide for meaningful public involvement of State and local government officials." The National Environmental Policy Act also requires coordination with local governments, the speakers at Saturday's event said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Vina_Frye at fws.gov Wed May 23 12:41:03 2012 From: Vina_Frye at fws.gov (Vina_Frye at fws.gov) Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 12:41:03 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) Meeting Message-ID: Hi Folks, The working group is scheduled to meet on June 11, 2012. The discussion topics are listed in the notice below. [Federal Register Volume 77, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 22, 2012)] [Notices] [Page 30314] >From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [ www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 2012-12377] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-FHC-2012-N124: FXFR1334088TWG0W4-123-FF08EACT00] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of meeting. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) affords stakeholders the opportunity to give policy, management, and technical input concerning Trinity River (California) restoration efforts to the Trinity Management Council (TMC). The TMC interprets and recommends policy, coordinates and reviews management actions, and provides organizational budget oversight. This notice announces a TAMWG meeting, which is open to the public. DATES: TAMWG will meet from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Monday, June 11, 2012. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Johnsons' Steak House, 160 Golf Course Road, Weaverville, CA 96093. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meeting Information: Nancy J. Finley, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521; telephone: (707) 822-7201. Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) Information: Robin Schrock, Executive Director, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093; telephone: (530) 623-1800; email: rschrock at usbr.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), this notice announces a meeting of the TAMWG. The meeting will include discussion of the following topics: Trinity River hatchery, Executive Director's report, TMC chair report, Update from workgroups, Update on the 2012 Water Year, Bay-Delta Conservation Plan & Delta Flow Criteria, BOR process for banking water. Completion of the agenda is dependent on the amount of time each item takes. The meeting could end early if the agenda has been completed. Dated: May 16, 2012. Nancy Finley, Field Supervisor, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, Arcata, CA. [FR Doc. 2012-12377 Filed 5-21-12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P Best regards, Vina Vina Frye U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata FWO 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone: (707) 822-7201 Fax: (707) 822-8411 vina_frye at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Thu May 24 16:55:30 2012 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 19:55:30 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Constitutional Sheriffs say excessive regu... Message-ID: <4922.2a2d9f75.3cf02472@aol.com> In a message dated 5/23/2012 10:37:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tstokely at att.net writes: When plans were made to take out four dams on the Klamath River, "they didn ?t coordinate properly with us," he said, adding that 70 percent of the people in Siskiyou County say they don?t want the dams removed, "but they aren ?t listening." In response to a question from the audience, Haney repeated a question Lopey asked of the sheriffs and his own response: "If we have to protect these dams, are you guys willing to stand with me?" and "I said, ?Yes.?" Interesting.... but the Sheriffs omit the fact that these dams do not belong to the County or "the people," but are privately owned. The County thus has no say, and no vote of "the people" to "keep the dams" means anything. What are they doing to protect the Constitutional right of PacifiCorp to dispose of its own property however it sees fit? And they omit the fact that these dams, even if relicensed, are simply no longer cost effective. In fact, FERC estimated that the dams, once relicensed, would actually generate 27% LESS power than the little bit they do today (82 MW), and then cost the company more than $20 million/year in net LOSSES ... which would have to be passed on to its customers, including most of Siskiyou County! They are, in short, trying to impose Government Socialism on the Company to force it to run its assets at a loss! How incredibly ironic! Someone should point this out to them! ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) Email: fish1ifr at aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Fri May 25 10:05:17 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 11:05:17 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change order - Trinity River Division Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River: Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) June 01, 2012 0700 3,220 3,130 June 02, 2012 0700 3,130 3,040 June 03, 2012 0700 3,040 2,950 June 04, 2012 0700 2,950 2,860 June 05, 2012 0700 2,860 2,770 June 06, 2012 0700 2,770 2,680 June 07, 2012 0700 2,680 2,600 June 08, 2012 0700 2,600 2,550 June 09, 2012 0700 2,550 2,500 June 14, 2012 0700 2,500 2,440 June 15, 2012 0700 2,440 2,360 June 16, 2012 0700 2,360 2,280 June 17, 2012 0700 2,280 2,200 June 18, 2012 0700 2,200 2,130 June 19, 2012 0700 2,130 2,060 June 20, 2012 0700 2,060 2,000 June 28, 2012 0700 2,000 1,940 June 29, 2012 0700 1,940 1,880 June 30, 2012 0700 1,880 1,820 June 30, 2012 0700 1,820 1,770 Ordered by: Thuy Washburn Note: ROD flows -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Fri May 25 13:13:23 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 14:13:23 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change order - Trinity River Division - REVISE in RED Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River: Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) June 01, 2012 0700 3,220 3,130 June 02, 2012 0700 3,130 3,040 June 03, 2012 0700 3,040 2,950 June 04, 2012 0700 2,950 2,860 June 05, 2012 0700 2,860 2,770 June 06, 2012 0700 2,770 2,680 June 07, 2012 0700 2,680 2,600 June 08, 2012 0700 2,600 2,550 June 09, 2012 0700 2,550 2,500 June 14, 2012 0700 2,500 2,440 June 15, 2012 0700 2,440 2,360 June 16, 2012 0700 2,360 2,280 June 17, 2012 0700 2,280 2,200 June 18, 2012 0700 2,200 2,130 June 19, 2012 0700 2,130 2,060 June 20, 2012 0700 2,060 2,000 June 27, 2012 0700 2,000 1,940 June 28, 2012 0700 1,940 1,880 June 29, 2012 0700 1,880 1,820 June 30, 2012 0700 1,820 1,770 Ordered by: Thuy Washburn Note: ROD flows -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tamer1 at suddenlink.net Fri May 25 13:49:20 2012 From: tamer1 at suddenlink.net (Ken Miller) Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 13:49:20 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Trinity Journal- Constitutional Sheriffs say excessive regu... References: <99CF9223-7312-4538-AAD3-B423AF4A1160@asis.com> Message-ID: <827324A6-C6E3-4387-9DA4-E3EE3152F63B@suddenlink.net> Wait Glen, if PC cannot afford to operate the dams without imposing ever-increasing rates on their customers, and if PC cannot come into compliance with the CWA and ESA so long as the dams are in, why are we making any sort of taxpayer funded deal, and more to the point, why are you supporting said ripoff end-run around our most precious laws? Since you are pointing out ironies, I thought you would enjoy this one. Ken > >> From: FISH1IFR at aol.com >> Date: May 24, 2012 4:55:30 PM PDT (CA) >> To: tstokely at att.net, env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >> Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Constitutional Sheriffs say excessive regu... >> >> In a message dated 5/23/2012 10:37:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tstokely at att.net writes: >> When plans were made to take out four dams on the Klamath River, "they didn?t coordinate properly with us," he said, adding that 70 percent of the people in Siskiyou County say they don?t want the dams removed, "but they aren?t listening." >> In response to a question from the audience, Haney repeated a question Lopey asked of the sheriffs and his own response: "If we have to protect these dams, are you guys willing to stand with me?" and "I said, ?Yes.?" >> >> Interesting.... but the Sheriffs omit the fact that these dams do not belong to the County or "the people," but are privately owned. The County thus has no say, and no vote of "the people" to "keep the dams" means anything. What are they doing to protect the Constitutional right of PacifiCorp to dispose of its own property however it sees fit? >> >> And they omit the fact that these dams, even if relicensed, are simply no longer cost effective. In fact, FERC estimated that the dams, once relicensed, would actually generate 27% LESS power than the little bit they do today (82 MW), and then cost the company more than $20 million/year in net LOSSES ... which would have to be passed on to its customers, including most of Siskiyou County! >> >> They are, in short, trying to impose Government Socialism on the Company to force it to run its assets at a loss! How incredibly ironic! Someone should point this out to them! >> >> >> ====================================== >> Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director >> Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) >> PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 >> Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 >> Web Home Page: www.pcffa.org >> Email: fish1ifr at aol.com >> _______________________________________________ >> env-trinity mailing list >> env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > -- > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pcatanese at dhscott.com Sat May 26 14:07:28 2012 From: pcatanese at dhscott.com (Paul Catanese) Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 21:07:28 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Trinity Journal- Constitutional Sheriffs say excessive regu... In-Reply-To: <827324A6-C6E3-4387-9DA4-E3EE3152F63B@suddenlink.net> References: <99CF9223-7312-4538-AAD3-B423AF4A1160@asis.com>, <827324A6-C6E3-4387-9DA4-E3EE3152F63B@suddenlink.net> Message-ID: <966CF80A-2E7C-43BD-BF08-A30B53AE5A38@dhscott.com> More ironic is the fact the fish belong to all of the people of the united states of America and we are going to spend countless millions to create more fish so that a select few can gill net 50 pct of the fish allocated to the basin. That seems very ironic to me. This all at a Huge cost to the American taxpayer both in terms of monetary cost and the usurping of property rights. At some point common sense has been lost. Endangered coho wouldnt be all that endangered if gill nets were removed. This at very little cost to the taxpayer Sent from my iPhone On May 26, 2012, at 10:12 AM, "Ken Miller" > wrote: Wait Glen, if PC cannot afford to operate the dams without imposing ever-increasing rates on their customers, and if PC cannot come into compliance with the CWA and ESA so long as the dams are in, why are we making any sort of taxpayer funded deal, and more to the point, why are you supporting said ripoff end-run around our most precious laws? Since you are pointing out ironies, I thought you would enjoy this one. Ken From: FISH1IFR at aol.com Date: May 24, 2012 4:55:30 PM PDT (CA) To: tstokely at att.net, env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Constitutional Sheriffs say excessive regu... In a message dated 5/23/2012 10:37:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tstokely at att.net writes: When plans were made to take out four dams on the Klamath River, "they didn?t coordinate properly with us," he said, adding that 70 percent of the people in Siskiyou County say they don?t want the dams removed, "but they aren?t listening." In response to a question from the audience, Haney repeated a question Lopey asked of the sheriffs and his own response: "If we have to protect these dams, are you guys willing to stand with me?" and "I said, ?Yes.?" Interesting.... but the Sheriffs omit the fact that these dams do not belong to the County or "the people," but are privately owned. The County thus has no say, and no vote of "the people" to "keep the dams" means anything. What are they doing to protect the Constitutional right of PacifiCorp to dispose of its own property however it sees fit? And they omit the fact that these dams, even if relicensed, are simply no longer cost effective. In fact, FERC estimated that the dams, once relicensed, would actually generate 27% LESS power than the little bit they do today (82 MW), and then cost the company more than $20 million/year in net LOSSES ... which would have to be passed on to its customers, including most of Siskiyou County! They are, in short, trying to impose Government Socialism on the Company to force it to run its assets at a loss! How incredibly ironic! Someone should point this out to them! ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: www.pcffa.org Email: fish1ifr at aol.com _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -- _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tamer1 at suddenlink.net Sat May 26 17:45:53 2012 From: tamer1 at suddenlink.net (Ken Miller) Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 17:45:53 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Constitutional Sheriffs say excessive regu... In-Reply-To: <966CF80A-2E7C-43BD-BF08-A30B53AE5A38@dhscott.com> References: <99CF9223-7312-4538-AAD3-B423AF4A1160@asis.com>, <827324A6-C6E3-4387-9DA4-E3EE3152F63B@suddenlink.net> <966CF80A-2E7C-43BD-BF08-A30B53AE5A38@dhscott.com> Message-ID: <217D8A48-D9BF-4F24-9D26-ABBE601E3A4C@suddenlink.net> I thought it was the seals and Japanese (or is it Korean?) fleet? On May 26, 2012, at 2:07 PM, Paul Catanese wrote: > More ironic is the fact the fish belong to all of the people of the united states of America and we are going to spend countless millions to create more fish so that a select few can gill net 50 pct of the fish allocated to the basin. That seems very ironic to me. > This all at a Huge cost to the American taxpayer both in terms of monetary cost and the usurping of property rights. At some point common sense has been lost. Endangered coho wouldnt be all that endangered if gill nets were removed. This at very little cost to the taxpayer > > Sent from my iPhone > > On May 26, 2012, at 10:12 AM, "Ken Miller" wrote: > >> Wait Glen, if PC cannot afford to operate the dams without imposing ever-increasing rates on their customers, and if PC cannot come into compliance with the CWA and ESA so long as the dams are in, why are we making any sort of taxpayer funded deal, and more to the point, why are you supporting said ripoff end-run around our most precious laws? Since you are pointing out ironies, I thought you would enjoy this one. >> >> Ken >>> >>>> From: FISH1IFR at aol.com >>>> Date: May 24, 2012 4:55:30 PM PDT (CA) >>>> To: tstokely at att.net, env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >>>> Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Constitutional Sheriffs say excessive regu... >>>> >>>> In a message dated 5/23/2012 10:37:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tstokely at att.net writes: >>>> When plans were made to take out four dams on the Klamath River, "they didn?t coordinate properly with us," he said, adding that 70 percent of the people in Siskiyou County say they don?t want the dams removed, "but they aren?t listening." >>>> In response to a question from the audience, Haney repeated a question Lopey asked of the sheriffs and his own response: "If we have to protect these dams, are you guys willing to stand with me?" and "I said, ?Yes.?" >>>> >>>> Interesting.... but the Sheriffs omit the fact that these dams do not belong to the County or "the people," but are privately owned. The County thus has no say, and no vote of "the people" to "keep the dams" means anything. What are they doing to protect the Constitutional right of PacifiCorp to dispose of its own property however it sees fit? >>>> >>>> And they omit the fact that these dams, even if relicensed, are simply no longer cost effective. In fact, FERC estimated that the dams, once relicensed, would actually generate 27% LESS power than the little bit they do today (82 MW), and then cost the company more than $20 million/year in net LOSSES ... which would have to be passed on to its customers, including most of Siskiyou County! >>>> >>>> They are, in short, trying to impose Government Socialism on the Company to force it to run its assets at a loss! How incredibly ironic! Someone should point this out to them! >>>> >>>> >>>> ====================================== >>>> Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director >>>> Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) >>>> PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 >>>> Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 >>>> Web Home Page: www.pcffa.org >>>> Email: fish1ifr at aol.com >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> env-trinity mailing list >>>> env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >>>> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> env-trinity mailing list >> env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tamer1 at suddenlink.net Sun May 27 13:38:34 2012 From: tamer1 at suddenlink.net (Ken Miller) Date: Sun, 27 May 2012 13:38:34 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Constitutional Sheriffs say excessive regu... In-Reply-To: <966CF80A-2E7C-43BD-BF08-A30B53AE5A38@dhscott.com> References: <99CF9223-7312-4538-AAD3-B423AF4A1160@asis.com>, <827324A6-C6E3-4387-9DA4-E3EE3152F63B@suddenlink.net> <966CF80A-2E7C-43BD-BF08-A30B53AE5A38@dhscott.com> Message-ID: My understanding is that coho are endangered throughout their southern range, and that gill nets will only be allowed on the Klamath. But are you claiming that coho would have escaped the ravages of coastal drainage logging, which all the fish experts I've heard indict as the dominant negative influence on salmonids, especially coho, or that water diversions, estuary diking, ranching and other upstream resource extractions have had a negligible impact compared to Native fishing? On May 26, 2012, at 2:07 PM, Paul Catanese wrote: > More ironic is the fact the fish belong to all of the people of the united states of America and we are going to spend countless millions to create more fish so that a select few can gill net 50 pct of the fish allocated to the basin. That seems very ironic to me. > This all at a Huge cost to the American taxpayer both in terms of monetary cost and the usurping of property rights. At some point common sense has been lost. Endangered coho wouldnt be all that endangered if gill nets were removed. This at very little cost to the taxpayer > > Sent from my iPhone > > On May 26, 2012, at 10:12 AM, "Ken Miller" wrote: > >> Wait Glen, if PC cannot afford to operate the dams without imposing ever-increasing rates on their customers, and if PC cannot come into compliance with the CWA and ESA so long as the dams are in, why are we making any sort of taxpayer funded deal, and more to the point, why are you supporting said ripoff end-run around our most precious laws? Since you are pointing out ironies, I thought you would enjoy this one. >> >> Ken >>> >>>> From: FISH1IFR at aol.com >>>> Date: May 24, 2012 4:55:30 PM PDT (CA) >>>> To: tstokely at att.net, env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >>>> Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Constitutional Sheriffs say excessive regu... >>>> >>>> In a message dated 5/23/2012 10:37:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tstokely at att.net writes: >>>> When plans were made to take out four dams on the Klamath River, "they didn?t coordinate properly with us," he said, adding that 70 percent of the people in Siskiyou County say they don?t want the dams removed, "but they aren?t listening." >>>> In response to a question from the audience, Haney repeated a question Lopey asked of the sheriffs and his own response: "If we have to protect these dams, are you guys willing to stand with me?" and "I said, ?Yes.?" >>>> >>>> Interesting.... but the Sheriffs omit the fact that these dams do not belong to the County or "the people," but are privately owned. The County thus has no say, and no vote of "the people" to "keep the dams" means anything. What are they doing to protect the Constitutional right of PacifiCorp to dispose of its own property however it sees fit? >>>> >>>> And they omit the fact that these dams, even if relicensed, are simply no longer cost effective. In fact, FERC estimated that the dams, once relicensed, would actually generate 27% LESS power than the little bit they do today (82 MW), and then cost the company more than $20 million/year in net LOSSES ... which would have to be passed on to its customers, including most of Siskiyou County! >>>> >>>> They are, in short, trying to impose Government Socialism on the Company to force it to run its assets at a loss! How incredibly ironic! Someone should point this out to them! >>>> >>>> >>>> ====================================== >>>> Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director >>>> Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) >>>> PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 >>>> Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 >>>> Web Home Page: www.pcffa.org >>>> Email: fish1ifr at aol.com >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> env-trinity mailing list >>>> env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >>>> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> env-trinity mailing list >> env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ema.berol at yahoo.com Mon May 28 11:03:58 2012 From: ema.berol at yahoo.com (Emelia Berol) Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 11:03:58 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Constitutional Sheriffs say excessive regu... In-Reply-To: <217D8A48-D9BF-4F24-9D26-ABBE601E3A4C@suddenlink.net> References: <99CF9223-7312-4538-AAD3-B423AF4A1160@asis.com> <827324A6-C6E3-4387-9DA4-E3EE3152F63B@suddenlink.net> <966CF80A-2E7C-43BD-BF08-A30B53AE5A38@dhscott.com> <217D8A48-D9BF-4F24-9D26-ABBE601E3A4C@suddenlink.net> Message-ID: I think its the seals, Ken ... maybe we can convince those foreign fleets to hunt seals instead of fish ... then everything will be just fine, and we can build more dams ... Seriously, please, (Paul C.) let 's keep native fishing rights out of this. The last I heard, there were plenty of fish until the gringoes showed up and started mining, commercial fishing and logging, and building roads and dams. Emelia Sent from my iPad On May 26, 2012, at 5:45 PM, Ken Miller wrote: > I thought it was the seals and Japanese (or is it Korean?) fleet? > > > > On May 26, 2012, at 2:07 PM, Paul Catanese wrote: > >> More ironic is the fact the fish belong to all of the people of the united states of America and we are going to spend countless millions to create more fish so that a select few can gill net 50 pct of the fish allocated to the basin. That seems very ironic to me. >> This all at a Huge cost to the American taxpayer both in terms of monetary cost and the usurping of property rights. At some point common sense has been lost. Endangered coho wouldnt be all that endangered if gill nets were removed. This at very little cost to the taxpayer >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On May 26, 2012, at 10:12 AM, "Ken Miller" wrote: >> >>> Wait Glen, if PC cannot afford to operate the dams without imposing ever-increasing rates on their customers, and if PC cannot come into compliance with the CWA and ESA so long as the dams are in, why are we making any sort of taxpayer funded deal, and more to the point, why are you supporting said ripoff end-run around our most precious laws? Since you are pointing out ironies, I thought you would enjoy this one. >>> >>> Ken >>>> >>>>> From: FISH1IFR at aol.com >>>>> Date: May 24, 2012 4:55:30 PM PDT (CA) >>>>> To: tstokely at att.net, env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >>>>> Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Constitutional Sheriffs say excessive regu... >>>>> >>>>> In a message dated 5/23/2012 10:37:44 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tstokely at att.net writes: >>>>> When plans were made to take out four dams on the Klamath River, "they didn?t coordinate properly with us," he said, adding that 70 percent of the people in Siskiyou County say they don?t want the dams removed, "but they aren?t listening." >>>>> In response to a question from the audience, Haney repeated a question Lopey asked of the sheriffs and his own response: "If we have to protect these dams, are you guys willing to stand with me?" and "I said, ?Yes.?" >>>>> >>>>> Interesting.... but the Sheriffs omit the fact that these dams do not belong to the County or "the people," but are privately owned. The County thus has no say, and no vote of "the people" to "keep the dams" means anything. What are they doing to protect the Constitutional right of PacifiCorp to dispose of its own property however it sees fit? >>>>> >>>>> And they omit the fact that these dams, even if relicensed, are simply no longer cost effective. In fact, FERC estimated that the dams, once relicensed, would actually generate 27% LESS power than the little bit they do today (82 MW), and then cost the company more than $20 million/year in net LOSSES ... which would have to be passed on to its customers, including most of Siskiyou County! >>>>> >>>>> They are, in short, trying to impose Government Socialism on the Company to force it to run its assets at a loss! How incredibly ironic! Someone should point this out to them! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ====================================== >>>>> Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director >>>>> Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) >>>>> PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 >>>>> Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 >>>>> Web Home Page: www.pcffa.org >>>>> Email: fish1ifr at aol.com >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> env-trinity mailing list >>>>> env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >>>>> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> env-trinity mailing list >>> env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >>> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity >> > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon May 28 12:18:34 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 12:18:34 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] There's a new post at KlamBlog about HVT FERC petition References: Message-ID: All, This is an interesting development in the saga of Pacificorp's Klamath Hydroelectric Project. TS From: Felice Pace Date: May 27, 2012 2:10:50 PM PDT To: undisclosed recipients Bcc: tstokely at att.net Subject: There's a new post at KlamBlog The new post is titled: Hoopa Valley Tribe moves to kill the KHSA Dam Deal: Tribe petitions FERC to reassert jurisdiction This post discusses the petition which the HVT filed on May 25th asking the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to reassert jurisdiction over PacifiCorp's Klamath Hydroelectric Project and for FERC to either relicense the Project with new terms and conditions or order PacifiCorp to remove the facilities it owns from the Klamath River. Here's an excerpt: It is clear that the Obama Administration's Interior Department wants the KHSA to proceed. They need the Dam Deal in order to carry the most controversial provisions of the KBRA Water Deal. If FERC reasserts jurisdiction over the fate of PacifiCorp?s dams, the KBRA can proceed - but it will be unlikely to secure the Congressional mandates and funding its promoters desire. The two deals have been artificially joined for purely political purposes. The only thing they have in common is that both are at their core special interest deals for the 1% at the expense of the 99%. A copy of the HVT petition is included in the post because it is not yet available on line. Read the full post and leave a comment at KlamBlog. Felice Pace Klamath, CA 95548 707-954-6588 "we must always seek the truth in our opponents' error and the error in our own truth." - Reinhold Niebuhr -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu May 31 16:46:20 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 16:46:20 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] News clips on Hoopa Valley Tribe's FERC Petition Message-ID: SF Chronicle Hoopa Tribe presses Feds to move faster on Klamath dams removal - http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2012/05/30/state/n050112D53.DTL Bruss Ross' Redding.com blog: http://blogs.redding.com/bross/archives/2012/05/tribe-petitions.html Oregon Public Broadcasting: http://news.opb.org/article/tribe-asks-feds-order-removal-4-klamath-dams/ Lost Coast Outpost: http://lostcoastoutpost.com/2012/may/30/hoopa-steps-pressure-feds-over-klamath-dams/ Pie N' Politics (you have to scroll almost to the bottom of the page to get the story) http://pienpolitics.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu May 31 16:58:25 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 16:58:25 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] News Clips on Bay-Delta Conservation Plan and Delta Plan Message-ID: All, Some of these articles are almost a week old, but you may not have seen them. It appears to me that the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan has had some kind of setback and is regrouping. The independent Delta Stewardship Council is being considered to be put under the Natural Resources Agency. The Final Draft Delta Plan by the DSC is now out for review and comment. See http://deltacouncil.ca.gov/ The Trinity River is a Delta Tributary Watershed and the Bureau of Reclamation's Trinity River water permits are part of a plans to convey water around the Delta through the "Chunnel." Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org Stephen Franks re-publicizes all of Thursday and Friday's rumors, press releases, etc., etc. about the Guv's Chunnel plans - http://capoliticalnews.com/2012/05/25/voters-and-votes-mean-nothing-to-the-professional-jerry-brown/ Alex Breitler does a good job of summarizing what was told to the privileged few in the private conversations about the Peripheral Canal/Chunnel. http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120526/A_NEWS14/205260314 Dan Bacher updates his report on the failure of AB 2421 to get out of legislative committee (requiring BDCP Cost/Benefit Analysis) http://www.calitics.com/diary/14366/groups-call-for-canal-costbenefit-analysis-despite-ab-2421-defeat RTD and Food & Water Watch call for cost/benefit analysis of Chunnel despite Legislature's failure to move the Berryhill bill - http://www.restorethedelta.org/1855 more on Berryhill's cost/benefit bill failing to get out of Assembly Appropriations - http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=21142 the Legislature starts considering the Guv's reorganization plan which puts the Delta Stewardship Council under Resources; note it's an "all of nothing" choice for the Legislature meaning the controversial DSC move may be a done deal; http://www.californiascapitol.com/blog/2012/05/browns-government-reorganization-plan-debated-by-lawmakers/ full Little Hoover Commission report on the Guv's reorg plan . It recommends that the Delta Stewardship Council remain independent- http://deltacouncil.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/files/Report211.pdf and DSC's April 23 pitch to the Little Hoover Commission - http://deltacouncil.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/files/HancockLHCLter_0.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jeffconnection at gmail.com Mon Jun 4 10:07:03 2012 From: jeffconnection at gmail.com (Jeff Morris) Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 10:07:03 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Turtle Talk on Tuesday, June 5th - Weaverville Message-ID: *Turtle Talk @ Shasta College Extension, Weaverville June 5, 2012 * Join Leah Sloan, who recently completed her Master of Science at HSU, as she presents her Master?s thesis informally during a brown bag lunch. *Topic:* Population Structure, Life History, and Terrestrial Movements of Western Pond Turtles in Lentic Habitats Along the Trinity River *When:* Tuesday, June 5, 2012, Noon - 1:00 p.m. *Where:* Shasta College Weaverville Extension - Conference Room 30 Arbuckle Court, Weaverville 96093 - Map Link Bring your lunch and questions. Anyone and everyone is welcome to attend. Leah will present the results of her research informally and welcomes questions. For additional information tell people to contact Leslie Hubbard at 623-1804. See you there! ___________________________________________________________________________ Jeff Morris (530) 355 - 9880 jeffconnection at gmail.com for the Trinity County Resource Conservation District www.tcrcd.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From acaswr at yahoo.com Tue Jun 5 08:51:33 2012 From: acaswr at yahoo.com (lou jacobson) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 08:51:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [env-trinity] Looking for kayakers - Winnemem War Dance for Safe Coming of Age Ceremony june 29-july 3 Message-ID: <1338911493.62370.YahooMailNeo@web120203.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> All,? Paging all Shasta area river enthusiasts,? Dr. Silvaggio, lecturer at Humboldt State University, is looking for a few good boaters to help protect the Wintu Winnemem War Dance for Safe Coming of Age ceremony June 29th-July 3rd by providing boater education and by being legal observers when interacting with potentially harassing boaters. To learn more or to signup to participate please contact Dr. Silvaggio at Anthony.Silvaggio at humboldt.edu. If you can't make it but you see the value in this, please pass the word along to those who may be able to participate. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPBHbxkVf1o&feature=plcp -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jun 5 11:23:09 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 11:23:09 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] TAMWG 6/11/12 Meeting agenda References: Message-ID: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TAMWG Mtg Agenda 6-11-12 (REVISED).pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 89281 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jun 5 15:55:44 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 15:55:44 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] 6th Annual Spring-run Chinook Symposium and 15th Annual Coho Confab References: <4FCE8A64.9010606@tcrcd.net> Message-ID: <4372A8D6-F62A-49F4-8484-B426781AA6D5@att.net> 6th Annual Spring-run Chinook Symposium August 16-17, 2012 Indian Creek Lodge, Trinity River, CA The 6th Annual Spring-run Chinook symposium will be August 16-17 at Indian Creek Lodge on the Trinity River. Thursday will feature an orientation presentation regarding Population Trends of Anadromous Salmonids in the Trinity River Basin by Wade Sinnen of DFG followed by an overview of Trinity River Spring-run Chinook and Upper Trinity River geography. Then participants have a choice of a tour of the South Fork Trinity River Watershed, where participants will look at Spring Chinook's relationship with roads, fires, geology and streams, or a presentation byJosh Strange of the Yurok tribe giving an overview of Trinity River Spring-run Chinook and Upper Trinity River Geography followed by a whitewater restoration rafting tour from Lewiston Dam to Indian Creek. Evening keynote talks will include a presentation on Yurok Tribal Perspectives on Spring-run Chinook salmon by Troy Fletcher of the Yurok tribe and a presentation by Josh Strange about perspectives on Spring-run Chinook salmon migration, management, and restoration, plus a presentation by Carlos Garza, NOAA Fisheries, on the biological issues in the Spring-run Chinook status determination for the Klamath-Trinity Basin. Friday will include another Restoration River trip for those who weren't able to participate on Thursday, and a tour of the Trinity River hatchery and gravel augmentation projects near Lewiston Dam. The symposium is $150 that includes all presentations, tours, meals, and rafting. Lodging is not included so please contact Indian Creek Lodge to reserve a room (530) 623-6294 15th Annual Coho Confab http://calsalmon.org/files/documents/tools/confab/confab_2012_agenda.pdf 15th Annual Coho Confab August 17-19, 2012, Registration opens at 5pm Indian Creek Lodge, Trinity River, CA The 15th Annual Coho Confab will be August 17-19 at Indian Creek Lodge on the Trinity River. The Confab will feature presentations about population monitoring, a retrospective of the effects of restoration work in the Trinity River watershed, and a presentation on whether the costly Trinity River Restoration Program will be effective in restoring salmon. Field tours will include a full-day tour of large wood projects and migration barriers in several tributaries, a stream crossing and sediment reduction tour, a restoration river float tour from Lewiston Dam to Indian Creek, and a tour focusing on mainstem channel rehabilitation design on the Trinity River. Workshops include underwater fish identification and macro-invertebrate sampling. The Confab will be held at a beautiful fishing lodge on the main stem of the Trinity River. This is an ideal place to bring your family and enjoy the Confab with the comfort of full accommodations. There are a variety of rooms including double rooms, suites, and deluxe suites with kitchenettes. Please make your reservation directly by calling (530) 623-6294, or visiting their website. The Confab fees include camping, all meals and workshops and tours. There is limited camping available on a first-come, first-served basis. 15th Annual Coho Confab Agenda http://calsalmon.org/files/documents/tools/confab/confab_2012_agenda.pdf Dana Stolzman Executive Director Salmonid Restoration Federation www.calsalmon.org (707) 923-7501 (707) 923-3135 fax -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jun 8 11:17:45 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 11:17:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- River Meetings slated Message-ID: River meetings slated http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_30679a26-affb-11e1-9bf3-0019bb30f31a.html Posted: Wednesday, June 6, 2012 10:15 am TAMWG Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group will meet from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday, June 11, at Johnsons' Steakhouse, 160 Golf Course Road, Weaverville. The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group affords stakeholders the opportunity to give policy, management and technical input concerning Trinity River restoration efforts to the Trinity Management Council. The meeting will include discussion of the following topics: Trinity River hatchery, Executive Director's report, TMC chair report, update from workgroups, update on the 2012 Water Year, Bay-Delta Conservation Plan & Delta Flow Criteria, BOR process for banking water. TRRP The Trinity River Restoration Program will hold a public meeting from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. Tuesday, June 12, at the Trinity Congregational Church in Weaverville to discuss channel rehabilitation projects that will be implemented on the Trinity River during the 2012 construction season. For more information about the program visit the TRRP office at 1313 S. Main St., Weaverville; call 623-1800; or see the program Web site at www.trrp.net. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Jun 11 11:32:08 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 11:32:08 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] TRRP Public Meeting June 12, Trinity Congregational Church Message-ID: <6230B818-147F-4909-9FBD-7CBA2157A2AA@att.net> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: LSF-UJC-Meeting-June-12-2012-Flyer.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 46309 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jun 13 17:06:46 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 17:06:46 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Delta Stewardship Council Remains Independent State Agency References: Message-ID: From: "Delta Stewardship Council" Date: June 13, 2012 4:56:08 PM PDT To: "tstokely at att.net" Subject: DSC Remains Independent State Agency Reply-To: No_Reply at deltacouncil.ca.gov The DSC to Remain an Independent State Agency WEDNESDAY 13 JUNE "We appreciate this decision by the Governor" "It allows the Council to remain an independent body," said DSC Chair Phil Isenberg. To read the press release, please click here. Having trouble reading this? View it in your browser. Not interested? Unsubscribe instantly. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From awhitridge at dishmail.net Tue Jun 19 15:46:32 2012 From: awhitridge at dishmail.net (Arnold Whitridge) Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 15:46:32 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: TMC agenda Message-ID: <8BAB6EAC817449F2818C9A0440CC43D3@arnPC> I have no official role here, it's just that I've resourcefully obtained the agenda for tomorrow's Trinity Management Council meeting, and I'm a naturally generous person. AW Draft Agenda TRINITY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL Hoopa, CA - Hoopa Valley Tribe Council Chambers June 20 - 21, 2012 Wednesday, June 20, 2012 Time Topic, Purpose and/or Decision to be Made Discussion Leader Regular Business: 12:00 Introductions: Brian Person, Chair - Approval of Agenda - Approval of December, January, March 2012 Minutes 12:30 Open Forum: Comments from the public Brian Person 1:00 Report from TMC Chair Brian Person ? Landowner issue update ? Letters update ? TMC action tracker ? Joint TMC-TAMWG meeting -results of poll 2:00 Report from TAMWG Chair Elizabeth Hadley 2:30 Report from Executive Director Robin Schrock 2:45 Work Group Updates Robin Schrock and WG members 3:00 2012 Budget/2013 President's Budget Robin Schrock Information / Decision Items: 3:30 TMC Bylaw changes for telephone conference decisions Brian Person 4:00 Fall Flow Release Recommendation (handout) Seth Naman 4:30 Fall Flows Discussion Brian Person 5:00 Adjourn TMC Thursday, June 21, 2012 8:30 Implementation Update DJ Bandrowski 9:30 Phase 1 Review DJ Bandrowski 10:00 Science Update Robin Schrock 10:20 Break 10:30 Presentation Two Chief's Partnership Award FS/NRCS Acknowledgement: Pat Frost's TRRP contributions Brian Person 11:00 2012 Flow Scheduling Update Rod Wittler 11:30 2012 Flow Hydrograph James Lee 12:00 Lunch - Hosted by the Hoopa Valley Tribe 1:00 TMC-TAMWG Joint meeting agenda Person/Hadley 2:00 Open Forum 2:30 Calendar - Upcoming meetings 3:00 Adjourn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TMC_Agenda June 2012_draft June 19 2012.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 32480 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jun 20 11:25:21 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 11:25:21 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Huffington Post- Mutated Trout Raise New Concerns Over Selenium Message-ID: Please recall that the Trinity River was dammed, in part, to deliver water to the San Luis Unit of the Central Valley Project. Check out the Huffington Post by Glen Martin and comment on it at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/23/mutated-trout-new-selenium-concerns_n_1297141.html and a related story on the NY Times at: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/science/earth/mutated-trout-raise-new-concerns-over-selenium.html?_r=4&hp And then there is the John Stewart/Daily Show clip about the two-headed trout (it's funny, but it's not): http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-june-14-2012/a-simple-plot Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Wed Jun 20 12:29:14 2012 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 12:29:14 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Huffington Post- Mutated Trout Raise New Concerns Over Selenium In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000601cd4f1a$fa512ba0$eef382e0$@suddenlink.net> Tom That's not a good link for Glen's blog - use, instead http://www.huffingtonpost.com/glen-martin/californias-selenium-time_b_160669 0.html Bill Kier Associates, Fisheries and Watershed Professionals P.O Box 915 Blue Lake, CA 95525 (707) 668-1822 Mobile: 707.498.7847 www.kierassociates.net GSA Contractor GS10F0124U From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2012 11:25 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Huffington Post- Mutated Trout Raise New Concerns Over Selenium Please recall that the Trinity River was dammed, in part, to deliver water to the San Luis Unit of the Central Valley Project. Check out the Huffington Post by Glen Martin and comment on it at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/23/mutated-trout-new-selenium-concerns _n_1297141.html and a related story on the NY Times at: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/science/earth/mutated-trout-raise-new-conc erns-over-selenium.html?_r=4 &hp And then there is the John Stewart/Daily Show clip about the two-headed trout (it's funny, but it's not): http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-june-14-2012/a-simple-plot Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jun 20 12:35:38 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 12:35:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] correction to Huffington Post by Glen Martin on selenium Message-ID: All, I gave you the wrong url for Glen Martin's blog on the Huffington Post about selenium. Here is the correct one: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/glen-martin/californias-selenium-time_b_1606690.html Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Thu Jun 21 10:25:33 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 11:25:33 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change order - Trinity River Division Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River: Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) July 01, 2012 0700 1,770 1,710 July 02, 2012 0700 1,710 1,660 July 03, 2012 0700 1,660 1,610 July 04, 2012 0700 1,610 1,560 July 05, 2012 0700 1,560 1,500 July 06, 2012 0700 1,500 1,460 July 07, 2012 0700 1,460 1,410 July 08, 2012 0700 1,410 1,360 July 09, 2012 0700 1,360 1,310 July 10, 2012 0700 1,310 1,250 July 11, 2012 0700 1,250 1,200 July 12, 2012 0700 1,200 1,150 July 13, 2012 0700 1,150 1,100 July 14, 2012 0700 1,100 1,050 July 15, 2012 0700 1,050 1,000 July 16, 2012 0700 1,000 950 July 17, 2012 0700 950 900 July 18, 2012 0700 900 850 July 19, 2012 0700 850 800 July 20, 2012 0700 800 750 July 21, 2012 0700 750 700 July 22, 2012 0700 700 650 July 23, 2012 0700 650 600 July 24, 2012 0700 600 550 July 25, 2012 0700 550 500 July 26, 2012 0700 500 450 Ordered by: Thuy Washburn Note: ROD flows -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Jun 23 11:20:38 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 11:20:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Dan_Bacher=3A_Lawmakers_demand_ret?= =?windows-1252?q?urn_to_=93policy_before_plumbing=94_on_Delta_plan?= References: <6CE8CA9E-796E-451B-976C-AFDE57DEE2A5@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <29CF48AE-1915-49A0-A16A-D581EB32AD0B@att.net> From: Dan Bacher Date: June 23, 2012 11:16:55 AM PDT Subject: Lawmakers demand return to ?policy before plumbing? on Delta plan Photo: George Miller and 11 other Representatives called for a delay in the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to build a peripheral canal or tunnel. george-miller.jpg Lawmakers demand return to ?policy before plumbing? on Delta plan by Dan Bacher Twelve northern California lawmakers called on Obama administration officials Friday to delay the ?imminent announcement? of what they described as an an ?expensive and potentially damaging water diversion project? until more details of the plan are made available. The California Democrats warned that the unpopular plan to build a peripheral canal or tunnel ? as described in a recent briefing in Washington and public meeting in Sacramento ? ?raises far more questions than it answers, and appears to turn the maxim of ?policy before plumbing? on its head.? In a Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) public meeting held in Sacramento Wednesday, Jerry Meral, Deputy Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency, said the state and Department of Interior were ?hoping to release? the revised conveyance plan by the end of July. Meral also said the draft EIR/EIS will be available ?this fall.? ?I guess it?s in the eye of the beholder, but certainly in terms of cost savings and local impacts, it?s going to be quite an improvement,? claimed Jerry Meral, in reference to the revised plan. The Bay Delta Conservation Plan proposal recently developed by state and federal officials would allow for the construction of massive tunnels ? capable of draining the Sacramento River at a rate of 15,000 cubic feet per second ? but delay any decisions about the uses of the project for as many as fifteen years, according to a statement from Congressman George Miller?s Office. The members of Congress wrote that a poorly designed plan for the Bay Delta Estuary ?could increase water exports from the Bay-Delta estuary ? while failing to restore the Bay-Delta ecosystem and rebuild salmon and other California fisheries as required by law.? ?Recent reports have described the water diversion project as capable of filling 10 Olympic-size swimming pools with Sacramento River water every minute, but the twelve members of Congress warned that the plan?s potentially damaging impacts on northern California cities and counties, the state?s economy, and the health of the Bay-Delta estuary are currently impossible to evaluate,? according to the statement. The members of Congress called on Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and acting Commerce Secretary Rebecca Blank to release ?a far more detailed description? of the proposed new framework before Gov. Jerry Brown and Secretary Salazar make any public announcement about the plan. U.S. Representatives George Miller, Jerry McNerney, Anna Eshoo, Mike Thompson, Doris Matsui, John Garamendi, Mike Honda, Lynn Woolsey, Jackie Speier, Barbara Lee, Zoe Lofgren and Pete Stark signed the letter to Salazar and Blank. ?We ask that you not finalize or formally announce this framework until a far more detailed description is made available for review,? they said. ?We do not believe it is wise to commit to massive new water pumping stations and conveyance tunnels while sustainable solutions to the problems of water quality, fish and ecosystem restoration, local impacts, and water flows are made to wait.? ?There is too much at stake in the BDCP for the federal government to announce a plan that defers important decisions while an expensive and potentially damaging water diversion project is allowed to proceed,? they concluded. The full letter is available at: http://georgemiller.house.gov/6-22-12%20congressional%20BDCP%20letter.pdf The first comprehensive economic benefit-cost analysis of the water conveyance tunnels at the center of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP), released on June 14 by the University of Pacific?s Eberhardt School of Business, Business Forecasting Center, reveals that peripheral canal doesn?t make any economic or financial sense. ?We find the tunnel is not economically justified, because the costs of the tunnel are 2.5 times larger than its benefits,? the UOP report states. ?Benefit-cost analysis is an essential and normal part of assessment and planning of large infrastructure projects such as the $13 billion water conveyance tunnel proposal, but has not been part of the BDCP.? For the complete report, go to: http://forecast.pacific.edu/articles/BenefitCostDeltaTunnel_Web.pdf If built, the peripheral canal or tunnel would hasten the extinction of Central Valley chinook salmon, steelhead, Delta smelt, longfin smelt and other fish species, according to both agency and independent scientists. This project, now being fast-tracked by Brown and Obama administrations, would result in the destruction of the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas. In my opinion, everybody who cares about the future of the Delta and California should applaud Representatives George Miller, Jerry McNerney, Anna Eshoo, Mike Thompson, Doris Matsui, John Garamendi, Mike Honda, Lynn Woolsey, Jackie Speier, Barbara Lee, Zoe Lofgren and Pete Stark for standing up against the economically and scientifically unfeasible plan by the Brown and Obama administrations to ?save the Delta? by draining it. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: george-miller.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 29834 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Jun 25 08:41:19 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 08:41:19 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Two letters on Klamath Dam removal Message-ID: Paul R. Houser: Dam removal holds risks, uncertainties Paul R. Houser, Redding Record Searchlight After I questioned the accuracy of science reporting and summary documents related to the Klamath Secretarial Decision, I faced systematic reprisal and my job as the Bureau of Reclamation's science advisor was terminated. Subsequently, I filed a scientific integrity allegation, and was invited to speak publicly about it in May. I was confronted with a very wide range of questions, where I carefully offered my opinion or relevant information. Dennis Lynch of the U.S. Geological Survey recently questioned some of this information ("Klamath science process is solid," June 11). Below I summarize the rationale for my comments, and offer some additional perspective. (Full text available at prhouser.com/houser/?p=830). Patrick Higgins: Settlements sidestep Klamath's real problems Patrick Higgins, Redding Record Searchlight The June 11 "Speak Your Piece," "Klamath science process is solid" by lead federal scientist Dennis Lynch, was almost pure Orwellian double-speak, which is the hallmark of the entire Klamath dam removal environmental review process. Lynch discredited arguments against dam removal recently advanced by whistle-blower Paul Houser, but did not refute Houser's original allegations of the program's misrepresentation of science. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jeffconnection at gmail.com Mon Jun 25 09:34:08 2012 From: jeffconnection at gmail.com (Jeff Morris) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 09:34:08 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Two letters on Klamath Dam removal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Tom, I think it's important for folks to know that the Paul Houser in the letter below* is not* the same Paul Houser that is the General Manager of the TPUD (formerly of Redding Electric Utility). Jeff Morris On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > Paul R. Houser: Dam removal holds risks, uncertainties > ****Paul R. Houser, Redding Record Searchlight**** > After I questioned the accuracy of science reporting and summary documents > related to the Klamath Secretarial Decision, I faced systematic reprisal > and my job as the Bureau of Reclamation's science advisor was terminated. > Subsequently, I filed a scientific integrity allegation, and was invited to > speak publicly about it in May. I was confronted with a very wide range of > questions, where I carefully offered my opinion or relevant information. > Dennis Lynch of the U.S. Geological Survey recently questioned some of this > information ("Klamath science process is solid," > June 11). Below I summarize the rationale for my comments, and offer some > additional perspective. (Full text available at prhouser.com/houser/?p=830 > ).**** > ** ** > Patrick Higgins: Settlements sidestep Klamath's real problems > **** > *Patrick Higgins, Redding Record Searchlight* > The June 11 "Speak Your Piece," "Klamath science process is solid" > by lead federal scientist Dennis Lynch, was almost pure Orwellian > double-speak, which is the hallmark of the entire Klamath dam removal > environmental review process. Lynch discredited arguments against dam > removal recently advanced by whistle-blower Paul Houser, but did not refute > Houser's original allegations of the program's misrepresentation of science. > **** > ** ** > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > -- Jeff Morris (530) 355 - 9880 jeffconnection at gmail.com *Management, Media & Resource Strateg**ies* www.jeffwmorris.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kgant at tds.net Mon Jun 25 10:19:25 2012 From: kgant at tds.net (Kelli Gant) Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 10:19:25 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Two letters on Klamath Dam removal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4FE89D9D.3000408@tds.net> Also a name spelling difference. TPUD's GM is Paul Hauser (with an A) -Kelli Jeff Morris wrote: > Tom, > > I think it's important for folks to know that the Paul Houser in the > letter below* is not* the same Paul Houser that is the General Manager > of the TPUD (formerly of Redding Electric Utility). > > Jeff Morris > > On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Tom Stokely > wrote: > > > Paul R. Houser: Dam removal holds risks, uncertainties > > > > Paul R. Houser, Redding Record Searchlight > > After I questioned the accuracy of science reporting and summary > documents related to the Klamath Secretarial Decision, I faced > systematic reprisal and my job as the Bureau of Reclamation's > science advisor was terminated. Subsequently, I filed a scientific > integrity allegation, and was invited to speak publicly about it > in May. I was confronted with a very wide range of questions, > where I carefully offered my opinion or relevant information. > Dennis Lynch of the U.S. Geological Survey recently questioned > some of this information ("Klamath science process is solid > ," > June 11). Below I summarize the rationale for my comments, and > offer some additional perspective. (Full text available at > prhouser.com/houser/?p=830 ). > > > Patrick Higgins: Settlements sidestep Klamath's real problems > > > *Patrick Higgins, Redding Record Searchlight* > The June 11 "Speak Your Piece," "Klamath science process is solid > " > by lead federal scientist Dennis Lynch, was almost pure Orwellian > double-speak, which is the hallmark of the entire Klamath dam > removal environmental review process. Lynch discredited arguments > against dam removal recently advanced by whistle-blower Paul > Houser, but did not refute Houser's original allegations of the > program's misrepresentation of science. > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > > > > -- > Jeff Morris > (530) 355 - 9880 > jeffconnection at gmail.com > > *Management, Media & Resource Strateg**ies* > www.jeffwmorris.com > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jun 27 10:49:53 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 10:49:53 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Phase 1 Review Update Message-ID: <643155CE-3FC2-43C1-B6B2-B6D8E4969780@att.net> For those of you who have not seen this, the Trinity River Restoration Program Science Advisory Board recently submitted this update on the Phase 1 Review. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Phase 1 update June 2012.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 118129 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Wed Jun 27 11:27:04 2012 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 11:27:04 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Phase 1 Review Update In-Reply-To: <643155CE-3FC2-43C1-B6B2-B6D8E4969780@att.net> References: <643155CE-3FC2-43C1-B6B2-B6D8E4969780@att.net> Message-ID: <002601cd5492$73e888b0$5bb99a10$@suddenlink.net> Thanks, Tom - it reminds me I should start stalking that watershed assessment contract opportunity again Bill Kier Associates, Fisheries and Watershed Professionals P.O Box 915 Blue Lake, CA 95525 (707) 668-1822 Mobile: 707.498.7847 www.kierassociates.net GSA Contractor GS10F0124U -----Original Message----- From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 10:50 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Phase 1 Review Update For those of you who have not seen this, the Trinity River Restoration Program Science Advisory Board recently submitted this update on the Phase 1 Review. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From MCKIER at dfg.ca.gov Wed Jun 27 11:53:11 2012 From: MCKIER at dfg.ca.gov (Mary Claire Kier) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 11:53:11 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River trapping summary..coming soon Message-ID: <4FEAF3E3.A226.009F.1@dfg.ca.gov> I told you in March I'd be sending out the first trapping summary of the 2012 sampling season somewhere around the end of June, but we ended up getting some more rain and snow (the water year designation is now 'normal'). We have not installed the Junction City weir, therefore I have nothing to report, yet. At this point the weir installations are scheduled for 23 July (or so) for Junction City, followed by Willow Creek around 28 August. I'll get the first trapping summary out once we've got some data to report. Enjoy your summer months... Mary Claire Mary Claire Kier DFG - Trinity River Project 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 707/822-5876 - FAX 822-2855 mckier at dfg.ca.gov Trinity River documents can be found at: http://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/documents/ContextDocs.aspx?cat=KlamathTrinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jun 27 13:54:25 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 13:54:25 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou County Petition to FERC, response to Hoopa Valley Tribe petition Message-ID: All, You may find the attached of interest. Siskiyou County filed a petition to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in response to the Hoopa Valley Tribe's petition for FERC on the issue of relicensing Pacificorps' Klamath Dams. I have not seen any news stories about this in any newspaper so far. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: P2082-058-SiskiyouAnswerToHVTPetition(06-25-12).pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 48982 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- From FISH1IFR at aol.com Wed Jun 27 14:42:36 2012 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 17:42:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou County Petition to FERC, response to Hoopa Valley ... Message-ID: <16e23.2db45835.3d1cd84c@aol.com> In a message dated 6/27/2012 1:55:29 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tstokely at att.net writes: You may find the attached of interest. Siskiyou County filed a petition to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in response to the Hoopa Valley Tribe's petition for FERC on the issue of relicensing Pacificorps' Klamath Dams. Colleagues... Siskiyou County's supporting a return to FERC just underscores the fact that by far the most likely outcome of the FERC process on its own (assuming the KHSA no longer holds) is RELICENSING, not dam decommissioning. People forget that this was FERC Staff's strong recommendation back in 2007. FERC has never ordered a dam down in its history except pursuant to a Settlement like the KHSA. There is no special reason they would do so in this one case. This is an agency of which it is said that it has never seen a dam it did not like! And remember, one of these four dams (J.C. Boyle) is in Oregon, where the water quality laws are much weaker, the environmental agencies even more timid about denying a 401 Certification and facing massive litigation, and the water quality impacts of the Oregon dam are the least of them all. J.C. Boyle also generates up to 80 MW -- the large majority of the generation of the whole system -- and therefore is by far the most valuable dam to keep, should it come to FERC. (Iron Gate = only 18 MW) A return to FERC risks at least a partial relicensing, and the loss of this unique opportunity for full river restoration for up to the next 50 years. Compared to the KHSA now in hand, which offers four-dam removal within the next 8 years, Parties to the KHSA such as PCFFA consider this "return to FERC and FERC will fix it" strategy to be very high risk. Some of my esteemed colleagues clearly disagree with me, particularly the Hoopa Tribe. But the fact that Siskiyou County is now cheering on the Hoopa Tribe's Petition to FERC to resume control over the relicensing process should give one great pause about the potential outcomes of that "return to FERC" strategy. As the great Yogi Berra said, "It is always dangerous to make predictions -- especially about the future." ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) Email: fish1ifr at aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t.schlosser at msaj.com Wed Jun 27 15:08:11 2012 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Tom Schlosser) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 15:08:11 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou County Petition to FERC, response to Hoopa Valley ... In-Reply-To: <16e23.2db45835.3d1cd84c@aol.com> References: <16e23.2db45835.3d1cd84c@aol.com> Message-ID: <4FEB844B.9040704@msaj.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Wed Jun 27 17:16:05 2012 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 20:16:05 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou County Petition to FERC, response to Hoopa Vall... Message-ID: Tom... Actually, citing the Condit Dam example rather undercuts your proposition that FERC would order Klamath dams removed in this case, directly or indirectly. Fact is, Condit Dam was removed pursuant to a Settlement Agreement that was in fact the model or template for the Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA). I suppose we could argue chicken-egg issues forever, but the fact still remains that a negotiated Settlement of the sort the KHSA represents is still the most straightforward, least risky, and least expensive way to remove all four dams. If ultimately the KHSA fails, and we are all forced to go back to the FERC process, it may well be a very different outcome than the Hoopa Valley Tribe hopes for. Certainly Siskiyou County thinks so, which is why they are supporting the Tribe's Petition! A copy of the Condit Dam Settlement Agreement is attached for those who are interested. Its a large file, so those not interested should merely ignore it. You might take note that the GOP-led House of Representatives is positioning to take authority to require fish passage and other relicensing preconditions away from federal agencies. There was a hearing on this very issue just today, titled: "Mandatory Conditioning Requirements on Hydropower: Howe Federal Resource Agencies are Driving Up Electricity Costs and Decreasing the Original Green Energy." A link to an archive webcast site for that hearing is at:: _http://naturalresources.house.gov/Calendar/EventSingle.aspx?EventID=300046_ (http://naturalresources.house.gov/Calendar/EventSingle.aspx?EventID=300046) Needless to say, relying soley on FERC also means relying on the federal government?s and that is controlled by Congress? willingness to require environmental protections such as fish passage in old dams. This willingness cannot be taken for granted. But a signed Settlement on dam removal would be at least in large part immune from changes in the Federal Power Act. ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) Email: fish1ifr at aol.com In a message dated 6/27/2012 3:08:14 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, t.schlosser at msaj.com writes: You shouldn't repeat the old falsehood that "FERC has never ordered a dam down in its history except pursuant to a Settlement like the KHSA." You ignore the many dam removals that are occurring as a result of the FERC process. It's half true that FERC normally hasn't "ordered" removal, but the whole truth is that FERC orders have forced the parties to agree to removal of the dams, which FERC approves. Didn't anyone see the Condit dam destroyed last October. Why did PacifiCorp remove Condit? Was it purely voluntary? No, it was because FERC's license included the agencies' sec. 18 prescriptions--requirements of volitional upstream and downstream fish passage, as FERC is compelled to do by the Supreme Court's Escondido decision in 1984 and, more recently, the City of Tacoma case in 2006 (_here_ (http://www.msaj.com/cases/051054a.pdf) ). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ConditSettlement.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 1793119 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jun 27 20:03:35 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 20:03:35 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Thirty-six_groups_demand_return_to?= =?windows-1252?q?_=93policy_before_plumbing=94?= References: <1776333B-DB10-4D9B-93E2-B45B66E75F81@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <60BE8DA0-A703-476E-A7A2-F235590F601D@att.net> From: Dan Bacher Date: June 27, 2012 5:52:37 PM PDT Subject: Thirty-six groups demand return to ?policy before plumbing? http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2012/06/27/thirty-six-groups-demand-return-to-?policy-before-plumbing?/ gang_of_12_got_it_right_doi_-doc_ltr.pdf download PDF (782.9 KB) Thirty-six groups demand return to ?policy before plumbing? by Dan Bacher Thirty-six California fishing, environmental and consumer advocacy organizations on June 27 demanded that the Obama administration delay the imminent announcement of a peripheral canal or tunnel proposed under the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) until ?fundamental details? are made available. ?The Departments of Interior and Commerce are poised to join with the State of California to recommend the construction of a multi-billion dollar plumbing project before defining how much it will cost, how it will be operated, or how much water it will produce without environmental damage,? the groups wrote in a joint letter to Ken Salazar, Secretary of Interior, and Rebecca Blank, Secretary of Commerce. Organizations signing the letter include the Sierra Club, Environmental Water Caucus, Friends of the River, Planning and Conservation League, Restore the Delta (RTD), Food and Water Watch, Golden Gate Salmon Association, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, California Water Impact Network, California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, Salmon Water Now, Save the American River, Water for Fish, California Striped Bass Association and Southern California Watershed Alliance. The groups wrote, "The State of California proposes construction of two world-record-size tunnels capable of taking nearly all of the average freshwater flow of the Sacramento River ? 15,000 cubic feet per second ? away from the San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary." "The proposed double tunnel project is designed to give a federal assurance of water to south of the Delta irrigators. As proposed the plan will give a federal guarantee of increased water to be taken from the San Francisco Bay Delta estuary. This proposed higher diversion will create chronic drought conditions and environmental devastation in the estuary," they said. The letter ask seven questions of the Obama administration officials beginning with: 1. "How much will it really cost?" "We?re being told that just the record size tunnels project costs are estimated at least $12.691 billion, but this does not include operation and maintenance which ups the cost to $17 billion, add in financing and the costs reach $51 billion according to BDCP documents. [See Chapter 8 BDCP documents (p. 8-86 & p. 8-88)]. Governor Brown estimates the costs at $14 billion," the groups stated. The other questions are: 2. "Who pays for it? Who REALLY pays for it? And the impacts? 3. How much ?new? water will be produced annually? 250,000 AF? 500,000 AF? 1 MAF? 1.5 MAF? 4. When will this ?NEW? found water be available ? 2018? 2020? 2023? 2026? 2030? 2050? What is the date of the first drop of water from completed construction? 5. How will this ?new? water pie be divided? Who gets what? How and when will that be determined? 6. What are the upstream impacts of this project on flows, temperatures, fisheries protection and reservoir operations? 7. Scientists report that climate disruption will impact California ? its coastline, sea level, weather patterns, precipitation rates and a growing list of other conditions. The current proposed plan indicates climate assumptions will be ?forthcoming." Can you guarantee that multi-billion dollar expenditures for plumbing being recommended will have meaningful utility in 2020, 2030, 2050, and beyond?" The groups agreed with the twelve northern California lawmakers who called on Obama administration officials Friday to delay the "imminent announcement" of what they described as an an "expensive and potentially damaging water diversion project" until more details of the plan are made available. (http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2012/06/23/lawmakers-demand-return-to-?policy-before-plumbing?-on-delta-plan/) The California Democrats warned that the unpopular plan to build a peripheral canal or tunnel ? as described in a recent briefing in Washington and public meeting in Sacramento ? ?raises far more questions than it answers, and appears to turn the maxim of ?policy before plumbing? on its head.? The construction of the peripheral canal or tunnel proposed under the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) would hasten the extinction of Central Valley chinook salmon, steelhead, Delta smelt, longfin smelt and other species, according to studies by independent and agency scientists alike. Both the Brown and Obama administrations are currently fast-tracking this government boondoggle, a project that aims to "restore" the Delta by draining it. The complete text of the groups' letter is available at http://www.restorethedelta.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: gang_of_12_got_it_right_doi_-doc_ltr.pdf_600_.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 136571 bytes Desc: not available URL: From andrew at wildcalifornia.org Thu Jun 28 09:51:58 2012 From: andrew at wildcalifornia.org (Andrew Orahoske) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 09:51:58 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou County Petition to FERC, response to Hoopa Vall... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <005701cd554e$56520bc0$02f62340$@org> But see attached Condit Biological Opinion, discussion begins at page 1 (p. 11 of the document), which tells the story further. It was a strong statement by NMFS requiring fish passage that killed Condit by making it uneconomical. The settlement was worked out among the parties to the relicensing, Pacificorp paid for removal, FERC presided over it all, and there was no act of Congress, that I?m aware of. Just for clarification then, Condit did involve a settlement agreement, but Congress was not asked for $$. Andrew J. Orahoske Conservation Director Environmental Protection Information Center 145 G Street, Suite A Arcata, CA 95521 Office: (707) 822-7711 Mobile: (707) 407-9020 www.wildcalifornia.org From: env-trinity-bounces+andrew=wildcalifornia.org at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces+andrew=wildcalifornia.org at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of FISH1IFR at aol.com Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 5:16 PM To: t.schlosser at msaj.com Cc: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Siskiyou County Petition to FERC, response to Hoopa Vall... Tom... Actually, citing the Condit Dam example rather undercuts your proposition that FERC would order Klamath dams removed in this case, directly or indirectly. Fact is, Condit Dam was removed pursuant to a Settlement Agreement that was in fact the model or template for the Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA). I suppose we could argue chicken-egg issues forever, but the fact still remains that a negotiated Settlement of the sort the KHSA represents is still the most straightforward, least risky, and least expensive way to remove all four dams. If ultimately the KHSA fails, and we are all forced to go back to the FERC process, it may well be a very different outcome than the Hoopa Valley Tribe hopes for. Certainly Siskiyou County thinks so, which is why they are supporting the Tribe's Petition! A copy of the Condit Dam Settlement Agreement is attached for those who are interested. Its a large file, so those not interested should merely ignore it. You might take note that the GOP-led House of Representatives is positioning to take authority to require fish passage and other relicensing preconditions away from federal agencies. There was a hearing on this very issue just today, titled: "Mandatory Conditioning Requirements on Hydropower: Howe Federal Resource Agencies are Driving Up Electricity Costs and Decreasing the Original Green Energy." A link to an archive webcast site for that hearing is at:: http://naturalresources.house.gov/Calendar/EventSingle.aspx?EventID =300046 Needless to say, relying soley on FERC also means relying on the federal government?s and that is controlled by Congress? willingness to require environmental protections such as fish passage in old dams. This willingness cannot be taken for granted. But a signed Settlement on dam removal would be at least in large part immune from changes in the Federal Power Act. ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: www.pcffa.org Email: fish1ifr at aol.com In a message dated 6/27/2012 3:08:14 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, t.schlosser at msaj.com writes: You shouldn't repeat the old falsehood that "FERC has never ordered a dam down in its history except pursuant to a Settlement like the KHSA." You ignore the many dam removals that are occurring as a result of the FERC process. It's half true that FERC normally hasn't "ordered" removal, but the whole truth is that FERC orders have forced the parties to agree to removal of the dams, which FERC approves. Didn't anyone see the Condit dam destroyed last October. Why did PacifiCorp remove Condit? Was it purely voluntary? No, it was because FERC's license included the agencies' sec. 18 prescriptions--requirements of volitional upstream and downstream fish passage, as FERC is compelled to do by the Supreme Court's Escondido decision in 1984 and, more recently, the City of Tacoma case in 2006 ( here). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: NMFS 2006 - Condit BiOp.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 415385 bytes Desc: not available URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Thu Jun 28 18:37:08 2012 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 21:37:08 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou County Petition to FERC, response to Hoopas Message-ID: <229db.3e8d3dcb.3d1e60c4@aol.com> In a message dated 6/28/2012 9:52:10 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, andrew at wildcalifornia.org writes: Just for clarification then, Condit did involve a settlement agreement, but Congress was not asked for $$. Andrew... correct. But of course no Congressional money is being asked for dam removal per se in the Klamath either... dam removal and related mitigation measures necessary from dam removal are being funded mostly by Company ratepayers, with some remaining second-tier funding (if needed) to eventually come (by 2020) from California, where most of the economic benefits from dam removal will be. About $35 million dollars is now in that dam removal Klamath Trust Fund, cumulative collected from ratepayer surcharges that amount to about $1.61/month per average residential customer in northern California -- less than the price of a decent cup of coffee a month. And it builds up at about $1 million/month until 2020 and the target removal date. A total of $200 million is to come from that source by 2020, and we are pretty much on track. Current delays in Congress do not hurt this effort in any way so long as those funds continue being collected. Congressional approval is required, of course, for the process of removing jurisdiction from FERC, and for the transfer of Keno Dam and a few other elements of the Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA). But NO federal money. This is to prevent what happened with the Elwha dam, which was actually authorized by Congress for removal but then kept Congressionally unfunded (for purely political reasons as a bargaining chip in Congress on unrelated issues) for more than a decade. (And even the Elwha dam eventually came down (this year) in spite of Congressional resistance.) The KHSA dam removal components only need to come through Congress once and only once. Many Settlement Parties' overarching goal is and always has been Klamath salmon restoration. Dam removal is only one element, though an essential one, of that 50-year watershed restoration program. Dam removal is thus a necessary -- but in itself not sufficient --prerequisite to that salmon restoration. Much more than mere dam removal is necessary to restore healthy salmon runs to an over-appropriated river with much of its salmon habitat severely damaged. Can't get there from dam removal alone. Federal funding is, of course, required for the long-term salmon watershed restoration efforts in the parallel KBRA. This is, of course, the rub in a Congress committed to pinching every penny. My own view -- and the numbers substantiate this -- is that investing a little more in the basin to fix its water over-allocation and habitat problems once and for all is far cheaper, in the long run, than spending federal money in periodic disaster assistance programs caused nearly every year by the problems that need fixing. And far more certain than trying to get these water reforms through litigation. Last decade nearly $15 million/year went to the Klamath Basin in federal disaster assistance alone! The economic price to the basin and coastal communities of the back-to-back water crises of 2001 and 2010 and fish kills (2002, leading to fishery closures 2006) to the region was in the hundreds of millions of dollars! Lurching from disaster to disaster is not the way to run things, and is not sustainable! Suppose we were able to get the dams down without that Restoration Agreement (the KBRA)? The lower river would still be starved of water, much of the spawning and rearing habitat still damaged, and salmon highly unlikely to recover to any major degree. This is why the KHSA is tied to and part of a much broader watershed restoration plan. The KBRA is very like the San Joaquin Settlement Agreement, seeking to restore salmon to the completely dewatered San Joaquin River in northern California for the first time in 60 years. That also took some years longer to get funded through Congress than originally anticipated. But once the San Joaquin Settlement Act began to move, it took only three weeks to become law! One is nearly always better off having tried something and failed rather than having tried nothing and succeeded. A 50-year watershed restoration plan like the KBRA is ambitious, yes, but it is in fact what the Klamath salmon runs need to fully recover. And all the science says that the kind of restoration and water reallocation programs embodied in the KBRA and KHSA will be moving us very far along indeed in the right direction. ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) Email: fish1ifr at aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jun 29 10:18:13 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 10:18:13 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee- California budget would indefinitely extend ban on dredge mining Message-ID: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/06/29/4598196/hed-here.html#mi_rss=Environment From truman at jeffnet.org Mon Jul 2 10:53:18 2012 From: truman at jeffnet.org (Patrick Truman) Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2012 10:53:18 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Above the Law in the West Message-ID: <9F7B084B86C748679B55BC71363F0269@Bertha> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/glen-martin/above-the-law_b_1640408.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jul 3 11:47:05 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2012 11:47:05 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Tom Stokely- A quick remedy for bee stings Message-ID: <60E24831-6025-4BDE-ADAF-13C159C6994F@att.net> Happy 4th of July to all. If you get stung by a bee, see below. http://www.redding.com/news/2012/jul/01/tom-stokely-a-quick-remedy-for-bee-stings/?partner=RSS A quick remedy for bee stings As the summer season is upon us, so are bees, wasps and other stinging creatures. The effects of a bee or wasp sting can be completely eliminated by immediate application of meat tenderizer or papaya extract. Meat tenderizer contains papain or bromelain that breaks down the protein that is meat. It also breaks down proteins that are wasp and bee venom. You must apply it immediately for full effect, however. For meat tenderizer, I just wet the affected area (after removing the stinger) and sprinkle on the powder so that it cakes on. I have never done it, but I'd bet that a dried papaya chewed up with moisture would probably also work. I have personally used meat tenderizer on bee stings several times with total success. Within minutes, signs of the sting are completely gone. Tom Stokely, Mount Shasta -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Jul 7 07:44:16 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2012 07:44:16 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard: Humboldt, Hoopa ask formore water in the Klamath; concerns loom about possible fall fish kill Message-ID: Humboldt, Hoopa ask for more water in the Klamath; concerns loom about possible fall fish kill http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_21026682/humboldt-hoopa-ask-more-water-klamath-concerns-loom With fall around the corner, Hoopa Valley Tribe officials are crossing their fingers for the government to release more water from the Trinity River to avoid a potential fish kill on the Klamath River. A record number of adult salmon -- estimated at more than 380,000 by the Pacific Fishery Management Council -- are anticipated to return to the Klamath this fall. Both Humboldt County officials and tribal members are concerned there won't be enough water in the river to support the fish. Regina Chichizola, communications coordinator for the Hoopa Valley Tribe and founder of the Klamath Riverkeeper group, said tribal members want the Bureau of Reclamation to respect the tribe's water rights and stop diverting most of the Trinity's water down south. ?Right now, all the water is going to the Central Valley,? Chichizola said. ?We're expecting an answer from the Bureau of Reclamation in the next two weeks.? The Trinity River is the Klamath's largest tributary, and water is often diverted from the river to farmers and residents of Southern California. In 2002, the diversion led to a massive fish kill on the Klamath. Fifth District Supervisor Ryan Sundberg said the fish kill had an immense negative impact on the county's tribes and fishing industry. ?Economically, that's nothing anyone wants to go through again,? Sundberg said. ?They had to do a couple of years where they closed down the salmon season.? The number of salmon estimated to return to the river this fall is 2.4 times the number of fish that attempted to spawn in September 2002. More than 33,000 adult salmon perished in the lower Klamath that year from a disease outbreak linked to low water levels and high fish density, according to the Pacific Fishery Management Council. Don Reck, the environmental division manager for the Bureau of Reclamation's Northern California Area Office, said the river gauge in 2002 reached about 2,000 cubic feet per second. He said a number of agency and tribal representatives have met to discuss water level recommendations for this year. ?The recommendations from the group are from mid-August to late September to have floor flows, as measured down near Klamath, at about 3,200 cubic feet per second,? Reck said. He said the Bureau of Reclamation will likely go through the National Environmental Policy Act process -- which evaluates the environmental effects of an action or project and its alternatives -- before making any final decisions on how much water to release from the Trinity. ?We'll probably be doing and environmental assessment to try to determine if there are any impacts to the human environment,? Reck said. Hoopa Valley Tribal Chairman Leonard Masten said the tribe won back 50 percent of the Trinity's flow by way of court rulings and a legislation-backed record of decision in 2000. The decision was still being litigated in 2002 when the fish kill occurred, but Masten said the decision is now in place and that it's law. ?We're having a tough time getting the Bureau of Reclamation to adhere to it,? Masten said. ?We're constantly having to fight to get them to pull their end.? Masten said the Bureau of Reclamation has been good about allocating funding to efforts focused on Klamath River restoration projects, but it's still a fight whenever it comes to water flow issues. ?It's been frustrating, and you'd think there'd be more assistance,? Masten said. The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors wrote letters in March to the U.S. Department of the Interior and Gov. Jerry Brown advising them of the potential for another fish kill and the need for additional water. Chichizola said more input from the community is still needed. ?I think if people go to the supervisors meetings and let them know how much they support the fishing industry, that it'll help,? Chichizola said. She said people can learn more at www.facebook.com/SaveTheKlamathTrinitySalmon. Megan Hansen can be reached at 441-0511 or mhansen at times-standard.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Jul 9 08:58:13 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 08:58:13 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle Editorial: Gov. Jerry Brown's delta fix is not much of a plan Message-ID: <499CCBDF-1CA5-4B3F-9180-E0255CA7199F@att.net> Gov. Jerry Brown's delta fix is not much of a plan http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/editorials/article/Gov-Jerry-Brown-s-delta-fix-is-not-much-of-a-plan-3691927.php Published 06:01 p.m., Sunday, July 8, 2012 Fish versus farms is the common shorthand Californians use to discuss how we decide to use our most valuable natural resource: water. Today, the debate is over fish versus financing of a "conveyance," as Sacramento describes a peripheral canal to "fix" the delta. ? The questions: Is a conveyance fish agencies will permit one that the water contractors will pay for? What if the contractors can't pay? The answers so far suggest this project is but a pipe dream. Sacramento has signaled that Gov. Jerry Brown and U.S. Interior Secretary Roger Salazar will announce a plan on or about July 25 for a $14 billion tunnel to move Sacramento River water 35 miles around the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to the Tracy pumps. Size matters: The tunnel will have three intakes, each capable of sucking in 3,000 cubic feet of water per second, or 9,000 cubic feet total. Alternatively, it would have five intakes and move 15,000 cubic feet of water. The discussion however, is around how much water would be exported: 4.3 million acre-feet per year (less than is diverted now) or 5.5 million acre-feet? What is the demand? The water contractors, who sell to both cities and agriculture, want "reliable" water deliveries and have agreed to pay the lion's share of the tunnel construction, operations and maintenance costs. In exchange, they want certainty that they won't be required to give up water at some later date for the delta fish. Can the state give that assurance? Do the tunnel costs pencil out for the water users without that assurance? Could the state require other water rights holders - say San Francisco or the East Bay Municipal Utility District - to contribute water for the fish instead? Environmental groups, concerned about the degraded water quality and declining salmon fisheries, could support construction of a tunnel because it would address the reversed river flows caused by pumping that misdirects, and ultimately kills, fish. But they want to know first how it will be operated. They are opposed to the plumbing-then-policy proposal in play now. The cost of habitat restoration, which the environmental groups insist on in exchange for their support, would be covered in part by state borrowing. Yet, last week, the Legislature moved the water bond measure off the November ballot. The Metropolitan Water District, which buys half of the state water project's deliveries, anticipates raising water rates by 15 to 20 percent to cover its share of the costs. But its customers, reeling from earlier rate increases, are buying less water. They have actively promoted conservation and are exploring desalinization as imported water becomes more expensive. Will Met be able to sell bonds to finance its share of a tunnel? If it sells the bonds, will it be able to repay them? Who pays if Met doesn't? Questions abound. Until there are answers, the delta "fix" is less than a plausible plan. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jul 12 12:12:49 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 12:12:49 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune- Stalling Brings About Call to Action Message-ID: <8AC0D88F-B4FD-4E2E-8094-87CC4BCDAEC6@att.net> http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2012/07/siskiyou-county-calls-for-ferc-action-on-klamath-dams/ Stalling Brings About Call to Action By Allie Hostler, Two Rivers Tribune Dam removal on the Klamath River is stalled and opponents of the Klamath Settlements are pushing to speed up water quality improvements on the ailing river. Although Klamath Settlements are on the Congressional table in the form of the Klamath Basin Economic Restoration Act, stakeholders such as the Hoopa Tribe believe there is a less expensive route to dam removal. The Tribe filed a petition with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in late May to restart the process for evaluating the future of the dams. The final step in the FERC relicensing process is Clean Water Act certification from California and Oregon. Siskiyou County does not support dam removal, but last week filed a response to Hoopa?s petition that says the states are failing to uphold their obligations under the Clean Water Act. ??The states of California and Oregon have ignored their lawful options in processing the water quality certification for the Project (Klamath Hydroelectric Project) and have instead entered into a contract?with the signatures of their respective governor?s?that provides for the 401 process to be held in abeyance until at least the year 2020,? Siskiyou County wrote in their response to the Hoopa Tribe?s Petition to FERC. Under the FERC process, PacifiCorp would have to decide whether to invest in expensive fish passage and water quality upgrades to the hydroelectric project, or remove the dams. The Hoopa Tribe believes that dam removal is far more likely to occur under the aforementioned scenario than deadlocked legislation. Others disagree, like the Northwest Regional Director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fisehrmen?s Associations (PCFFA), Glen Spain. Spain defends the Klamath Settlements and remains optimistic that legislation is the cure for decades of perpetual disaster in the Klamath Basin. ?The KBRA is very much like the San Joaquin Settlement Agreement, seeking to restore salmon to the completely dewatered San Joaquin River for the first time in 60 years. That also took some years longer to get funded through Congress than originally anticipated,? Spain wrote in an email. ?But once the San Joaquin Settlement Act began to move, it took only three weeks to become law.? Siskiyou County opposed the Settlements early in their inception, but for different reasons than the Hoopa Tribe. Hoopa wants the dams to come down, but doesn?t believe the Settlements are realistic. The Tribe also believes the settlements fail to provide enough water for salmon and fail to protect senior water rights in the Basin. ?Despite the aspirations of the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement, that planning process is not cleaning up our water. Instead, it blocks fish unless Congress passes dangerous and expensive legislation, which is going nowhere,? Hoopa Valley Tribal Chairman, Leonard Masten said in a prepared statement. Spain holds that the FERC process will not bring down the dams. ?FERC has never ordered a dam down in its history except pursuant to a Settlement like the KHSA,? Spain said. ?There is no special reason they would do so in this one case. This is an agency of which it is said that is has never seen a dam it did not like!? Representing the Hoopa Tribe on the matter, Thomas Schlosser also wrote in an email that Settlement proponents have ignored the many dam removals that are occurring as a result of the FERC process. He cited the removal of PacifiCorp?s Condit Dam last October. ?Why did PacifiCorp remove Condit?,? he said. ?It was because FERC?s license included the agencies? prescriptions?requirements of volitional upstream and downstream fish passage?typically in these cases, the licensee concludes that future operation of a project on the new terms that are consistent with existing law will be uneconomic, so the licensee seeks and obtains FERC?s permission to decommission the project. PacifiCorp?s testimony to the PUCs in connection with the dam removal surcharge makes clear their opinion that the most cost effective route for them is removal of all four dams.? On Monday, the Hoopa Tribe issued a call to action asking the public to participate in an upcoming California State Water Resources Control Board meeting where they are expected to continue stalling the Clean Water Act Certification process. The meeting will be held on July 17, 2012 in Sacramento. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jul 12 15:18:31 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:18:31 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Donald McCovey-Time for different direction on Klamath Dam removal Message-ID: <6317F501-A945-470D-8F0B-3057C5257C37@att.net> Time for different direction on Klamath Dam removal Donald McCovey/For The Times-Standard Posted: 07/11/2012 02:35:21 AM PDT http://www.times-standard.com/guest_opinion/ci_21050463/time-different-direction-klamath-dam-removal The Resighini Rancheria is a small federally recognized tribe with a reservation at the top of the Klamath River estuary. We are of Yurok ancestry. Our people have fished the Klamath River since time immemorial and we remain dependent on the bounty of the river, both for our sustenance and our spiritual well being. The Resighini Rancheria favors removal of four Klamath Hydroelectric Project (KHP) dams but strongly opposes the implementation of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) that is part of the government dam removal process. Our tribal government was denied participation in the Klamath settlement talks, but we have studied the issues while participating in review of government dam removal environmental documents. We have come to the conclusion that our treaty rights and the government's trust responsibility should not be changed to favor politically powerful farm interests as part of dam removal. Also, dam owner PacifiCorp should be made to remove its polluting dams sooner than 2020 and replace their power generating capacity at the expense of their rate-payers, not at the expense of the citizens of California. The Indian people of the Klamath River Basin share a harmony-based culture where all living creatures are part of a living river system. The Upper Klamath ecosystem historically provided clean water for the lower Klamath River, until the Klamath Project reduced lakes and wetlands by 80 percent. By preventing recovery of the marshes and Advertisement shallow lakes of the Upper Klamath Basin, the Klamath settlement will block the recovery of water quality as well as the endangered sucker fish and dozens of bird species dependent on the Tule Lake and Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuges. During our government to government meetings, we asked that the effects of the KBRA be scientifically analyzed. Government representatives declined, saying that its effects were unknown and yet to be determined. In fact the KBRA and its effects are already being felt. In January 2012 the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation turned off the water to the refuges and in March 2012, dead ducks started falling from the sky. From October 2011 through February 2012, Lower Klamath River flows were drawn down to levels that violated the coho salmon biological opinion for Klamath Project operation and created potential risk of increasing algae blooms that are known to be a major factor in salmon disease epidemics. In April of 2010, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service allowed the bureau to draw down Tule Lake to levels that would not support Lost River and shortnose suckers, and to capture the fish and transport them to Upper Klamath Lake. We have asked Secretary of Interior Salazar to explain why these agencies are not upholding the Endangered Species Act, but he has not responded. The federal legislation to authorize dam removal is stalled and likely dead. California has made no indication that it will come up with the $250 million required for dam removal under the Klamath Settlement. The Resighini Rancheria agrees with the Hoopa Tribe that dam removal through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing process will be the quickest path to decommissioning. Although FERC staff recommended dam retention for power generation, the requirement by the National Marine Fisheries Service for fish ladders that cost $240 million will render the project uneconomic. This forces dam decommissioning at PacifiCorp's expense and would involve a simple settlement not involving water rights or tribal trust, similar to the one the company recently signed to facilitate removal of the Condit Dam in Washington state. The California State Water Resources Control Board has the ability to block relicensing of the KHP because the reservoirs within the project create thermal, nutrient and toxic algae pollution. Interim measures that PacifiCorp is following until 2020 under the Klamath settlement do not lessen these conditions. On July 17, we will attend the water board's meeting and call upon them to assert their authority, recognized in both the Clean Water Act and the Federal Power Act, and to re-activate their 401 certification process. The Resighini Rancheria hopes that citizens of the North Coast will make their voices heard to get dams removed through the FERC process and to work for Klamath River ecological restoration that truly restores Harmony to the basin. See www.KlamathER.org for more information. Donald McCovey is the chairman of the Resighini Rancheria Tribal Council. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: imp.gif Type: image/gif Size: 43 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Jul 14 07:47:57 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 07:47:57 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard- Pot farm poison; study find marijuana grows likely responsible for mammal deaths Message-ID: http://www.times-standard.com/ci_21075742/pot-farm-poison-study-find-marijuana-grows-likely?source=most_viewed Pot farm poison; study find marijuana grows likely responsible for mammal deaths Thadeus Greenson/The Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Posted: Times-Standard.com Potent rat poisons used on large-scale illegal marijuana farms sprinkled through forest lands throughout the state may be killing off a rare forest carnivore, according to a groundbreaking study released Friday. ?This could be a game changer,? said Arcata City Councilman Mark Wheetley of the study produced by biologists from University of California Davis documenting the deaths of fishers, reclusive members of the Mustelid family that are candidates for protection under the Endangered Species Act. ?I think this whole study should serve as a wake up call for the public to understand the magnitude of the impact of what's being done to what we consider sacred, protected public lands,? continued Wheetley, who holds a day job as a senior biologist for the California Department of Fish and Game. Law enforcement and environmental officials have long complained of the environmental degradation associated with large-scale marijuana cultivation on forest lands. But the evidence has been almost exclusively anecdotal, limited to stories of diverted streams, networks of irrigation piping, piles of trash and large amounts of commercial fertilizers, insecticides and rodenticides. The study released Friday documents the scientific data behind the stories for the first time, quantifying the environmental impacts of illicit grows. Mourad Gabriel, lead author of the study and president of Blue Lake's Integral Ecology Research Center, said the study sprang from efforts to identify and study threats to California's fisher populations. Because the reclusive forest predators live in coniferous and hardwood forests -- mostly forest, park and tribal lands -- far away from urban population centers or agricultural fields, Gabriel said researchers were shocked to find they were being poisoned by toxicants at an alarming rate. The study found that almost 80 percent of fishers found dead by researchers between 2006 and 2011 had been exposed to high levels of anticoagulant rodenticide -- commonly referred to as rat poison. Because these fishers were being monitored and lived in remote areas, Gabriel said researchers were initially stumped as to what could be the potential exposure points for them. Then, Gabriel said, it clicked: Researchers realized that all these fishers' habitats overlapped with illegal marijuana farms that often used high levels of commercial pesticides and rodenticides to protect their crop. Further, the study notes, all the deaths of exposed fishers occurred between mid-April and mid-May, the optimal time period for planting marijuana outdoors, when growers are most likely to use large amounts of poison to protect their seedlings. The study describes a grow site discovered by law enforcement less than 7.5 miles from one of the fisher study areas, where large amounts of rodenticide were found sprinkled around plants and lining plastic irrigation lines, presumably to keep rats from chewing them. The anticoagulant rodenticides inhibit mammals' ability to recycle vitamin K, making their blood incapable of clotting, leading to uncontrollable internal bleeding and, ultimately, death. The second-generation poisons can be lethal with a single dose, the study notes, but can take up to a week from ingestion to be lethal. Gabriel said some of the rodenticides are treated with ?flavorizers? to make the poisons taste like bacon, cheese or peanut butter, which could also cause fishers and other animals to eat the poison directly. The most likely -- and troubling -- conclusion, however, is that the fishers were exposed through their prey: small rodents. This is a troubling notion for biologists and conservationists for several reasons. First, because fishers have the same prey groups as federally protected, threatened or endangered species like condors, spotted owls and martens, those groups may be just as likely to be impacted. Second, these poisons could wipe out a whole prey group -- wood rats, deer mice and other small scavenging rodents -- in the region, leading to the collapse or partial collapse of a food chain. Rodenticides, however, are far from the only troubling items found at illicit marijuana growing sites. In a separate paper, Gabriel and others outline what they found during a brief visit to an abandoned marijuana garden in one of their fisher project areas. In addition to pounds of rodenticide, they reported finding 575 pounds of fertilizer, including 200 pounds of fertilizers with 46 percent nitrogen levels, 24 pounds of slug bait and 32 ounces of Malathion, a potent pesticide. Such findings come as no shock to law enforcement. Humboldt County Sheriff's Office Sgt. Wayne Hansen, who currently heads the county drug task force and has spent years heading marijuana eradication efforts for the county, said the large-scale grows believed to be tied to drug trafficking organizations -- the ones most likely to be on remote public lands -- often utilize huge amounts of poisons and fertilizers, in addition to diverting streams and clear-cutting swaths of forest. Gabriel said his study simply brushes the tip of the proverbial iceberg. The next step for him and fellow researchers, Gabriel said, is to look at whether the use of rodenticides at grow sites on public lands is depleting the prey pool for fishers and other carnivores. But, Gabriel said, there are a tremendous amount of questions associated with these growing operations that warrant scientific attention, including the impacts of pesticides, fertilizers and stream diversions. The hope, Gabriel said, is that his study and the ones that follow help inform the discussion. One thing for sure is that the study is already getting loads of attention, having circulated through some professional circles before its public release Friday. Tommy Lanier, director of the White House-funded National Marijuana Initiative, said Friday he's very familiar with the fisher study and hopes it will serve to educate the public about some of the ancillary impacts of the marijuana market. To that end, Lanier said, he's trying to get Sen. Barbara Boxer, who heads the U.S. Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works, to hold a congressional hearing on illegal marijuana cultivation on public lands. He said he plans on asking Gabriel to come back and address Congress. ?The environmental impacts are huge and have to be a huge part of the discussion,? Lanier said. ?(This study) is a great example of some of the effects.? On the Web: To read the complete study, or view a video about it, visit www.news.ucdavis.edu/search/news_detail.lasso?id=10287 Thadeus Greenson can be reached at 441-0509 or tgreenson at times-standard.com. Share this article -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Jul 14 07:55:06 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 07:55:06 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com- California sunshine law suspended; local leaders say they will continue to comply Message-ID: <7D5F9995-8797-4A17-9BBF-760B744AAAB4@att.net> http://www.redding.com/news/2012/jul/13/california-sunshine-law-suspended-local-public/ California sunshine law suspended; local leaders say they will continue to comply By Jenny Espino Friday, July 13, 2012 Do you know what your city council and school board members will be discussing at next week's meeting? Technically, they no longer have to tell you. State legislators have relieved governing bodies for public agencies of the obligation to post agendas or disclose actions taken in closed session. Last month, scraping up any pennies they could find to plug the massive budget gap, the lawmakers suspended parts of the Brown Act. The suspension saves the state about $100 million in reimbursements for the cost to post proper notification, and could last three years or more. Local government leaders Friday said they plan to continue to ensure transparency. "To comply is minimal," Redding Mayor Dick Dickerson said. "This current council would continue to (follow the act). Even if it does cost money, it is part of our responsibility. "I would not advocate for any changes in the city. I think it's too important." Anderson and Shasta Lake representatives expressed similar sentiments. Agendas for Anderson City Council meetings will still be posted 72 hours ahead of meetings and reports from closed session actions will follow a familiar format, City Manager Jeff Kiser said. John Kenny, attorney for Shasta Lake, Dunsmuir, the Shasta Regional Transportation Authority and numerous other government agencies said he won't advise any of those bodies to change their practices. "The Brown Act is a minimum anyway," he said. "There's nothing that precludes them from doing more." Such reassurances didn't quell concerns from a watchdog group that say the Legislature's move strikes at the heart of California's sunshine law and now requires the public to increase its vigilance. "There are going to be a lot of agencies that are going to be committed to being transparent, and there are going to be those that have budget problems of their own," said Jim Ewert, general counsel for the California Newspaper Publishers Association. "They are not going to want to make decisions in the light." Shasta County Administrative Officer Larry Lees, who is out of the office through Aug. 17, could not be reached for comment. Meanwhile, efforts are under way to amend the state constitution over the issue. Gov. Jerry Brown has language in his tax-increase initiative on the November ballot that would write the provisions into the constitution, instead of their being subject to state mandate. Similarly, state Sen. Leland Yee, a San Francisco Democrat, wants to make the entire open meetings law a part of the constitution and is working to place a measure on the ballot. Governing boards for municipal and county governments and school districts prepare and post agendas for public meetings and report decisions from closed sessions. The state reimburses these agencies for their costs, though it has fallen behind in the past two years. Dickerson said he was unaware the state covered the costs for tasks he sees as basic and minimal. "It costs nothing for me to come out of closed session and report any actions taken," he said. City Manager Kurt Starman, in an email Friday, stressed Redding would continue to adhere to the state law. "It is essential for the public to receive timely information about local government meetings in order to ensure meaningful public participation and input," he said. Reporter Sean Longoria contributed to this report. ? 2012 Scripps Newspaper Group ? Online -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: header_print.gif Type: image/gif Size: 5276 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sing_logo.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1020 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Jul 14 07:58:00 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 07:58:00 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com-Flat Fire in Trinity County grows to 1, 066 acres and 30 percent containment Message-ID: <76D68AB6-1739-45C7-AE99-FDFBB5E79895@att.net> http://www.redding.com/news/2012/jul/13/flat-fire-in-trinity-county-grows-to-1066-acres/ Flat Fire in Trinity County grows to 1,066 acres and 30 percent containment By Sean Longoria, Joe Szydlowski Friday, July 13, 2012 The Flat Fire, burning 30 miles west of Weaverville in Trinity County, had charred 1,066 acres of forest and was 30 percent contained as of 7 p.m. Friday, Shasta-Trinity National Forest officials said. Crews don't expect to achieve full containment until July 21. Meanwhile, crews in the Mendocino National Forest continue to battle the Mill Fire, which had grown to more than 23,000 acres Friday. That blaze was 50 percent contained, though officials don't expect full containment until next week. The Flat Fire, which started Wednesday at the Hayden Flat campground inside Shasta-Trinity National Forest, has spread north and east along the north side of Highway 299. The fire has not jumped Highway 299, nor has it jumped French Creek, which firefighters feared would allow it to spread even more. "At this point I don't see that as a likely concern," said Jim Mackensen, public information officer for NorCal Team One, which is coordinating firefighting efforts. Nearly 50 structures are threatened, though there are no evacuations orders. Mackensen said buildings in Del Loma and at other points on Highway 299 have protection surrounding them. The fire spread at a moderate rate Friday after climbing to 640 acres Thursday night. "We didn't even get winds coming up the canyons like we normally do," he said. "Mother Nature's been giving us a hand." The fire is around 30 percent contained, mainly near Highway 299, he said. Dr. Ken Cutler, Trinity County's health officer, issued an alert Friday, advising people to limit outdoor activity because of wildfire smoke. Residents also shouldn't operate fans or air conditioners if they're bringing in smoke from outside, according to the advisory. Some 159 firefighters had battled the blaze Thursday night, but that was increased to about 395 Friday, Mackensen said. The fire has cost around $250,000 as of 9:15 p.m. Friday, although Mackensen said the cost is still rising. On Wednesday evening, Highway 299 was closed because of the nearby wildfire. However, the highway has since come under one-way traffic control, said Denise Yergenson, a spokeswoman for the California Department of Transportation. Delays are expected to be about 30 minutes on Highway 299, Yergenson said. Go to dot.ca.gov/dist2/for updates on road closures in the area. Mackensen said the highway could face sporadic closures due to mopping-up efforts and falling debris, such as trees and boulders, that's no longer held in place by vegetation. "Things can come down at any time," he said. The fire had grown to about 500 acres by 9 a.m. Thursday. The blaze was about 300 acres as of late Wednesday night. One person suffered minor injuries Wednesday. Steep terrain is confounding firefighting efforts, according to a Forest Service website. South of Trinity County, the Mill Fire had consumed around 36 square miles of the Mendocino National Forest and destroyed five outbuildings. Three people suffered injuries, according to The Associated Press. All roads and trails had been closed in the Stonyford area. Evacuations were still in effect for Fouts Springs, Bonnie View and Board Camp Springs. More than 1,500 people were battling that blaze, which broke out a week ago. It's so far cost $6.1 million damage and suppression, officials said. Firefighters have seen 40-foot flames as the blaze pushes uphill, according to the Forest Service. The northern side of the fire has been mopped up, though firefighters are patrolling it. More than 400 structures are threatened, mostly in Century Ranch. That community lies to the south of the East Park Reservoir, about 3 miles from the Mill Fire's eastern flank. Drift smoke from the Mill Fire has surrounded Shasta County for about the past week, slightly lowering air quality in the area. Reporter Sean Longoria contributed to this report. ? 2012 Scripps Newspaper Group ? Online -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: header_print.gif Type: image/gif Size: 5276 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sing_logo.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1020 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Jul 16 10:10:14 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 10:10:14 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] NOAA Report: Two West Coast Fish Stocks Overfished, 171 Harvested At Sustainable Rate References: <004e01cd6373$8c48c2e0$a4da48a0$@sisqtel.net> Message-ID: <0C9B5A0B-75BF-4101-9F39-73E663F29DAC@att.net> From: Sari Sommarstrom [mailto:sari at sisqtel.net] Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 9:53 AM To: Trinity River e-news (env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us ) Subject: NOAA Report: Two West Coast Fish Stocks Overfished, 171 Harvested At Sustainable Rate THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN: Weekly Fish and Wildlife News July 13, 2012 Issue No. 628 NOAA Report: Two West Coast Fish Stocks Overfished, 171 Harvested At Sustainable Rate According to a feature article posted by NOAA Fisheries on its Northwest Fisheries Science Center web site, only two of the 173 West Coast fish stocks -- Pacific bigeye tuna and Pacific bluefin tuna -- are now subject to overfishing, meaning that 171 stocks currently are harvested at a sustainable rate. However, five stocks are classified as overfished, which means that the population?s abundance is too low, or below a prescribed threshold, according to NOAA Fisheries 15th Annual Report to Congress on the Status of U.S. Fisheries. The report was submitted in May. Those stocks include Canary rockfish, cowcod, Pacific ocean perch, yelloweye rockfish, and chinook salmon from the California Central Valley. Though these stocks are overfished, rebuilding plans are in place to restore the populations to healthy levels. Two stocks, Queets River coho salmon and petrale sole, identified as overfished in 2010, were removed from the list in 2011 because the populations are rebounding. In fact, Queets River coho salmon, as well as Western Strait of Juan de Fuca coho salmon, widow rockfish, and Klamath River chinook salmon, are fully rebuilt. The report documents the journey toward rebuilding stocks to healthy, sustainable levels. It provides a ?snap-shot? of where our fisheries stood at the end of 2011. Of the 214 stocks evaluated, 173 were on the West Coast and are managed jointly by NOAA Fisheries and the Pacific Fishery Management Council. The dynamic between science and management ensures our fisheries are sustainable. West Coast fisheries, whether for commercial sale or recreation, play a major role in the economy, the article says. In 2010, the value of fish stocks commercially landed under federal fishery management plans (Pacific groundfish, salmon, and coastal pelagic species) was $242 million. In 2010, 704,000 marine recreational anglers each took an average of 2.8 fishing trips off the West Coast-fishing for species such as salmon, black rockfish, albacore tuna, lingcod, and Pacific halibut. Fish processors, restaurants, grocery stores, sellers of fishing tackle, fuel, and ice, and many other businesses are involved in the fishing and seafood supply chain, generating jobs and income. In 2009, West Coast Federal fisheries, along with non-Federal fisheries such as those for shrimp, oysters, and crab, generated approximately $2 billion in income and 60,000 jobs on the West Coast. A number of factors contribute to the health of our fisheries and to the abundance of particular fish stocks in addition to fisheries management, the article says. These factors include human-induced habitat degradation and environmental change, such as climate change, ocean acidification, and land-based pollution. They also include factors such as predation, disease, and natural population cycles. Fisheries management requires a robust understanding of what science tells us about the status of each stock and about the various human and environmental factors that may influence a stock?s health. NOAA Fisheries works with the Pacific Fishery Management Council to balance all of these considerations and ensure that we all benefit from the bounty of this resource. To view the full Status of the Stocks 2011 Report to Congress, visit: http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/stories/2012/05/docs/status_of_stocks_2011_report.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trinityjosh at gmail.com Mon Jul 16 16:21:48 2012 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 16:21:48 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard- Pot farm poison; study find marijuana grows likely responsible for mammal deaths In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just another reason that cannabis should be decriminalized. Prohibition does not work. It costs US over $42 billion a year in the War on Drugs for a harmless herb that could potentially be spent elsewhere for social investment. Yet the harm caused by the agencies against "drug-users", society, lives, and our neighbors in Mexico goes beyond the money. Just tack this on to the cumulative cost. Maybe if more of America toked up we wouldn't be stuck on stupid or going to war for corporations. Though I highly recommend everyone read "God's Middle Finger: Into the lawless heart of the Sierra Madre" to get an idea of why they are here and in Mexico growing. http://www.amazon.com/Gods-Middle-Finger-Lawless-Sierra/dp/1416534407 http://www.alternet.org/drugs/64465/ On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 7:47 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > > http://www.times-standard.com/ci_21075742/pot-farm-poison-study-find-marijuana-grows-likely?source=most_viewed > > Pot farm poison; study find marijuana grows likely responsible for mammal > deaths > Thadeus Greenson/The Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard > Posted: > Times-Standard.com > > Potent rat poisons used on large-scale illegal marijuana farms sprinkled > through forest lands throughout the state may be killing off a rare forest > carnivore, according to a groundbreaking study released Friday. > > ?This could be a game changer,? said Arcata City Councilman Mark Wheetley > of the study produced by biologists from University of California Davis > documenting the deaths of fishers, reclusive members of the Mustelid family > that are candidates for protection under the Endangered Species Act. > > ?I think this whole study should serve as a wake up call for the public to > understand the magnitude of the impact of what's being done to what we > consider sacred, protected public lands,? continued Wheetley, who holds a > day job as a senior biologist for the California Department of Fish and > Game. > > Law enforcement and environmental officials have long complained of the > environmental degradation associated with large-scale marijuana cultivation > on forest lands. But the evidence has been almost exclusively anecdotal, > limited to stories of diverted streams, networks of irrigation piping, > piles of trash and large amounts of commercial fertilizers, insecticides > and rodenticides. > > The study released Friday documents the scientific data behind the stories > for the first time, quantifying the environmental impacts of illicit grows. > > Mourad Gabriel, lead author of the study and president of Blue Lake's > Integral Ecology Research Center, said the study sprang from efforts to > identify and study threats to California's fisher populations. Because the > reclusive forest predators live in coniferous and hardwood forests -- > mostly forest, park and tribal lands -- far away from urban population > centers or agricultural fields, Gabriel said researchers were shocked to > find they were being poisoned by toxicants at an alarming rate. > > The study found that almost 80 percent of fishers found dead by > researchers between 2006 and 2011 had been exposed to high levels of > anticoagulant rodenticide -- commonly referred to as rat poison. Because > these fishers were being monitored and lived in remote areas, Gabriel said > researchers were initially stumped as to what could be the potential > exposure points for them. > > Then, Gabriel said, it clicked: Researchers realized that all these > fishers' habitats overlapped with illegal marijuana farms that often used > high levels of commercial pesticides and rodenticides to protect their > crop. Further, the study notes, all the deaths of exposed fishers occurred > between mid-April and mid-May, the optimal time period for planting > marijuana outdoors, when growers are most likely to use large amounts of > poison to protect their seedlings. > > The study describes a grow site discovered by law enforcement less than > 7.5 miles from one of the fisher study areas, where large amounts of > rodenticide were found sprinkled around plants and lining plastic > irrigation lines, presumably to keep rats from chewing them. > > The anticoagulant rodenticides inhibit mammals' ability to recycle vitamin > K, making their blood incapable of clotting, leading to uncontrollable > internal bleeding and, ultimately, death. The second-generation poisons can > be lethal with a single dose, the study notes, but can take up to a week > from ingestion to be lethal. > > Gabriel said some of the rodenticides are treated with ?flavorizers? to > make the poisons taste like bacon, cheese or peanut butter, which could > also cause fishers and other animals to eat the poison directly. The most > likely -- and troubling -- conclusion, however, is that the fishers were > exposed through their prey: small rodents. > > This is a troubling notion for biologists and conservationists for several > reasons. First, because fishers have the same prey groups as federally > protected, threatened or endangered species like condors, spotted owls and > martens, those groups may be just as likely to be impacted. Second, these > poisons could wipe out a whole prey group -- wood rats, deer mice and other > small scavenging rodents -- in the region, leading to the collapse or > partial collapse of a food chain. > > Rodenticides, however, are far from the only troubling items found at > illicit marijuana growing sites. In a separate paper, Gabriel and others > outline what they found during a brief visit to an abandoned marijuana > garden in one of their fisher project areas. In addition to pounds of > rodenticide, they reported finding 575 pounds of fertilizer, including 200 > pounds of fertilizers with 46 percent nitrogen levels, 24 pounds of slug > bait and 32 ounces of Malathion, a potent pesticide. > > Such findings come as no shock to law enforcement. > > Humboldt County Sheriff's Office Sgt. Wayne Hansen, who currently heads > the county drug task force and has spent years heading marijuana > eradication efforts for the county, said the large-scale grows believed to > be tied to drug trafficking organizations -- the ones most likely to be on > remote public lands -- often utilize huge amounts of poisons and > fertilizers, in addition to diverting streams and clear-cutting swaths of > forest. > > Gabriel said his study simply brushes the tip of the proverbial iceberg. > The next step for him and fellow researchers, Gabriel said, is to look at > whether the use of rodenticides at grow sites on public lands is depleting > the prey pool for fishers and other carnivores. But, Gabriel said, there > are a tremendous amount of questions associated with these growing > operations that warrant scientific attention, including the impacts of > pesticides, fertilizers and stream diversions. The hope, Gabriel said, is > that his study and the ones that follow help inform the discussion. > > One thing for sure is that the study is already getting loads of > attention, having circulated through some professional circles before its > public release Friday. > > Tommy Lanier, director of the White House-funded National Marijuana > Initiative, said Friday he's very familiar with the fisher study and hopes > it will serve to educate the public about some of the ancillary impacts of > the marijuana market. To that end, Lanier said, he's trying to get Sen. > Barbara Boxer, who heads the U.S. Senate Committee on the Environment and > Public Works, to hold a congressional hearing on illegal marijuana > cultivation on public lands. He said he plans on asking Gabriel to come > back and address Congress. > > ?The environmental impacts are huge and have to be a huge part of the > discussion,? Lanier said. ?(This study) is a great example of some of the > effects.? > > On the Web: > > To read the complete study, or view a video about it, visit > www.news.ucdavis.edu/search/news_detail.lasso?id=10287 > > Thadeus Greenson can be reached at 441-0509 or > tgreenson at times-standard.com. > Share this article**** > > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jul 17 13:31:07 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 13:31:07 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Draft Environ. Docs for Use of Trinity Reservoir Water to Supplement Lower Klamath River Flows References: <40f22f9cd82b47caa4d0fa9cb95b9db4@usbr.gov> Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: From: "Janet Sierzputowski" Date: July 17, 2012 1:06:15 PM PDT To: tstokely at att.net Subject: Draft Environ. Docs for Use of Trinity Reservoir Water to Supplement Lower Klamath River Flows Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, CA MP-12-121 Media Contact: Pete Lucero, 916-978-5100, plucero at usbr.gov For Release On: July 17, 2012 Reclamation Releases Draft Environmental Documents for Use of Trinity Reservoir Water to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klamath River in 2012 REDDING, Calif. ? The Bureau of Reclamation has released the Draft Environmental Assessment and Draft Finding of No Significant Impact (EA/FONSI) to use Trinity Reservoir-stored water to supplement flows in the Lower Klamath River to help protect returning adult salmon from a disease outbreak and mortality during late-summer 2012. Projections of a near record-breaking run of adult fall Chinook salmon to the Klamath River Basin have prompted requests to supplement flows to the Lower Klamath River between August 15 and September 21. Reclamation estimates up to 92,000 acre-feet of water could be used to supplement flows in the Lower Klamath River. Of this total, approximately 48,000 acre-feet could be used as a precautionary increase in flows to the Lower Klamath River, and up to 44,000 acre-feet could be used if an emergency situation were to occur. Any use of the emergency water would be informed by real-time environmental and biological monitoring by federal, state and tribal biologists. The EA/FONSI were prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and are available at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=10230. If you encounter problems accessing the documents online, please call 916-978-5100 or email mppublicaffairs at usbr.gov. Please email comments by close of business Friday, July 27, 2012, to Don Reck at dreck at usbr.gov. Comments may also be mailed to Mr. Reck at Bureau of Reclamation, Northern California Area Office, 16349 Shasta Dam Blvd., Shasta Lake, CA 96019, or faxed to 530-276-2005. For additional information or to request a copy of the Draft EA/FONSI, please contact Mr. Reck at 530-275-1554. The Draft EA/FONSI may also be viewed at Reclamation's Northern California Area Office at the above address. # # # Reclamation is the largest wholesale water supplier and the second largest producer of hydroelectric power in the United States, with operations and facilities in the 17 Western States. Its facilities also provide substantial flood control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. Visit our website at www.usbr.gov. If you would rather not receive future communications from Bureau of Reclamation, let us know by clicking here. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver Federal Center, Alameda & Kipling Street PO Box 25007, Denver, CO 80225 United States -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jul 18 08:21:48 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 08:21:48 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard-Plan to release more water from Trinity dam: officials hope to avoid fish kill Message-ID: <707D8191-5C97-403A-8ADF-B68A03E80068@att.net> http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_21100453/plan-release-more-water-from-trinity-dam-officials Plan to release more water from Trinity dam; officials hope to avoid fish kill Grant Scott-Goforth/The Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Posted: Times-Standard.com A plan has been drafted to increase water flow from the Trinity River dam in order to prevent a repeat of the massive fish kill on the Klamath and Trinity rivers that occurred in 2002. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation issued a draft environmental assessment and a draft finding of no significant impact suggesting that it allocate 48,000 acre feet of water from the Trinity Reservoir beginning Aug. 15, if needed. The bureau would also use up to 44,000 additional acre feet of water if signs of an eminent disease outbreak are observed, according to the draft report. The bureau is seeking public comment on the draft reports, but Regina Chichizola, communications coordinator for the Hoopa Valley Tribe and founder of the Klamath Riverkeeper group, said an agreement with the tribe gives the bureau the ability to release extra water beginning Aug. 15. ?We are really excited the (Bureau of Reclamation) has decided to release water to save the Klamath salmon,? Chichizola said. ?If the (Bureau of Reclamation) wants to release water for the salmon they will do it.? At the same time, Chichizola said the tribe was disappointed that the bureau had not allocated water from reservoirs on the Klamath branch. She said she is afraid that the fish that branch off up the Trinity system will survive, while those that continue up the Klamath will not. Bureau of Reclamation spokesman Pete Lucero said the draft plan does not allocate any more water from the Klamath system. The Trinity River is the Klamath's largest tributary, and water is often diverted from the river to farmers and residents of Southern California. In 2002, the diversion -- in conjunction with a large run of fish -- led to a massive fish kill on the Klamath. Disease was the primary cause of death, with warm temperatures, low water volumes, and high fish density likely contributing to the epidemic, according to the Bureau of Reclamation draft report. Similar conditions exist this year. A record number of adult salmon -- estimated at more than 380,000 by the Pacific Fishery Management Council -- are anticipated to return to the Klamath this fall. That's three times the average run over the last 30 years. In addition, a relatively dry winter season could mean low, warm -- and crowded -- rivers for fish. Tom Stokely, a water policy analyst for the California Water Impact Network, said the Trinity Dam provides a source of cold water. ?It really is a tremendous tool that's available to the bureau, the various fisheries agencies and the tribe,? Stokely said. ?This is clearly an effective way of preventing the kind of poor conditions in the habitat that led to the fish kill in 2002.? Lucero said the Bureau of Reclamation is accepting public comment until July 27. ?We should be able to hit the Aug. 15 date, if necessary,? Lucero said. He said the decision will be influenced by public comment and considerations of impacts down the line. ?I don't think, in California, there's any water that doesn't have two to three claims on it,? Lucero said. ?Every drop of water we have in the system is necessary if we should have continued dry spells.? Stokely said his group supports the planned release of water. ?In a sense, it relies on the goodwill of the groups that have an interest in Trinity River water,? Stokely said. Info Box: Trinity River water The Bureau of Reclamation is asking for public comment on its draft environmental assessment and draft finding of no significant impact reports. The documents can be viewed online at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=10230 or viewed at the Bureau of Reclamation, Northern California Area Office, 16349 Shasta Dam Blvd., Shasta Lake, Calif. Comments will be accepted until the close of business July 27, and can be submitted to Don Reck via email at dreck at usbr.gov, mailed to Bureau of Reclamation, Northern California Area Office, 16349 Shasta Dam Blvd., Shasta Lake, CA, 96019, or faxed to 530-276-2005. Grant Scott-Goforth can be reached at 441-0514 or gscott-goforth at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Jul 22 10:40:40 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 10:40:40 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com- Curtis Knight:Klamath agreements- not dead yet Message-ID: <54985D51-7A1C-40B8-AFD6-73FDA25C0498@att.net> http://www.redding.com/news/2012/jul/22/curtis-knight-klamath-agreements-151-not-dead/ Curtis Knight: Klamath agreements ? not dead yet Staff Reports Sunday, July 22, 2012 On Tuesday, the State Water Resources Control Board voted 5-0 to continue PacifiCorp's water quality certificate abeyance, making it clear the rush to declare the Klamath River's settlement agreements dead is wholly premature. Especially given the odd bedfellows the call for a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission solution has created. The Hoopa Tribe wanted the abeyance lifted and FERC to re-engage so the dams would come down faster. Meanwhile, Siskiyou County wanted the abeyance lifted and FERC involved because they believe it's the best way to save the dams. Siskiyou County is playing a dangerous game. Their legal argument for keeping the dams has been shot full of holes, and one wonders how much more money they're willing to spend defending a position that effectively removes the county from discussions while costing its citizens jobs and potentially higher electrical rates. Siskiyou County is trying to usher the dam relicensing process toward the worst possible conclusion. Under a FERC decommissioning the county would receive nothing, the lawsuits over water and restoration would continue and the dams may eventually come out anyway because removing them is less expensive than retrofitting them. And if the county gets its wish and the dams stay in, the vast majority of Siskiyou County ratepayers who are PacifiCorp customers will end up paying more for electricity, according to the company and the California Public Utilities Commission. Under the settlement agreement PacifiCorp ratepayers' obligations are capped at $200 million. Absent the agreements ratepayers costs are certain to go up as all other alternatives are more expensive for PacifiCorp and the ratepayers. That would be a terrible deal for Siskiyou County, especially considering the estimated 4,600 jobs that would be generated by the settlement agreements. Siskiyou County should rethink the impact their head-in-the-sand approach will have on county residents (like landowners around Copco Lake, who have been especially poorly represented) and instead engage with the process to ensure county residents are better represented. As for the Hoopa Tribe's position, we understand the desire to remove the dams quickly, but a return to the clumsy, divisive FERC process guarantees a long and contentious path to dam removal ? if dam removal at all. FERC has never ordered dam removal and setting the legal precedent for them to do so could take decades. The settlement agreements represent the quickest path to dam removal, clean water, healthy fish returns and community health in the Klamath Basin. Fixing problems before they blossom into full-blown disasters ? like the 2002 fish kill or the 2001 irrigation water shutoff ? is always cheaper than repairing them after the fact; eliminating the cyclical emergency responses ? and their attendant, unanticipated costs ? is a key goal of the settlement agreements. It's true the two bills that would fully implement the settlement agreements will likely not be acted on this year, but in a wildly partisan Congress deadlocked over even the tiniest issues, the only things that made any progress at all were bile and rancor. Meanwhile, the implementation of the settlement agreements continues. PacifiCorp is investing in meaningful interim measures to improve habitat, water quality and flows. The dam removal trust account sits at $35 million and is growing by over $1 million per month. All these benefits go away if PacifiCorp and settlement parties are forced back to the FERC process. The settlement agreements represent a solution to the Klamath Basin's water and fish problems negotiated by citizens and stakeholders with skin in the game, not a distant, dysfunctional Congress or a faceless bureaucracy. Abandoning the settlements because of the foolish actions ? or inaction in this case ? of a few politicians isn't just pointless; it's also a surrender to the lack of progress, fish kills, irrigation water shutdowns, lawsuits and fighting of the past. Curtis Knight is the conservation director for California Trout. He lives in Mount Shasta. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sing_logo.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1020 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Jul 22 10:47:21 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 10:47:21 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] AP-California, federal officials about to reveal delta water plans Message-ID: <40787E57-5580-4BFE-9207-A5EB649C23D1@att.net> This includes water from the Trinity River... http://www.redding.com/news/2012/jul/22/california-federal-officials-about-reveal-water-pl/ California, federal officials about to reveal delta water plans GOSIA WOZNIACKA/Associated Press Sunday, July 22, 2012 FRESNO (AP) ? Gov. Jerry Brown is set to reignite the state's water wars when he makes the long-awaited announcement next week about plans to build a massive twin tunnel system to carry water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to farmland and cities. Already the $23.7 billion proposal is facing heavy criticism. Opponents say the tunnels will suck more water from the already fragile delta, further harming its fisheries, increasing costs for water users and devastating the area's agricultural-based economy by destroying water quality. Last week, 11 members of Congress from the area sent a letter to the governor and federal Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, urging them to conduct a statewide analysis before proceeding with the plan. They questioned the thoroughness of a report done for the state that found the project's benefits outweigh the costs. Supporters say the project is the long-overdue answer to pleas for a steady water supply to adequately supply farmers and municipalities south of the delta. They also claim the project's location actually will help the region's endangered fish species, especially the salmon and smelt. State and federal officials acknowledge the plan has holes, but believe they will be able to address concerns as the project is built over the next 10 to 15 years. "We decided to embrace scientific uncertainty regarding the facility's operation, water flows, habitat restoration and the response of fish," said Karla Nemeth, program manager for the plan at the California Natural Resources Agency. Precisely how much water is diverted will depend on what is determined by the scientific studies that will accompany construction, she said. "Ultimately what passes muster is what will work for the fish," Nemeth said. Environmental groups said it's unacceptable to proceed with a project that has so many unanswered questions. "We need to know upfront what the impacts of the project are and how they are going to mitigate these impacts or to actually improve conditions for fish," said Jim Metropulos, an advocate at Sierra Club California. The delta, an inland estuary where hundreds of species live, is the hub of California's water delivery system. Both the state and federal governments run massive pumps on the south end that siphon drinking and irrigation water to more than 25 million Californians and to farms that produce half the nation's fruits and vegetables. But the system doesn't provide all the water that's needed and state officials have for decades tried to come up with a plan to provide a better supply. Voters rejected a canal plan in 1982 and various other ideas were bandied about until the tunnel project emerged. The broad outline for the tunnels is known, but Brown and Salazar are expected to provide greater detail when they make their announcement Wednesday. The tunnels would siphon water using three intakes on the Sacramento River below Freeport, carry it some 60 miles underground to pumping facilities near Tracy, and then use existing canals to move it to farms in the Central Valley and cities such as Los Angeles and San Diego. The system would be capable of diverting 67,500 gallons of water per second, a pace that would fill six Olympic-sized swimming pools every minute. The tunnels would be sized to handle even more water and the extra space would allow the water to move by force of gravity, saving on costs. The project also includes plans for more than 100,000 acres of floodplain and tidal marsh habitat restoration. Water users would pay for the tunnels and related infrastructure, while taxpayers would finance the restoration portion. A key funding mechanism is an $11 billion water bond that will go before voters in 2014. Balancing the needs of water users against preservation of the ecosystem is the heart of the project and the center of the controversy. The decline of once-abundant fish species like salmon and smelt has triggered regulations to protect them, and court decisions have curtailed water deliveries in recent years. Farmers in the Central Valley say the restrictions have forced them to fallow productive land. But Bill Jennings, an executive committee member of Restore the Delta, a coalition of farming, urban and environmental groups, said the tunnel project could make things worse for delta farmers. They now irrigate with water that is cleansed as it flows through the delta. If the tunnel project moves ahead, they will use water that has more salts and toxins that could kill or damage crops. Recreational and commercial fisheries would be hard hit because less water will make it through the river, he said. Boating, swimming and water skiing also would suffer. "The delta is in a biological meltdown. Taking more water won't restore an ecosystem that's already hemorrhaging from lack of flows," Jennings said. "This plan is not a path to restoration; it's a death sentence for one of the world's greatest estuaries." But other groups said the project has merit ? if it is run as efficiently as promised. "There's ample reason to believe that we can divert the same amount of water out of a new system with far less environmental impacts," said John Cain, director of conservation at the nonprofit American Rivers. Taking water from the north of the delta instead of the south would greatly benefit the estuary, Cain said. In the south, where in-flows are low, pumps entrain and kill fish and their food resources. The huge tunnel project could actually prove more beneficial to fish. "It's the big gulp, little sip theory," he said. "A large facility would be able fill up and take a large gulp during wet periods, while taking less during dry periods." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sing_logo.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1020 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Jul 22 10:44:35 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 10:44:35 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Bacher: Feds plan to release Trinity water to prevent Klamath fish kill References: <2D0F2F14-D142-42C7-A53C-F0153DBEE539@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: From: Dan Bacher Date: July 19, 2012 6:44:20 PM PDT Subject: Feds plan to release Trinity water to prevent Klamath fish kill http://blogs.alternet.org/danbacher/2012/07/19/feds-plan-to-release-trinity-water-to-prevent-klamath-fish-kill/ Over 100 members of the Hoopa Valley and Resighini Tribes and their allies rallied for clean water on the Klamath in Sacramento on July 17. Photo by Dan Bacher. 800_img_7563.jpg original image ( 3456x2304) Feds plan to release Trinity water to prevent Klamath fish kill by Dan Bacher In September 2002, I received a call from fishing guide Dan Carter that a massive fish kill was taking place on the lower Klamath River. He soon turned the phone over to Walt Lara, Yurok Tribal Elder, who emphasized the scope of the disaster unfolding at the time on the Lower Klamath. "The fish kill is a lot worse than everybody thinks," said Walt Lara, then the Requa representative to the Yurok Tribal Council. "It's a lot larger than anything I've seen reported on the TV news or in the newspapers." ?The whole chinook run will be impacted, probably by 85 to 95 percent. And the fish are dying as we speak. They're swimming around in circles. They bump up against your legs when you're standing in the water. These are beautiful, chrome-bright fish that are dying, not fish that are already spawned out,? the shaken Lara told me. An estimated 68,000 fish perished in the largest kill of adult salmon in U.S. history. Ten years later, the potential for another fish kill looms over the Klamath River. Biologists are forecasting four times more salmon than last year ? and an astounding 15 times more than in 2006. The ocean salmon population is estimated to be 1.6 million adult Klamath River fall Chinook, compared to last year's forecast of 371,100. Scientists forecast a record 380,000 Chinook salmon will return to the Klamath River this year. That is 250 percent more Klamath salmon than 2002, the year the fish kill occurred. To prevent a fish kill from taking place again, the Hoopa Valley Indian Tribe and Humboldt County this spring requested that the Bureau of Reclamation release 50,000 acre feet of water, water the county has the right to, down the Klamath. The Bureau of Reclamation rejected this request, but on Tuesday, July 17, they released a draft plan to release Trinity River water down the Klamath to forestall another fish kill from taking place this fall. The Bureau said it released the ?Draft Environmental Assessment and Draft Finding of No Significant Impact (EA/FONSI)" to use Trinity Reservoir-stored water to supplement flows in the lower Klamath River to "help protect returning adult salmon from a disease outbreak and mortality during late-summer 2012.? ?Projections of a near record-breaking run of adult fall Chinook salmon to the Klamath River Basin have prompted requests to supplement flows to the Lower Klamath River between August 15 and September 21,? said Pete Lucero, Bureau spokesman. ?Reclamation estimates up to 92,000 acre-feet of water could be used to supplement flows in the Lower Klamath River,? said Lucero. ?Of this total, approximately 48,000 acre-feet could be used as a precautionary increase in flows to the Lower Klamath River, and up to 44,000 acre-feet could be used if an emergency situation were to occur.? He noted that any use of the emergency water would be informed by "real-time" environmental and biological monitoring by federal, state and tribal biologists. Tribes, environmentalists encouraged by plan Tribal representatives are encouraged that the Bureau is releasing flows down the Trinity, but continue to urge the Bureau?s Klamath division to release the 50,000 cfs. down the Klamath. ?We are really excited that the Bureau has decided to put extra flow down the Trinity for Klamath salmon,? said Regina Chichizola, Communications Director for the Hoopa Valley Tribe. ?But we also would like the Klamath BOR to release water down the Klamath River.? ?We?re glad that the Bureau will protect the migrating salmon up to the mouth of the Trinity,? she noted. ?However, any salmon that will go past the Trinity will have to deal with low, warm flows from Iron Gate Dan. We want to make sure that all of the salmon are protected.? Tom Stokely, water policy analyst for the California Water Impact Network, applauded the Bureau?s plan to release Trinity water. ?Clearly the unprecedented large run of Klamath-Trinity fall chinook is a combination of vastly improved conditions for salmon as a result of higher Trinity River flows since 2001 as well as good ocean conditions,? said Stokely. ?The vast cold water pool in Trinity Lake is the best tool to prevent a repeat of the disastrous 2002 Lower Klamath fish kill and it's been done before,? he stated. It's a rare example of the Bureau of Reclamation doing the right thing for salmon and steelhead fisheries in terms of providing water necessary for their survival.? In a recent letter to Humboldt County and the Hoopa Valley Tribe, the BOR told the County and the Tribe that it would not let Humboldt County draw on the County?s own water right to 50,000 acre-feet of CVP water in Trinity Lake to protect the fish this year. ?I acknowledge that Humboldt County and the Hoopa Valley Tribe have made repeated requests to the Department of Interior regarding administering the 1959 contract for the release of 50,000 acre feet of water annually from the Trinity River,? said Michael L. Connor, Commissioner. ?I regret that we have thus far been unable to provide you our response, but it remains under discussion at the highest levels of the Department.? When Central Valley agribusiness interests came for the Trinity River?s water in 1955, Humboldt County saw the writing on the wall. In a show of vision for the time, the County fought the big water interests and won an entitlement to 50,000 acre feet of water from the Trinity River Division, according to a statement from the Hoopa Valley Tribe. ?Humboldt County secured this water on top of the language in the 1955 bill that conditioned the diversion of Trinity River water with the need to first protect fish and wildlife,? stated Ryan Sundberg, Humboldt County Board of Supervisor. ?Yet this language, and our water right, were never respected, and soon 90% of the Trinity was going to the Central Valley. This took a huge toll on our fish runs, and our economy.? ?I?m happy that they?re releasing the water to hopefully avoid another fish kill,? said Sundberg. ?Now it?s our job to make sure the water is released. We?re still pushing for the determination of Humboldt County having no less than 50,000 acre feet of water. Our position is that that this water is on top of the water than the current river is coming down the river.? Regarding Humboldt County?s water, Leaf Hillman, Director of Natural Resources for the Karuk Tribe, said, ?It?s absolutely a no-brainer that Humboldt County is entitled to the water. They should get it and should have been getting it ? it?s long overdue.? "We support the additional flows down the Trinity and have to keep a close eye on river conditions," said Troy Fletcher, Yurok Tribe policy analyst. "We have a long time position of supporting the 50,000 acre feet of water requested by Humboldt County." Fletcher emphasized that the Tribe strongly supports the technical efforts of the Fish Response Team to stop a fish kill from taking place. "We, more than anybody else, have a heightened responsibility to protect the fish in the Klamath, since the fish kill took place in the lower river on the Yurok Reservation," said Fletcher. Record of Decision restored Trinity flows The record run expected on the Trinity and Klamath River this year is due to a number of factors, led by higher flows down the Trinity mandated under the historic Record of Decision and improved ocean conditions. Massive diversions to irrigate drainage-impaired land on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley and provide water to power users continued until 2000 when the Hoopa Tribe, supported by legislation, a 14 year flow study, and multiple court rulings won back 47% of the Trinity?s flows. ?The 2000 Record of Decision restored flows to the river and funded a massive, scientifically based restoration project on the Trinity," stated Hoopa Valley Tribal Chairman Leonard Masten, Jr. ?Unfortunately the decision was still being litigated when the 2002 Klamath fish kill happened." The Trinity Management Council, who recently released a study calling for much higher fall flows in the Klamath -Trinity River to protect Klamath salmon, the Pacific Fisheries Management Council, several congressmen, sportfishing groups, and water managers in California have been supportive of the requests for more water down the Klamath to prevent a fish kill this fall. ?For the Hoopa Tribe the salmon are no less important to us then the air we breathe,? said Masten. ?We are as committed now to the recovery of the Klamath and Trinity salmon as we ever were, and we will support anyone working to find water for their recovery.? The draft documents (EA/FONSI) were prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and are available at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=10230. If you encounter problems accessing the documents online, please call 916-978-5100 or email mppublicaffairs [at] usbr.gov. Please email comments by close of business Friday, July 27, 2012, to Don Reck at dreck [at] usbr.gov. Comments may also be mailed to Mr. Reck at Bureau of Reclamation, Northern California Area Office, 16349 Shasta Dam Blvd., Shasta Lake, CA 96019, or faxed to 530-276-2005. For additional information or to request a copy of the Draft EA/FONSI, please contact Mr. Reck at 530-275-1554. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_img_7563.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 363124 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jul 25 17:15:27 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 17:15:27 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- BOR plans increased flows on Trinity River Message-ID: <4BECEB8E-EE2B-427D-A931-C2B27A15327D@att.net> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_78a0a716-d601-11e1-8a29-001a4bcf6878.html BOR plans increased flows on Trinity River By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 6:15 am The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has plans to boost flows to the Trinity River in the late summer -- beyond what had been scheduled -- to reduce chances of a fish die-off in the lower Klamath River. The agency recently released a draft environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact for the plan to release an additional 48,000 to 92,000 acre-feet of water to the river from Aug. 15 to late September. The comment period on the documents ends Friday. The Trinity River is the main tributary to the Klamath, which in September 2002 saw a die-off of fall chinook salmon due to disease resulting from overcrowding during the large fish run, warm water, and low water velocities and volumes. Different estimates have been given for the number of fish that died prior to spawning in 2002, many of them bound for the Trinity River. At Reclamation, "our official estimate is 34,000," said Reclamation spokesman Pete Lucero. Some other estimates were almost twice that much. The water year ends Sept. 30, so the additional release to the river would not affect Central Valley Project water deliveries for 2012, Reclamation said. The higher release could affect carryover storage at Trinity reservoir and cold water available for fish in 2013. "We don't know for sure if we're going to have an effect on future years until we know what our hydrology's going to be," Lucero said. The environmental assessment notes that while available water supplies in the Trinity River Basin increased dramatically in the spring, the water supply in the upper Klamath River didn't improve nearly as much. With a fall run of 352,000 fish expected this year, which would be the largest on record since 1978, and relatively dry conditions in the upper Klamath Basin, biologists have been concerned about a repeat of 2002. An additional 48,000 acre-feet of water released to the Trinity River is proposed to avert that. Another 44,000 acre-feet could be released to increase the water turnover rate if high levels of fish-borne illness are detected, according to the assessment. Under the proposed plan, releases from Lewiston Dam to the Trinity River will be increased from Aug. 15 to Sept. 21 or 30 depending on water temperature, a time period at which the release would normally be 450 cubic feet per second. The goal would be to supplement flows in the lower Klamath so they are 3,200 cfs rather than approximately 2,575 to 2,800 they would be with no changes to the Trinity flow. A higher pulse flow is planned on Sept. 2, coinciding with a higher release from Iron Gate Dam on the Klamath River for a Yurok Tribe ceremony. The pulse flow of 4,400 cfs in the lower Klamath would further increase water velocity and turnover rates in parts of the river where adult salmon are holding, Reclamation said. While the release at Lewiston would be dependant on the Klamath flow and tributaries in order to hit the target in the lower Klamath, a hydrograph in the assessment indicates the Lewiston release would increase to about 1,000 cfs in August with a spike in early September of around 1,400 cfs, returning to 1,000 cfs and then back to 450 cfs. From the Trinity Lake Revitalization Alliance, Kelli Gant said she feels torn about the plan. If the entire 92,000 acre-feet is taken from the lake, "it's about a 7-foot elevation change," she said. "You're torn because you understand the need for the fish but then again I don?t know if it's that big of a crisis," Gant said. "Show us the science that says this is needed." "Our fear is they're going to release all that water and then we'll have another dry winter like the last one," she said. Tom Stokely, water policy analyst for the California Water Impact Network and a former Trinity County natural resources planner, agrees with the plan to release more Trinity water. "It's the right thing to do," he said, "and I don't think anyone wants to be responsible for another fish kill like the one in '02." While it's true that a 3,200 cfs flow in the lower Klamath would be rare under natural conditions, Stokely said "it's not a natural system on either side, anymore." In addition to the dams, erosion from human activities has filled in deep holes fish used to hold in, he said, and the huge salmon run anticipated plus poor hydrology on the Klamath side are good reasons to take the action. "I hope nobody decides to challenge it legally," Stokely said, "because the consequences could be devastating." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jul 26 12:18:58 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 12:18:58 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] C-WIN Report: Why We Cannot Afford the Peripheral Canal References: <87A747D7-73F7-4CA8-A8E9-B0912DC9E9A3@att.net> Message-ID: <668B7D70-903C-49FC-B077-1F12740C9733@att.net> Env-Trinity subscribers, While this may not be directly about the Trinity River, it does affect the waters of the Trinity because that's where some of the water for the proposed Peripheral Tunnels will come from. Please pass this on! Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Release Contacts: Carolee Krieger 805-969-0824 or 805-451-9565 Tom Stokely 530-524-0315 or 530-926-9727 REPORT DOCUMENTS HUGE COST OVERRUNS FOR SANTA BARBARA?S STATE WATER: AN INDICATION OF MASSIVE COSTS FOR PERIPHERAL CANAL July 26, 2012, Santa Barbara California Following the July 25 announcement of a Peripheral Canal/Tunnel proposed by Governor Brown and Interior Secretary Kenneth Salazar, the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN, online at http://www.c-win.org) released a report on the high cost and low reliability of State Water Project water for Santa Barbara County. The report, ?The Cost of Water for Santa Barbara County- Why We Cannot Afford a Peripheral Canal? documents huge cost overruns and dismal water deliveries for State Water Project water in Santa Barbara County. C-WIN recommends that Santa Barbara County and its water agencies withdraw support for the Peripheral Canal/Tunnel. The report also includes a white paper report by economics firm ECONorthwest that contains an estimate of the range of costs for Santa Barbara County and its ratepayers who are expected to pay for a portion of the Peripheral Canal/Tunnel. C-WIN?s President, Carolee Krieger said, ?Santa Barbara County voters were told in 1991 that it would cost $270 million to get 97% of our State Water Project contract amounts. The reality is that it will ultimately cost us nearly $1.7 billion for a lot less water than they promised, especially during drought years when it is actually needed. We are being told by the same people that the Peripheral Canal will ?only? cost $14 billion. The rest of California?s ratepayers and taxpayers should learn from our economic disaster by rejecting the Peripheral Canal/Tunnel.? The report examined budget and water delivery information from the Central Coast Water Authority (CCWA) and the four South Coast water agencies- the City of Santa Barbara, Montecito Water District, Carpinteria Valley Water District and Goleta Water District. In the case of the Montecito Water District, the agency is spending 39% of its total budget this year (over $4.9 million) on State water, but they are not taking any of it because they don?t need it. Continual price increases have led to decreased water use such that State water is not needed. The water district is having to dip into reserves to balance its budget. Krieger said, ?Even with the existing cost estimates, a Peripheral Canal/Tunnel will lead to additional rate increases and bankrupt our local water agencies. The ECONorthwest report predicts that under the lowest cost scenario, Santa Barbara County water rates will go up on average $24/month in 2019. The high cost scenario would increase rates by $160 month in 2019.? The C-WIN report estimated the 1998-2011 average cost of State water for the four South Coast water agencies at $3,000 to $6,000 per acre-foot and up to $9,000/acre-foot during the 2010 drought year. Water agency estimates of unit costs per acre-foot are much less than C-WIN?s estimates because they are based on delivery of full contract amounts that have never been delivered and are not likely to ever be delivered. The report also compares the actual cost of State water to other available sources including the Cachuma Project groundwater, recycling and reopening the City of Santa Barbara?s mothballed desalination plant. All other sources of water are cheaper, even with the large costs of restarting the city of Santa Barbara?s mothballed desalination plant. Tom Stokely, C-WIN?s project manager and principal author of the report said, ?I was astounded when I saw what was promised and what actually happened in Santa Barbara County. It?s clear from the research that the existing costs of State water are straining water agency budgets to their limits. More debt from a Peripheral Canal/Tunnel will surely send these agencies over the edge into bankruptcy. Additional water rate increases cannot compensate for these additional costs. Ratepayers will decrease consumption resulting in even less revenue to the water agencies, putting them further in debt.? Krieger added ?Based on the California Department of Water Resources? history of lowballing cost estimates for this project and others, there is no reason to believe that constructing 33? diameter twin tunnels 150? under the Delta will ?only? cost $14 billion. It will surely cost much more than that, especially when you consider the costs of financing, materials, energy and the potential for engineering design problems. It?s just another example of dishonesty in government. There are more reliable and cheaper alternatives to the Governor?s boondoggle.? # # # For more information on C-WIN?s Santa Barbara report, see The Public Summary of the C-WIN Report at http://www.c-win.org/webfm_send/247 The Full C-WIN Report with Appendices at http://www.c-win.org/webfm_send/248 The ECONorthwest White Paper on Santa Barbara County Costs at http://www.c-win.org/webfm_send/249 The California Water Impact Network promotes the equitable and environmental use of California's water, including instream uses, through research, planning, public education, and litigation. www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PastedGraphic-1.tiff Type: image/tiff Size: 51560 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jul 27 20:21:49 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 20:21:49 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: CBB: Study Analyzes Benefits Of 'Mark-Selective' Fishing For Wild Salmon Populations References: <009501cd6c5e$8d754190$a85fc4b0$@sisqtel.net> Message-ID: From: "Sari Sommarstrom" Date: July 27, 2012 6:16:01 PM PDT To: "Trinity River e-news" Cc: "Tom_Stokely" Subject: CBB: Study Analyzes Benefits Of 'Mark-Selective' Fishing For Wild Salmon Populations THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN: Weekly Fish and Wildlife News www.cbbulletin.com July 27, 2012 Issue No. 630 Study Analyzes Benefits Of ?Mark-Selective? Fishing For Wild Salmon Populations A fish marking practice commonly used in Washington and Oregon could significantly increase wild salmon populations in California, while allowing continued harvest of abundant hatchery populations, according to a recent study published in Marine and Coastal Fisheries. The article, first published June 18, is authored by Brian J. Pyper of Cramer Fish Sciences and Fish Metrics, Steven P. Cramer of Cramer Fish Sciences and Randoph P. Ericksen of Cramer Fish Sciences and the Wild Salmon Center. California wild chinook salmon populations, including several populations that are protected under the Endangered Species Act, have declined over the past decades. This has led to increased management restrictions on commercial and recreational fisheries, as well as increased reliance on hatchery-raised fish to support those fisheries. In Oregon and Washington, nearly all hatchery salmon produced for harvest receive a visible mark, while wild salmon remain unmarked and are therefore easily identified in ocean and river fisheries. When adult salmon are caught, marked hatchery salmon are kept, while unmarked wild salmon in most cases must be released back to the ocean or river. This practice of ?mark-selective fishing? has enabled many salmon fisheries in Oregon and Washington to continue despite serious concerns for the abundance of wild salmon, according to the recently published study. As an example naturally produced fish from a total of 13 salmon and steelhead stocks originating in the Columbia River basin are protected from non-tribal harvest. Although California has not adopted this practice, the new study suggests that mark-selective fishing could result in substantial increases in wild salmon populations while maintaining important harvest opportunities, the research paper says. ?A harvest strategy that targets hatchery salmon over wild salmon makes sense when hatchery salmon are plentiful but are mixed with depleted wild populations? said Steve Cramer, founding scientist of the consulting firm Cramer Fish Sciences, and co-author of the publication. ?If wild salmon populations in California continue to struggle and we do not find a solution that enables targeted capture of hatchery fish while allowing wild fish to escape, then it is likely that salmon fishing in California will be increasingly constrained to low levels.? The study used data on the actual abundance and harvest of chinook salmon in northern California?s Central Valley and the ocean off California over two decades (1988-2007) to examine how mark-selective fishing regulations would have affected harvest and spawner abundance. The study showed that selective fishing could have, if applied to past fishing seasons, doubled the number of wild salmon in California rivers. At the same time, it would have allowed substantial harvests of hatchery fish, depending on the proportion of salmon that were of hatchery origin. The key results of the study applied to recent years (2001-2007) in which ocean fisheries were constrained to protect weak wild populations. ?We examined a range of plausible scenarios of fishing effort and hatchery salmon abundance,? Cramer explained. ?When 60 percent or more of the salmon are from hatcheries, the mark-selective scenarios generally allowed for higher total harvests of salmon and modest increases in wild populations compared to the traditional regulations that were in place to constrain harvest and protect wild fish.? The study cited other research that estimated hatchery fish have composed as high as 90 percent of chinook off California in recent years. About 35 million juvenile chinook are released each year from Central Valley hatcheries, but most of these fish are unmarked. ?The high cost of marking all hatchery fish, and the challenge of working out new methods to estimate catch-and-release mortality of wild salmon has hindered fisheries agencies in California from implementing mark-selective fisheries,? Cramer said. ?Despite these challenges, the results of our study suggest that serious consideration and evaluation of mark-selective fisheries for California salmon are warranted.? The full study, ?Implications of Mark-Selective Fishing for Ocean Harvests and Escapements of Sacramento River Fall Chinook Salmon Populations,? can be found here:http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/19425120.2012.679575 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Sat Jul 28 12:26:47 2012 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2012 12:26:47 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: CBB: Study Analyzes Benefits Of 'Mark-Selective' Fishing For Wild Salmon Populations Message-ID: <001c01cd6cf6$ee979ac0$cbc6d040$@suddenlink.net> 'Takes me back.. It's been nearly 20 years, but the late Nat Bingham and I spent nearly a year - fruitlessly - trying to promote mark-selective salmon fishing for CA by seeking a federal appropriations earmark to provide CA Fish & Game with funds for undertaking universal marking of hatchery salmon We successfully approached then-North Coast Congressman Dan Hamburg and had the earmark in gear before meeting with the DFG oppostion at the old NMFS Tiburon Lab. The DFGers brought in Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission personnel to beef up their opposition, which, if memory serves, turned on two main concerns : 1- that hooking mortality, particularly for coho, was unacceptably high; and 2- that there were too many management programs that relied on longtime series of fractional marking data to simply chuck it all for a new mark-selective fishing regime As these things go, critical junctures in the federal appropriation process were missed, Nat and I had trouble figuring out what was going on with the Hamburgers, and, when we did, we found they had quietly shelved our initiative because of the DFG opposition. Such is the stuff conservation leadership is too often made of To be fair, not all the opposition came from the fish bureaucrats. Earl Carpenter of Bodega Bay was still regarded as 'the Captain' of CA's commercial salmon fishing fleet and he growled 'you're going to be sorry as hell if you succed - you're going to find there's a hell of a lot more naturals out there then you think. 'Would that it were so! In those days Jim Martin (cc-ed here), then ODF&W's fisheries chief was pushing hard - and successfully - for what is now the NW's universal hatchery marking/mark-selective salmon fishing regime Fishing with Jim on the Willamette last year for spring salmon (the mainstem Columbia was closed) I tied into a beauty which took me several minutes to crank up close enough to the boat to see the ad fin. It was an absolutely huge, gorgeous fish and my heart filled, frankly, for the opportunity to turn it loose, hopefully to produce more lunkers like him/her I'm still wrapped around one of the assignments that the visionary Nat Bingham - who's been gone 14 years now - gave me, and that's boosting, however I can, genetic stock identification (see, e.g., http://www.pacificfishtrax.org/media/2pagers/Genetics%20CROOS%20Summary%201J an10.pdf Hopefully, between the two technologies - mark-selective fishing and GSI - we can pass salmon on to the next seven generations Bill Kier Kier Associates, Fisheries and Watershed Professionals P.O Box 915 Blue Lake, CA 95525 (707) 668-1822 Mobile: 707.498.7847 www.kierassociates.net GSA Contractor GS10F0124U From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Friday, July 27, 2012 8:22 PM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: CBB: Study Analyzes Benefits Of 'Mark-Selective' Fishing For Wild Salmon Populations From: "Sari Sommarstrom" Date: July 27, 2012 6:16:01 PM PDT To: "Trinity River e-news" Cc: "Tom_Stokely" Subject: CBB: Study Analyzes Benefits Of 'Mark-Selective' Fishing For Wild Salmon Populations THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN: Weekly Fish and Wildlife News www.cbbulletin.com July 27, 2012 Issue No. 630 Study Analyzes Benefits Of 'Mark-Selective' Fishing For Wild Salmon Populations A fish marking practice commonly used in Washington and Oregon could significantly increase wild salmon populations in California, while allowing continued harvest of abundant hatchery populations, according to a recent study published in Marine and Coastal Fisheries. The article, first published June 18, is authored by Brian J. Pyper of Cramer Fish Sciences and Fish Metrics, Steven P. Cramer of Cramer Fish Sciences and Randoph P. Ericksen of Cramer Fish Sciences and the Wild Salmon Center. California wild chinook salmon populations, including several populations that are protected under the Endangered Species Act, have declined over the past decades. This has led to increased management restrictions on commercial and recreational fisheries, as well as increased reliance on hatchery-raised fish to support those fisheries. In Oregon and Washington, nearly all hatchery salmon produced for harvest receive a visible mark, while wild salmon remain unmarked and are therefore easily identified in ocean and river fisheries. When adult salmon are caught, marked hatchery salmon are kept, while unmarked wild salmon in most cases must be released back to the ocean or river. This practice of "mark-selective fishing" has enabled many salmon fisheries in Oregon and Washington to continue despite serious concerns for the abundance of wild salmon, according to the recently published study. As an example naturally produced fish from a total of 13 salmon and steelhead stocks originating in the Columbia River basin are protected from non-tribal harvest. Although California has not adopted this practice, the new study suggests that mark-selective fishing could result in substantial increases in wild salmon populations while maintaining important harvest opportunities, the research paper says. "A harvest strategy that targets hatchery salmon over wild salmon makes sense when hatchery salmon are plentiful but are mixed with depleted wild populations" said Steve Cramer, founding scientist of the consulting firm Cramer Fish Sciences, and co-author of the publication. "If wild salmon populations in California continue to struggle and we do not find a solution that enables targeted capture of hatchery fish while allowing wild fish to escape, then it is likely that salmon fishing in California will be increasingly constrained to low levels." The study used data on the actual abundance and harvest of chinook salmon in northern California's Central Valley and the ocean off California over two decades (1988-2007) to examine how mark-selective fishing regulations would have affected harvest and spawner abundance. The study showed that selective fishing could have, if applied to past fishing seasons, doubled the number of wild salmon in California rivers. At the same time, it would have allowed substantial harvests of hatchery fish, depending on the proportion of salmon that were of hatchery origin. The key results of the study applied to recent years (2001-2007) in which ocean fisheries were constrained to protect weak wild populations. "We examined a range of plausible scenarios of fishing effort and hatchery salmon abundance," Cramer explained. "When 60 percent or more of the salmon are from hatcheries, the mark-selective scenarios generally allowed for higher total harvests of salmon and modest increases in wild populations compared to the traditional regulations that were in place to constrain harvest and protect wild fish." The study cited other research that estimated hatchery fish have composed as high as 90 percent of chinook off California in recent years. About 35 million juvenile chinook are released each year from Central Valley hatcheries, but most of these fish are unmarked. "The high cost of marking all hatchery fish, and the challenge of working out new methods to estimate catch-and-release mortality of wild salmon has hindered fisheries agencies in California from implementing mark-selective fisheries," Cramer said. "Despite these challenges, the results of our study suggest that serious consideration and evaluation of mark-selective fisheries for California salmon are warranted." The full study, "Implications of Mark-Selective Fishing for Ocean Harvests and Escapements of Sacramento River Fall Chinook Salmon Populations," can be found here:http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/19425120.2012.679575 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Sun Jul 29 08:19:26 2012 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2012 08:19:26 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] on embracing scientific uncertainty Message-ID: <002401cd6d9d$8b17fab0$a147f010$@suddenlink.net> Right on, Jim Martin. Because there's not enough water available from the Sacramento River to meet CA's 2009 'historic Delta legislation's' call for meeting the 'co-equal goals' of 1- dependable water supply for out-of-stream desires and 2- protection of the watershed's/ estuary's public trust resources, the amount of Delta through-flow req'd for the protection of public trust resources having been reported out by the State Water Resources Control Board in August 2010 ( http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/de ltaflow/final_rpt.shtml) and immediately dissed by the gen'l manager of the Metropolitan Water District of SoCal as - if taken literally - signaling 'game over' (whatever that means - sounds ominous, as tho' he didn't really appreciate having the best available science concerning the amount of Delta through-flow required to protect public trust resources) the 'Plan' announced by the Governor and Sec'y Salazar last Wednesday calls for twin 33-ft diameter tunnels, 15k cfs diversion capacity (the average annual flow of the Sacramento River is 16k cfs), installing three 3k cfs capacity pumps along the river in the Freeport-Hood area to feed a forebay and the tunnels, and launching (i.e., when all the hardware is in place) a 10-15 yr period of 'adaptive management' to determine how much water can be withdrawn from the estuary without doing violence to the public trust resources. I think the Resources Agency's Bay Delta Conservation Program mgr Karla Nemeth said it all this week with "We decided to embrace scientific uncertainty regarding the facility's operation, water flows, habitat restoration and the response of fish." When the best available science - the work products (link above) from the SWRCB's months-long 2010 Delta through-flow requirements proceedings - doesn't work, embrace scientific uncertainty - it's worked wonderfully well for the Trinity River Restoration Program. (30 minutes of non-stop performance by NMFS' animated 'West Coast Salmon Coordinator' here http://www.water.ca.gov/news/newsreleases/2012/072612bdcp_190mb_long.wmv) Bill Kier From: Martin, Jim [mailto:jtmartin at purefishing.com] Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2012 3:23 PM To: Kier Associates; Tom Stokely; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Cc: peter moyle; huey johnson at rri; john mcmanus at earthjustice; jim mccarthy @ mccarthy consult; joel kawahara at earthlink Subject: RE: [env-trinity] Fwd: CBB: Study Analyzes Benefits Of 'Mark-Selective' Fishing For Wild Salmon Populations Hey Bill, Your reminiscing about our battle to establish mark-select fishing brought back a memory for me, when I was asked by Ryan Broadrick and Banky Curtis, then Director and Deputy Director, respectively of DFG about this topic at a North American Wildlife Conference about 8 years ago or so. I told them that mass marking and mark-select fishing was critical to have any stability in fisheries and the Sacramento was at the southern edge of the salmon range and the fight for water was going to be nip and tuck to win over the long term. I likened it to having an insurance policy..you don't use it every year, but when you need it..you really need it. They told me that it was just too expensive to mass mark, and the fall run of chinook was stable at over half million fish per year.with plenty of naturals. I told them that the hard times were coming and most of the naturals are really hatchery fish spawning below the hatchery..a definition that will not pass the red face test. They told me that if we really knew how many true wild fish there were, we would probably list the fall run and that would be the end of fisheries..and I told them that ignorance is never a good long term strategy and we have good fisheries on hatchery fish in the Columbia and have 13 stocks listed under the ESA. I told them they were just plain wrong and time will show that to be true. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TSTOKELY at ATT.NET Mon Jul 30 07:56:59 2012 From: TSTOKELY at ATT.NET (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 07:56:59 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard-Hoopa Tribe granted funds for fish passage project Message-ID: <640F3885-BD91-46CD-87A8-CA9539F13A2B@ATT.NET> http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_21190156 Hoopa Tribe granted funds for fish passage project The Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Posted: Times-Standard.com The Hoopa Valley Tribe is slated to receive a $110,000 national grant for a project that'll remove a barrier on Hostler Creek that currently inhibits fish passage. American Rivers -- an organization that works to protect and restore the nation's rivers and streams -- and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Restoration Center have partnered this year to provide financial and technical assistance to six projects throughout the nation, according to a press release. One of the projects involves removing the Hostler Creek fish barrier, which prohibits juvenile and adult coho and Chinook salmon, as well as steelhead, from migrating upstream to high-quality habitat. According to the release, removal of the barrier is anticipated to allow fish access to more than three times the existing habitat in the creek. For more information about the grants, visit www.americanrivers.org. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Jul 30 08:00:54 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 08:00:54 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard Editorial- Super Smith Message-ID: <3695E3B3-3817-4CD6-A081-2553ECD28D51@att.net> Best wishes to Jimmy Smith in his recovery. He has long been a friend of the fish and the people, and has worked hard to protect them all. TS http://www.times-standard.com/opinion/ci_21185405 'Super Smith' A TIMES-STANDARD EDITORIAL Eureka Times Standard Posted: Times-Standard.com Tuesday was the last time Jimmy Smith will attend a meeting of the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors as 1st District supervisor. Friday will be his last day in office. Smith will be stepping down early to concentrate on medical treatments for a third bout of cancer. We wish him the best, and applaud him for his years of public service. The most fitting tribute to Jimmy Smith is not to revisit the roll call of organizations and officials who appeared at or sent representatives to Tuesday's meeting to honor the man -- although we will: Congressman Mike Thompson; Assemblyman Wesley Chesbro; state Sen. Noreen Evans; the U.S. Department of Fish and Game; the local American Cancer Society; the Ferndale Chamber of Commerce; Pacific Gas and Electric Company; the Eureka City Council; the Greater Eureka Chamber of Commerce; the North Coast Integrated Regional Water Management Plan board; the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District; county Veterans Service Office; representatives of supervisors in Sonoma, Mendocino and Trinity counties; Humboldt County Sheriff Mike Downey; Chief Probation Officer Bill Damiano; Registrar of Voters Carolyn Crnich; Public Works Director Tom Mattson; 1st District Supervisor-elect Rex Bohn; and Smith's fellow supervisors. No, the best way to salute Smith is to look back on his record of service, and recognize the odds he's overcome. According to Jacque Smith, it was her husband's successful 1992 battle with pancreatic lymphoma -- normally a death sentence instead of a diagnosis -- that drove him into public service. And serve he has. Since first running for and winning a seat on the Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District board in 1995, Smith went on to win a seat on the county Board of Supervisors in 2000. Since then, as 1st District Supervisor, he's represented what he called his ?27,000 bosses? -- residents of Ferndale, Holmes, Honeydew, Hookton, Loleta, Pepperwood, Petrolia, Redcrest, Scotia, Shively, Stafford and parts of Eureka. In 2004, Smith battled back from a skin cancer diagnosis to continue to serve the 1st District. On Friday, he'll step down a few months early to focus on beating lymphoma. No one -- save perhaps, himself -- would have begrudged the man had he stepped down in June when he submitted his resignation to his fellow supervisors. But he wanted to stay on a little while longer to help with the transition, to do all that he could to serve his constituents. And so he stayed on a short while longer, until Gov. Brown approved the appointment of Supervisor-elect Bohn to the 1st District seat. ?I want to make sure we transition everything,? Smith said. ?It's a good time to transition out, and I'll be working closely with the supervisor-elect.? A class act from start to finish. We join 4th District Supervisor Virginia Bass in acclaiming her colleague ?Super Smith? -- and wish him and his family a speedy recovery. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From MCKIER at dfg.ca.gov Tue Jul 31 14:25:48 2012 From: MCKIER at dfg.ca.gov (Mary Claire Kier) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 14:25:48 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] First Trinity River Project sampling summary of the 2012 season Message-ID: <5017EAAA.A226.009F.1@dfg.ca.gov> Good afternoon! Attached please find the LONG anticipated first trapping summary of the 2012 season. The Junction City weir was installed on July 23 and the results are on in: More than half of the total Chinook trapped at JC last year were caught in the first week of trapping this year...maybe an indication of good things to come? Let's hope so. When I have a chance to make sure all of the spreadsheets are correct I'll send the regular file (not just this JC only one). Mary Claire Mary Claire Kier DFG - Trinity River Project 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 707/822-5876 - FAX 822-2855 mckier at dfg.ca.gov Trinity River documents can be found at: http://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/documents/ContextDocs.aspx?cat=KlamathTrinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: JC_ONLY_2012.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 29184 bytes Desc: not available URL: From MCKIER at dfg.ca.gov Tue Jul 31 15:21:00 2012 From: MCKIER at dfg.ca.gov (Mary Claire Kier) Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 15:21:00 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] More than half of the total ADULTS (dang!) Message-ID: <5017F79A.A226.009F.1@dfg.ca.gov> I meant to say more than half the total ADULT Chinook in the first week ...not more than half of the total Chinook... sorry for the mislead. Cheers! MC Mary Claire Kier DFG - Trinity River Project 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 707/822-5876 - FAX 822-2855 mckier at dfg.ca.gov Trinity River documents can be found at: http://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/documents/ContextDocs.aspx?cat=KlamathTrinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 1 14:34:46 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 14:34:46 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou Daily News- Supervisors object to Trinity flow release Message-ID: <8AC9B1BA-480E-458B-A4E8-05D8D1F3A80A@att.net> http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20120730/NEWS/120739991?refresh=true Supervisors object to flow release The Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday filed their official comments on the Bureau of Reclamation's (BOR) intention to release additional water from the Trinity River's Lewiston Dam this year in an attempt to avoid a repeat of the 2002 Klamath River record fish kill that occurred downstream of the Trinity and Klamath confluence. PHOTO/ SUBMITTED In 2002 an outbreak of fish disease, exacerbated by low flows and high water temperatures, resulted in the premature death of an estimated 34,000 Chinook salmon in the lower Klamath River. With the prediction of a record-breaking salmon run this year, BOR?proposes to release additional Trinity River water in an attempt to avoid a repeat of 2002. The Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday filed their official comments on the Bureau of Reclamation's (BOR) intention to release additional water from the Trinity River's Lewiston Dam this year in an attempt to avoid a repeat of the 2002 Klamath River record fish kill that occurred downstream of the Trinity and Klamath confluence. In the document, the board acknowledges that the agency's proposed action is "rooted in good intentions to benefit Trinity River Chinook salmon." However, the board states, "it does not appear that there has been sufficient consideration as to whether this action may be detrimental to other populations of Chinook and Coho." BOR says the specific intention of the additional flows is to flush disease-carrying aquatic worms from the river and maintain a lower density of the worms and fish during the Chinook migration, thereby reducing the infection rate. According to the comments filed by the supervisors, their primary objection to the release is based in concern that increased flows entering the Klamath River may "create migration cues resulting in fish moving into the Klamath River and its tributaries at times when temperature and flow conditions are marginal or even lethal." Essentially, the board is concerned that Chinook salmon will migrate into reaches of the Klamath River and its tributaries, such as the Scott and Shasta Rivers, before seasonal rainfall increases stream flows enough to support their survival, potentially resulting in pre-spawn mortality. Wade Sinnen, Senior Environmental Scientist for the California Department of Fish and Game's (DFG) Klamath/Trinity program said, "Supplemental flows were sent down the Trinity in 2003 and 2004 after the 2002 fish kill. These flows did not, to my knowledge, lead to premature migration and subsequent fish kills in the upper Klamath in those years." "Typically the fall run of Chinook start entering the lower klamath River around the first of August, with the peak being mid to late August, thus the timing of the supplemental flows," said Sinnen. In their document, the supervisors say, "The request for increased Trinity River flows in mid-August and September is a departure from the natural Trinity hydrograph, which typically did not produce higher flows until late in October." According to BOR's Draft EA, "Reclamation would operate Lewiston Reservoir to target a minimum flow in the lower Klamath River at KNK [gauging station] of 3,200 cfs (cubic feet per second) from August 15, 2012, to September 21, 2012..." The Draft EA also states, "The 3,200 cfs flow magnitude was identified as the approximate August and September average flows during those years (since 1978) when the fall Chinook salmon run in the Klamath River was greater than the 2002 run size." "A variety of monitoring efforts are planned that will be integral to determining the need for an emergency fall flow release in 2012 and provide valuable data with which to assess the effectiveness of the recommended preventative release strategy," says the agency. In the closing paragraphs of the board of supervisors' comments, they invoke their well know objection to the Klamath Dam removal agreements, saying, "In testimony before the State Water Resources Control Board on July 17, John Bezdek, representing the Department of the Interior, spoke of the need for a holistic approach in managing the Klamath Basin and decried 'piecemeal' management efforts. Unfortunately, 'piecemeal' is exactly what has been produced with the KHSA and KBRA, where the focus is on the mainstem of the Klamath River rather than a true holistic approach to the issues of the greater Klamath Basin." The board adds, "Disjointed management actions on the Trinity River threaten to be just the latest example of the Bureau and NMFS embarking on yet another tangent of piecemeal action." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AR-120739991.jpg&MaxH=225&MaxW=225 Type: image/jpeg Size: 10890 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Aug 2 16:35:51 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 16:35:51 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Peripheral Tunnel: Governor announces twin tunnel plan; locals fear the worst for Trinity waters References: Message-ID: <16AF222D-FF25-4371-8D62-BA13A3B4FFC3@att.net> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_6b398844-db84-11e1-86e7-0019bb30f31a.html PERIPHERAL TUNNEL Governor announces twin tunnel plan; locals fear the worst for Trinity waters Story Comments ShareShare Print Create a hardcopy of this page Font Size: Default font size Larger font size PHIL NELSON The Trinity Journal Kayakers on Trinity River Kayakers relax for a moment on the Trinity River. Gov. Jerry Brown?s Peripheral Tunnel plan has local officials worried about the impact on Trinity waters. Related Links Related:For more information and press conference video Posted: Wednesday, August 1, 2012 6:15 am | Updated: 8:07 pm, Tue Jul 31, 2012. By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | 0 comments Gov. Jerry Brown's announcement last week of a plan for twin tunnels to divert water away from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to farms and cities in the south raises concerns in Trinity County. The Bay Delta Conservation Plan unveiled by Brown and U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar includes construction of two tunnels 33 feet in diameter or larger to transport water under the delta, an inland estuary. The plan is estimated to cost about $24 billion, including $14 billion for construction of the tunnels to be paid for by water users and $10 billion for habitat restoration to come from taxpayers. A water bond to pay for some of the restoration is set for the November 2014 ballot. A video of the July 25 news conference is available online. Calling it "a big idea for a big state," Brown said knowledge has been gained since the voters rejected his plan for a peripheral canal around the delta 30 years ago. It is needed to deal with earthquakes and climate change, he said. Questioned about cost, Brown said there will be reviews, but "analysis paralysis" is not working and he intends to "get shit done." "If we have to fight initiatives and referendums, we'll fight those, too," he said. "Everybody knows this system we have here is broken," Salazar said. Salazar noted that pumps now used to get water from the delta to consumers kill fish. The plan will also reduce uncertainty for farmers about water deliveries, he said. However, in Trinity County concerns run high about the potential to send more water south. Lots of the water going through those tunnels would be diverted Trinity River water ? but the planning does not seem to consider the effect on Trinity County, said Roger Jaegel, chair of the Trinity County Board of Supervisors. The full board will work on an official position on the plan, Jaegel said, but for himself, "I feel we need to continue to emphasize our county of origin rights." "I didn't see Trinity County mentioned at all," Jaegel said. "I don't think anybody really has acknowledged that a lot of that is Trinity water." "Trinity County certainly has provided water to the south for quite some time with little or no compensation," he added. "I'm not sure they even understand that we're here." With the twin tunnels, he said, "It's going to mean the water transfers are going to become much easier." From the Trinity Lake Revitalization Alliance, Kelli Gant of Trinity Center has been following versions of the delta plan for some time. In an earlier analysis, "not once do they talk about the impact above the dams," she said. "The main thing we're concerned about is when they look at the delta plan, all they're focusing on is the delta, Sacramento River and the surrounding counties," she said. In contrast, she said, there are plans to give a lot of money to the delta communities to do things like rebuild a marina if it has to be moved. "There's nothing mentioned at all for compensating the area of origin communities," she said. "That's the biggest issue we see." Efforts of the Restore the Delta organization have caused the governor to downscale how much water will be taken but not the size of the pipes, Gant said. "They're saying, 'Trust us we'll take less water,'" she said, and the message is "let's go ahead and build it and we'll figure out how to operate it when it's built." From the California Water Impact Network, former Trinity County natural resources planner Tom Stokely called the plan "an expensive boondoggle" at a time the state is in a budget crisis. He noted that a cost benefit analysis by the University of the Pacific found the project would pay back a dollar for every $2.50 spent. Better alternatives, he said, would include reinforcing levees in the delta, water conservation, desalinization, storm water capture and water recycling. From an environmental standpoint, Stokely is doubtful the plan will benefit wildlife in the delta as billed, and he said the Trinity River will suffer. While the 2000 Trinity River Record of Decision called for setting Trinity River flows based on water-year type, Stokely notes that the Bureau of Reclamation has water rights for the river that allow minimum flows well below what are called for in that decision. The bottlenecks in moving water out of the delta have only been beneficial in keeping water in Trinity Lake, he said, and if those are removed the lake will be drained leaving no cold water for fish. "An absolute disaster for the Trinity River," he said. "This is bad news for the Trinity and everybody who depends on it." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 50189d507e0b5.preview-300.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 19172 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Aug 3 21:03:27 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 21:03:27 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: CBB: West's 2000-2004 Drought Worst In 800 Years, Models Point to 21st Century 'Mega-Drought' References: <006f01cd71c5$3a820d30$af862790$@sisqtel.net> Message-ID: <33E53072-5372-48F9-BE87-0D7A1D594267@att.net> From: "Sari Sommarstrom" Date: August 3, 2012 3:13:36 PM PDT To: "Trinity River e-news" Cc: "Tom_Stokely" Subject: CBB: West's 2000-2004 Drought Worst In 800 Years, Models Point to 21st Century 'Mega-Drought' Remembering 2001 & 2002 fish crises on Klamath plus 2002 Biscuit Fire? THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN: Weekly Fish and Wildlife News www.cbbulletin.com August 3, 2012 Issue No. 631 Research: West?s 2000-2004 Drought Worst In 800 Years, Models Point to 21st Century ?Mega-Drought? The chronic drought that hit western North America from 2000 to 2004 left dying forests and depleted river basins in its wake and was the strongest in 800 years, scientists have concluded, but they say those conditions will become the ?new normal? for most of the coming century. Such climatic extremes have increased as a result of global warming, a group of 10 researchers reported this week in Nature Geoscience. And as bad as conditions were during the 2000-04 drought, they may eventually be seen as the good old days. Climate models and precipitation projections indicate this period will actually be closer to the ?wet end? of a drier hydroclimate during the last half of the 21st century, scientists said. Aside from its impact on forests, crops, rivers and water tables, the drought also cut carbon sequestration by an average of 51 percent in a massive region of the western United States, Canada and Mexico, although some areas were hit much harder than others. As vegetation withered, this released more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, with the effect of amplifying global warming. ?Climatic extremes such as this will cause more large-scale droughts and forest mortality, and the ability of vegetation to sequester carbon is going to decline,? said Beverly Law, a co-author of the study, professor of global change biology and terrestrial systems science at Oregon State University, and former science director of AmeriFlux, an ecosystem observation network. ?During this drought, carbon sequestration from this region was reduced by half,? Law said. ?That?s a huge drop. And if global carbon emissions don?t come down, the future will be even worse.? This research was supported by the National Science Foundation, NASA, U.S. Department of Energy, and other agencies. The lead author was Christopher Schwalm at Northern Arizona University. Other collaborators were from the University of Colorado, University of California at Berkeley, University of British Columbia, San Diego State University, and other institutions. It?s not clear whether or not the current drought in the Midwest, now being called one of the worst since the Dust Bowl, is related to these same forces, Law said. This study did not address that, and there are some climate mechanisms in western North America that affect that region more than other parts of the country. But in the West, this multi-year drought was unlike anything seen in many centuries, based on tree ring data. The last two periods with drought events of similar severity were in the Middle Ages, from 977-981 and 1146-1151. The 2000-04 drought affected precipitation, soil moisture, river levels, crops, forests and grasslands. Ordinarily, Law said, the land sink in North America is able to sequester the equivalent of about 30 percent of the carbon emitted into the atmosphere by the use of fossil fuels in the same region. However, based on projected changes in precipitation and drought severity, scientists said that this carbon sink, at least in western North America, could disappear by the end of the century. ?Areas that are already dry in the West are expected to get drier,? Law said. ?We expect more extremes. And it?s these extreme periods that can really cause ecosystem damage, lead to climate-induced mortality of forests, and may cause some areas to convert from forest into shrublands or grassland.? During the 2000-04 drought, runoff in the upper Colorado River basin was cut in half. Crop productivity in much of the West fell 5 percent. The productivity of forests and grasslands declined, along with snowpacks. Evapotranspiration decreased the most in evergreen needleleaf forests, about 33 percent. The effects are driven by human-caused increases in temperature, with associated lower soil moisture and decreased runoff in all major water basins of the western U.S., researchers said in the study. Although regional precipitations patterns are difficult to forecast, researchers in this report said that climate models are underestimating the extent and severity of drought, compared to actual observations. They say the situation will continue to worsen, and that 80 of the 95 years from 2006 to 2100 will have precipitation levels as low as, or lower than, this ?turn of the century? drought from 2000-04. ?Towards the latter half of the 21st century the precipitation regime associated with the turn of the century drought will represent an outlier of extreme wetness,? the scientists wrote in this study. These long-term trends are consistent with a 21st century ?megadrought,? they said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From campaign at mbaysav.org Sun Aug 5 20:18:11 2012 From: campaign at mbaysav.org (Deirdre Des Jardins) Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2012 20:18:11 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Thousands of Fish Die as Midwest Streams Heat Up In-Reply-To: <33E53072-5372-48F9-BE87-0D7A1D594267@att.net> References: <006f01cd71c5$3a820d30$af862790$@sisqtel.net> <33E53072-5372-48F9-BE87-0D7A1D594267@att.net> Message-ID: <017201cd7382$1c301bb0$54905310$@org> Thousands of Fish Die as Midwest Streams Heat Up LINCOLN, Neb. - Thousands of fish are dying in the Midwest as the hot, dry summer dries up rivers and causes water temperatures to climb in some spots to nearly 100 degrees. About 40,000 shovelnose sturgeon were killed in Iowa last week as water temperatures reached 97 degrees. Nebraska fishery officials said they've seen thousands of dead sturgeon, catfish, carp, and other species in the Lower Platte River, including the endangered pallid sturgeon. And biologists in Illinois said the hot weather has killed tens of thousands of large- and smallmouth bass and channel catfish and is threatening the population of the greater redhorse fish, a state-endangered species. http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/ap/drought%20dead%20fish-1956619893_v2.grid-6x2 .jpg Read more at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48516974/ns/us_news-environment/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 15197 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Vina_Frye at fws.gov Tue Aug 7 09:00:55 2012 From: Vina_Frye at fws.gov (Vina_Frye at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 09:00:55 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Joint Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group and Trinity Management Council Meeting Message-ID: Hi Folks, A joint meeting of the TAMWG and TMC is scheduled on August 20, 2012. The discussion topics are listed in the notice below. [Federal Register Volume 77, Number 147 (Tuesday, July 31, 2012)] [Notices] [Page 45370] >From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [ http://www.gpo.gov/] [FR Doc No: 2012-18638] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-FHC-2012-N176; FXFR1334088TWG0W4-123-FF08EACT00] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of meeting. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) affords stakeholders the opportunity to give policy, management, and technical input concerning Trinity River (California) restoration efforts to the Trinity Management Council (TMC). The TMC interprets and recommends policy, coordinates and reviews management actions, and provides organizational budget oversight. This notice announces a joint TAMWG and TMC meeting, which is open to the public. DATES: TAMWG and TMC will meet from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on Monday, August 20, 2012. ADDRESSES: The morning portion of the meeting will take place at the North Fork Grange Hall, Dutch Creek Road, Junction City, CA 96048. The group will then have lunch and resume the meeting at the Strawhouse Resort, 31301 Hwy 299, Big Flat, CA 96048. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meeting Information: Nancy J. Finley, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521; telephone: (707) 822-7201. Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) Information: Robin Schrock, Executive Director, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093; telephone: (530) 623-1800; email: rschrock at usbr.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), this notice announces a joint meeting of the TAMWG and TMC. The meeting will include discussion of the following topics: United States Bureau of Reclamation and Rehabilitation Implementation Group update on project activities; Discussion of how the project was improved based on partner input; Discussion of project implementation challenges based on flow constraints; USBR RIG staff demonstration of restoration features; FWS staff discussion of monitoring and benefits of restoration features; TAMWG and TMC discussion of observations from restoration site visits; TAMWG and TMC identification of priority outreach/public relations; TAMWG,TMC, and TRRP definition of roles and responsibilities; and Discussion of 2013 plan to expand outreach efforts. Completion of the agenda is dependent on the amount of time each item takes. The meeting could end early if the agenda has been completed. Dated: July 25, 2012. Kathleen Brubaker, Supervisory Fish and Wildlife Biologist, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, Arcata, CA. [FR Doc. 2012-18638 Filed 7-30-12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P Vina Frye U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata FWO 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone: (707) 822-7201 Fax: (707) 822-8411 vina_frye at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Tue Aug 7 12:02:10 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 12:02:10 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River 2012 Trapping summary update Message-ID: <5021037B.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Please see attached for the Junction City Weir summary update. Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: JC weir 2012 JWEEK 31 trapping summary.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 26112 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Aug 9 12:10:40 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 12:10:40 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Willow Creek Community Meeting Responses References: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF73D302D0AF8@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Message-ID: <1AA17C24-911B-4B85-BC4E-78F138353B38@att.net> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jeff Morris Date: Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:17 PM Subject: Willow Creek Community Meeting Responses Trinity River Community, The May 29th community meeting in Willow Creek generated some excellent questions about the Trinity River, the restoration activity, and other regional river related issues. We hope that you're find the attached responses useful. These include: A Citizens Guide to the Trinity River Record of Decision is available at the following link: http://www.usbr.gov/mp/ncao/trinity_river/trinity_river_mainstem_brochure.pdf We believe that a review of this brochure is a must for anyone interested in the Trinity River. Resource links to partner and regional agencies These are available at the end of the Willow Creek Q&A document. This can be handy resource if you have a question on a specific issue regarding the Trinity River. Don't forget that all Community Q&A docs are available on the TrinityRiver.org website and thank you again for your interest in the Trinity River communities. www.TrinityRiver.org -- www.TrinityRiver.org a community based website for the Trinity River -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Willow Creek 5.29.2012 Q&A Final.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 554742 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Aug 10 08:24:14 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 08:24:14 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Chinook salmon may have record run on the Klamath Message-ID: <9D3F8BF5-8285-4B6D-8F0C-6A6AAC967C29@att.net> http://www.redding.com/news/2012/aug/10/chinook-salmon-may-have-record-run-on-the/ Chinook salmon may have record run on the Klamath Biologists worry disease could spread By Damon Arthur Friday, August 10, 2012 The number of Chinook salmon swimming up the Klamath River this year is expected to be the largest in decades, with estimates ranging from 352,000 to 380,000 fish returning this fall. While the huge numbers of fish returning to the Klamath basin this year is generating excitement, it also has fish biologists worried about a repeat of September 2002, when 34,000 fish died in the Klamath River. "It is the irony of the situation, certainly," said Wade Sinnen, a senior environmental scientist with the state Department of Fish and Game. With thousands of fish coming out of the Pacific Ocean and crowding up the river the chances of spreading disease also increase, fish biologists say. To reduce the likelihood of spreading a disease known as "ich," officials plan to increase the amount of water flowing out of Trinity and Lewiston lakes. "If you provide a lot of flow, it basically flushes the parasites out," said Robin Schrock, executive director of the Trinity River Restoration Program. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which operates the dams, plans to start ramping up flows into the river on Monday, Schrock said. The water from the dams generally takes two days to flow downriver until it reaches the Klamath, she said. Using water from the lakes, officials want to regulate the flow in the river so that it remains around 3,200 cubic-feet per second from Aug. 15 to Sept. 21. In September 2002, there were about 1,900 cfs flowing through the lower Klamath, Sinnen said. This year's salmon run is predicted to be 2.4 times what it was in 2002, so they are increasing the amount of water in the river to prevent an ich outbreak. Following the 2002 fish die-off, officials assembled the Klamath Fish Health Assessment Team, comprised of 16 agencies that monitor and share information about conditions on the river. The team has established four escalating readiness levels ? green, yellow, orange and red ? corresponding with the health of the river and the fish. The fish-readiness level is at yellow, which means there is a "need for heightened awareness," data sharing among team members becomes more important and the "fish mortality response plan should be dusted off and folks ready to respond with personnel and resources if the situation escalates," according to the KFHAT website. Sinnen said there won't be more water released from reservoirs on the Klamath River upstream of the mouth of the Trinity River. There isn't as much Klamath River water available upstream of the Trinity, he said. The fishing in the ocean has been good this year, and the salmon are just starting to show up in the Klamath River, Sinnen said. Fall run salmon season on the Klamath begins Wednesday. Because of the higher number of fish predicted to return, the DFG has doubled the limit on salmon to four this year. The maximum number of fish an angler can have in possession also was doubled to eight. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: sing_logo.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1020 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Aug 10 10:17:32 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 10:17:32 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Reclamation to Release Additional Water from Trinity Reservoir to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klam References: <51e5088396ad487eb7b086d3cfba5769@usbr.gov> Message-ID: From: "Louis Moore" Date: August 10, 2012 10:12:21 AM PDT To: tstokely at att.net Subject: Reclamation to Release Additional Water from Trinity Reservoir to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klam Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, CA MP-12-141 Media Contact: Pete Lucero, 916-978-5100, plucero at usbr.gov For Release On: August 10, 2012 Reclamation to Release Additional Water from Trinity Reservoir to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klamath River REDDING, Calif. ? The Bureau of Reclamation will release additional water from Trinity Reservoir to supplement flows in the Lower Klamath River in 2012 to help protect a possible record-breaking run of adult Chinook salmon from disease outbreak and mortality. Releases from Lewiston Dam will begin in the early morning hours of August 13 and end in the last week of September. Flows in the Lower Klamath River will be targeted at 3,200 cubic feet per second during this period, and Lewiston Dam releases will be adjusted accordingly. Current river flow forecasts indicate that Lewiston Dam releases will increase from the current rate of 450 cfs on August 13 and will vary between about 1,000 and 1,200 cfs prior to dropping to 450 cfs in late September. The rate of increasing releases could be as high as 250 cfs every two hours, and the rate of flow reductions could be as high as 100 cfs every four hours. The public is urged to take all necessary precautions on or near the river while flows are increased. An Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact were prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. The draft documents were released for public review July 17-27, and public comments have been addressed in the Final EA/FONSI. The documents are available at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=10230. If you encounter problems accessing the environmental documents online, please call 916-978-5100 or email mppublicaffairs at usbr.gov. # # # Reclamation is the largest wholesale water supplier and the second largest producer of hydroelectric power in the United States, with operations and facilities in the 17 Western States. Its facilities also provide substantial flood control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. Visit our website at http://www.usbr.gov. If you would rather not receive future communications from Bureau of Reclamation, let us know by clicking here. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver Federal Center, Alameda & Kipling Street PO Box 25007, Denver, CO 80225 United States -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Aug 11 07:07:59 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2012 07:07:59 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard:Klamath River to receive more Trinity River reservoir water Message-ID: <4EE2BEF2-87C1-42C8-8113-89279F8F0121@att.net> Klamath River to receive more Trinity River reservoir water The Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Created: http://www.times-standard.com/ci_21290316/klamath-river-receive-more-trinity-river-reservoir-water?source=most_viewed Releases from Lewiston Dam will begin in the early morning hours Monday and end the last week of September, according to a Bureau of Reclamation press release on Friday. Additional water is being released to help protect a possible record-breaking run of adult Chinook salmon from disease outbreak and death. The Trinity River is the Klamath's largest tributary, and water is often diverted from the river to farmers and residents of Southern California. In 2002, the diversion led to a massive fish kill on the Klamath. Flows in the lower Klamath River will be targeted this year at 3,200 cubic feet per second, the release said. Current river flow forecasts indicate that Lewiston Dam releases will increase from the current rate of 450 cubic feet per second Monday and will vary from 1,000 to 1,200 cubic feet per second prior to dropping to 450 cubic feet per second in late September. The rate of increasing releases could be as high as 250 cubic feet per second every two hours, and the rate of flow reductions could be as high as 100 cubic feet per second every four hours, the release said. The public is asked to take all necessary precautions on or near the river while flows are increased. Regina Chichizola, communications coordinator for the Hoopa Valley Tribe and former executive director of the Klamath Riverkeeper group, said the Hoopa Valley Tribe is pleased by the announcement, but concerned for the future. ?We worry that in future years water releases for Klamath salmon runs may not available. Both the peripheral tunnel plans and Klamath Basin Restoration agreements ignore the fact that salmon need water to survive,? Chichizola said in a statement. An environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact were prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. The draft documents were released for public review July 17 and public comments have been addressed in the final document. The documents are available at www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=10230. Share this article -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Aug 11 07:23:20 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2012 07:23:20 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] IREHR: Tea Parties, Property Rights and Anti-Indianism in the Klamath River Basin Message-ID: http://www.programs.irehr.org/issue-areas/tea-party-nationalism/tea-party-news-and-analysis/item/422-tea-parties-property-rights-and-anti-indianism-in-the-klamath-river-basin From tstokely at att.net Tue Aug 14 07:41:39 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 07:41:39 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com Editorial: A nice problem for north's rivers: Too many salmon Message-ID: <2AA475C3-52A7-4145-BB1C-A4667D9C20F6@att.net> http://www.redding.com/news/2012/aug/13/editorial-a-nice-problem-for-norths-rivers-too/ Editorial: A nice problem for north's rivers: Too many salmon Too many salmon? It seems like only yesterday our Northern California chinook were collapsing to the verge of extinction. And indeed, just a few summers ago they seemed to be. Entire fishing seasons ? in the ocean and in the rivers ? were scrapped in the name of preserving scarce salmon and giving them a chance to spawn the next generation. Apparently it worked. The Sacramento River runs are booming, and the Klamath River this year is expecting the best salmon return in decades ? to the point were fisheries managers fear an overcrowded river that will spread disease and lead to a repeat of the notorious 2002 fish die-off. In an attempt to avert such an ugly scene, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation today will begin ramping up releases from Trinity Lake into the Trinity River, a tributary of the Klamath. Keeping a healthy flow in the lower river, they hope, will flush out parasites that thrive in the low, warm river of late summer. Downriver Indian tribes and Humboldt County earlier this year had called on Reclamation to release extra cold water from Trinity Lake, and as recently as last month they were not at all sure they would get their way. The county and some tribes are engaged in a running argument with Reclamation over old water rights that they claim rightly belong to them ? and not to Central Valley Project water contractors on the inland side of the Trinity divide ? and they'd pressed for that water to be used on the salmon's behalf. Reclamation turned down that request, still declining to concede the coastal "area of origin" rights, but it is coming through with the water in any case. Of course, water released today to boost fish might well contribute to a later shortfall if the winter comes up dry. California has water wars precisely because it's scarce and in demand. But for now, Reclamation has decided it has the water and the flexibility to keep this banner salmon year from turning into a disaster. Bravo to the bureau ? and wouldn't it be nice to have this kind of fish problem more often? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Aug 14 15:07:35 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 15:07:35 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Final TMC/TAMWG Agenda August 20 Message-ID: <1FD14BA0-360F-40A3-B94B-69FFA7505B17@att.net> See http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/tamwg.html Final Agenda for Joint TAMWG/TMC - August 20,2012 9:00 am - Meet at the North Fork Grange Hall on Dutch Creek Road, in Junction City 9:30 am - Leave the North Fork Grange Hall for the Junction City site - Presentation on site by USBR RIG staff and contract staff to orient to the projects activities. - Discussion of how the project was improved based on partner input - Discussion of project implementation challenges based on flow constraints 11:00 am - Leave for Wheel Gulch Site - Presentation on site by USBR RIG staff to demonstrate restoration features - Presentation on site by FWS staff on monitoring and ecological benefits of restoration features 12:15 am - Resume the meeting at the Straw House Resort for Lunch and afternoon discussion (on - site) 1 :00 pm - Discuss observations from restoration site visits 1:30 pm - Identify Priority Outreach Needs/ Public Relations for the Program (5 program priorities for outreach in FY 13) 2:30 pm - Discussion of how TAMWG can work with TMC and TRRP in addressing pressing commurrity concerlis (Roles and Responsibilities defined) 3:30 pm - 201 3 plan to Expand outreach efforts (J. Morris) 4:30 pm - Adjourn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Tue Aug 14 15:27:09 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 15:27:09 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River 2012 trapping summary update Message-ID: <502A6E0D.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Please see attached for the Junction City Weir summary update for the Julian Week 32, Aug. 6 to Aug. 12. Note: The Junction City Weir (JCW) was pulled from the river on August 13, 2012 due to the increase in flows released from Trinity Dam which made the weir inoperable and at risk to flood damage. We expect large runs of salmon this season and the increase in flows are to help maintain suitable water quantity and quality in the lower Klamath River to reduce the potential for a fish kill. We hope to re-install the JCW when flows return to near summer base levels. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: JC weir 2012 JWEEK 32 trap summary.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 34304 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 15 08:32:59 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 08:32:59 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle on Trinity increased flows Message-ID: <390376A3-8CC6-4CD2-AF5E-F123748E8EEA@att.net> See http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/Reservoir-release-to-prevent-salmon-disease-3780224.php I haven't seen a Lewiston Dam Flow Schedule come through yet. Could somebody from the Bureau of Reclamation please post it to this list serve for the public? Thanks Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 15 08:38:15 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 08:38:15 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal-Reclamation ramps up river releases Message-ID: <33BF29FD-CF80-42B9-8C14-7AA5A37B02D7@att.net> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_319f96ee-e68a-11e1-b9bc-0019bb30f31a.html Reclamation ramps up river releases By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 6:15 am The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation began increasing water releases from Trinity Lake to the Trinity River on Monday to reduce chances of a fish die-off in the lower Klamath River during what could be a record run of fall chinook salmon. As of Tuesday the 450 cubic feet per second of water usually released from Lewiston Dam at this time of year had been boosted to 955 cfs. The Trinity River is the main tributary to the Klamath, and the higher release at Lewiston will be adjusted in an effort to keep flows in the lower Klamath at 3,200 cfs. It is estimated that the higher release from Lewiston will vary between 1,000 and 1,200 cfs to reach that target. The flows are to drop back down to 450 cfs in late September. The higher releases are expected to total around 48,000 acre-feet of additional water released from Trinity Lake. Another 44,000 acre-feet of water could be released if needed. "If fish start to die they're looking at more flows," said Robin Schrock, executive director of the Trinity River Restoration Program. Residents are asked to report any observations of large numbers of dead or dying fish on the Trinity River and its tributaries to CalTip at 1-888-334-2258. The Klamath Fish Health Assessment Team, formed in 2003 with members from many agencies, will also be monitoring fish health in the river, Schrock said. She noted that the team and restoration program staff gather information and make recommendations, but they do not set policy. Fliers with safety information about the increased flows and the request for information on fish die-offs are posted along the river. The higher flows are a response to the deaths in September 2002 of an estimated 34,000 fall chinook salmon ? many bound for the Trinity River. It was determined that the fish died in the lower Klamath without spawning due to disease resulting from overcrowding during the large fish run, warm water, and low water velocities and volumes. With an even bigger fall run of 352,000 fish expected this year, which would be the largest on record since 1978, and relatively dry conditions in the upper Klamath Basin, biologists have been concerned about a repeat of 2002. Reclamation recently released an environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact for the higher river releases. The final documents available atwww.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=10230 respond to comments made on earlier draft documents. The environmental assessment notes that 23 e-mails were received in support of the proposed increased flows, and 156 e-mails were received in support of the proposed flows plus additional water augmentation from storage in the upper Klamath Basin. From the Trinity Lake Revitalization Alliance, Kelli Gant commented that the environmental assessment does not reference published, defensible scientific studies or data showing that the proposed flow augmentation is needed. Reclamation responded that it is not aware of any such specific studies, but the post-2002 analysis of the fish die-off referenced in the environmental assessment does provide relevant analyses and some general recommendations. In response to another comment from Gant that the drop in Trinity Lake elevation from the flows will likely make many boat ramps unusable, Reclamation said based on forecasted conditions and planned operation of the Trinity River Division, it does not anticipate any changes to boat ramp usability. The assessment states that if only the 48,000 acre-foot preventive release is implemented, the water surface elevation at Trinity Lake will decrease by up to 3.5 feet compared to what it would be. If the additional 44,000 acre-foot emergency flow is implemented, the reservoir elevation will be decreased by up to another 3 feet. Boat ramp access is expected to remain the same as it would with no action, the assessment said, although "there is a small chance that some boat ramps might not be useable due to a reduced water elevation in the lake during the later part of summer of 2013." The assessment notes that other factors preclude making meaningful estimates that far in the future. In response to comments from Trinity Public Utilities District General Manager Paul Hauser and Barry Tippin of Redding Electric Utility, a "worst-case scenario" regarding the amount of foregone power generation and the value they put on it was added to the assessment. There could be decreased power generation if Trinity Lake does not fill in water year 2013 and less water is available to go through power plants. Decreased power generation is difficult to quantify, the assessment states, but if the full 92,000 acre-feet were released, future foregone generation could be a maximum of about 110,400 megawatt hours worth in excess of $5 million. However, it was noted that power generation opportunities are subject to many restrictions and uncertainties unrelated to increased flows for the fall run. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 15 08:42:53 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 08:42:53 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity flow website Message-ID: <869A1D3A-D6E7-4C34-8032-C34FA4DB7F69@att.net> here is a website showing Lewiston Dam releases a day ahead of time: http://www.dreamflows.com/Pages/TrinitySchedule.php From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 15 08:54:42 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 08:54:42 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] TRRP website has real-time Trinity flows References: Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: From: "Schrock, Robin M" Date: August 15, 2012 8:47:13 AM PDT To: Tom Stokely , "Washburn, Thuy T" Cc: "Person, Brian L" Subject: RE: Please send revised Trinity flow schedule Tom, The TRRP website has had real time posting of flows in the Trinity River at 7 gages, including Lewiston, on its website homepage for several years. You and the public can also sign up for the email list to receive this information ? this has also been available on the website for several years. Please feel free to pass this information on. Thank you, Robin Robin M. Schrock Executive Director Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street Weaverville, CA 96093 TEL: (530) 623-1800 FAX: (530) 623-5944 CELL: (530) 945-7489 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 15 09:23:30 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 09:23:30 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Change Order - Lewiston Dam References: Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: From: "Washburn, Thuy T" Date: August 15, 2012 9:08:30 AM PDT To: Subject: Change Order - Lewiston Dam Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 8/15/2012 1000 950 1050 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Supplementing flows in Lower Klamath River. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Wed Aug 15 09:08:30 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 10:08:30 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Lewiston Dam Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 8/15/2012 1000 950 1050 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Supplementing flows in Lower Klamath River. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Aug 16 12:07:58 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 12:07:58 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Walters on Cost overruns for Twin Tunnels Message-ID: <4D0D32D4-8214-402A-8F10-E0994380112E@att.net> Check out this video from Dan Walters where he expresses doubt about the cost estimates for Governor Brown's Twin Tunnels. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2yJN6cr0kU&feature=player_embedded Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From TWashburn at usbr.gov Fri Aug 17 09:00:05 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 10:00:05 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Lewiston Dam Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 8/17/2012 0900 1050 1000 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Supplementing flows in Lower Klamath River. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Aug 17 10:33:54 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 10:33:54 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] KQED/PBS on Twin Tunnels Debate Message-ID: <984D9008-1086-4B7C-9A54-BBE33BC76EB9@att.net> See a really great synopsis of the Peripheral Canal debate from KQED/PBS athttp://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/science/july-dec12/waterwar_08-02.html Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Aug 20 21:05:06 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 21:05:06 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Glen Martin, Huffington Post: The Madness of King Jerry Message-ID: <2D855901-9A63-4DD5-9F15-5A5239694766@att.net> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/glen-martin/the-madness-of-king-jerry_b_1797652.html?view=screen August 21, 2012 The Internet Newspaper: News, Blogs, Video, Community The Madness of King Jerry Posted: 08/17/2012 7:38 pm Was California Gov. Jerry Brown a Manchurian Candidate for California's water buffaloes (promoters of hugely expensive and environmentally destructive water projects)? Kind of looks that way. Brown ran on a moderate platform that included a rational water policy. He promised to "fix" the broken Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta, restore its moribund fisheries, and provide some equity in the distribution of state water. Well, Brown got elected; after that, he apparently had a Vulcan mind meld with the agribusiness panjandrums of the western San Joaquin Valley. His new mantra is "peripheral canal"-- or maybe "conveyance system." It amounts to the same thing: subterranean twin tunnels that shuttle water from the Sacramento River around the Delta to the South State. And by South State, I mainly mean the corporate farmers of the San Joaquin. These plutocratic land barons will get most of this government-subsidized water, while SoCal urbanites must be content with a minority share. Brown explained his rationale late last month at a press conference to announce his plans for the behemoth twin-tunneled conveyance apparatus that will move from 9,000 to 15,000 cubic feet of water a second (and cost upward of $50 billion). He was getting on in years, he acknowledged, and was depressed that he kept going to the funerals of old friends. Ergo, he wanted, as he so memorably put it, "...to get sh-t done." I sympathize. More to the point, I empathize. I'll even express it in the colorful and colloquial language Brown prefers: getting old is something of a bitch. Anyone descending into ungraceful dotage, myself included, would like to get more shi-t done. But not all sh-t, of course, is created equal. And the canal is definitely bad sh-t. That's because it makes no sense economically or environmentally. Jeffrey Michael, an economist with the University of the Pacific at Stockton, conducted an analysis of the proposal and concluded the costs will outweigh the benefits by $7 billion. And while we're at it, the supposed "benefits" look decidedly slim, at least if beneficiaries are defined as the commonweal. Yes, South State cities need water, but they can get it without additional trips to the pork barrel -- and the accrual of more state debt. Remember, most of the water from Brown's "chunnel" will be used to irrigate thewestern San Joaquin Valley; this vast expanse of selenium-tainted soil already produces millions of acre feet of toxic agricultural drainwater that is a clear and present danger to human health, fisheries and wildlife. Cities must therefore be given priority over industrial agricultural for government project water. Second, we need to pick the low-hanging fruit. Recycling, conservation, desalinization plants and rain recovery systems for new residential and commercial projects will all help assure California's water security without a Ceaucescuesque public works project. Too, Brown and his allies disingenuously claim a canal is necessary to restore the biological health of the Delta. Exactly wrong. The chunnel will remove more of what the Delta needs: fresh water. It is the annual infusion of fresh water from the Sacramento River and rivers coming off the west slope of the Sierra that maintains the brackish conditions necessary for robust biological productivity in the Bay/Delta estuary. Brown's Orwellian doublespeak belies the fact that the chunnel's promoters are seeking a 50-year exemption from the U.S. Endangered Species Act. In other words, the Sacramento River's water can be blithely shuttled south for five decades before anyone has to worry about impacts on California's salmon runs. At the end of that period, of course, it's highly unlikely any salmon will be left. No salmon, no ESA restrictions - no problem. For the water buffaloes, at least. This is nothing new. Southern Californians were scammed by a grandiose water export scheme before. Allow me to transport you back to the halcyon year of 1991, when voters approved the "Coastal Branch" of the State Water Project's California Aqueduct. It tapped the main aqueduct near Kettleman City in the San Joaquin Valley, ultimately supplying the coastal communities of Santa Barbara, Santa Maria, and San Luis Obispo. Its 116 miles of pipe and five pumping stations were supposed to cost taxpayers no more than $270 million. By 1995, construction costs had spiked to $595 million; water deliveries to South Coast cities, however, have been no more than 36 percent of the total stipulated by contract. When all the hot air and construction dust settles by 2035, the total costs of the Coastal Branch are expected to exceed $1.75 billion. And that's without Brown's Folly -- I mean, peripheral canal. If this monumental boondoggle goes through, the South Coast could very well wind up paying more for less water. A study by the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) notes that Santa Barbara residents only need state water during droughts - precisely the times when such water is not available. Meanwhile, Santa Barbara's four South Coast water districts must continue to meet their bond obligations for the Coastal Branch - regardless of whether water is actually delivered. C-WIN observes that the Montecito Water District will shell out almost $5 million this year - or about 40 percent of its budget - to satisfy its Coastal Branch debt, even though it does not need and will not receive any state water. Construction of Brown's chunnel will only make things worse, increasing the price of water for California's ratepayers and ensuring the destruction of the richest estuary on the West Coast of the continental United States. Brown is doing everything he can to avoid a public decision on the project. The last time voters weighed in on a "conveyance system" was in 1982, during Brown's first tenure as governor. In that year, voters soundly rejected a referendum on a peripheral canal. The chances are very good they'd do so again. No surprise, then, that chunnel supporters are pushing for the issuance of state revenue bonds to fund the project; that route doesn't require voter approval. It's sad that Brown has been reduced from the "People's Governor" to agribusiness shill in the twilight of his career. But it's sadder still that Californians may have to suffer the crushing debt and environmental degradation that could result from his megalomania. We expected - and deserved --better from him. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: los-angeles.gif Type: image/gif Size: 4411 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Vina_Frye at fws.gov Wed Aug 22 11:32:46 2012 From: Vina_Frye at fws.gov (Vina_Frye at fws.gov) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 11:32:46 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) meeting Message-ID: Hi Folks, The working group is scheduled to meet on September 10, 2012. The discussion topics are listed in the notice below. [Federal Register Volume 77, Number 161 (Monday, August 20, 2012)] [Notices] [Page 50155] >From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [ www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 2012-20366] [[Page 50155]] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-FHC-2012-N201;FXFR1334088TWG0W4-123-FF08EACT00] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of meeting. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) affords stakeholders the opportunity to give policy, management, and technical input concerning Trinity River (California) restoration efforts to the Trinity Management Council (TMC). The TMC interprets and recommends policy, coordinates and reviews management actions, and provides organizational budget oversight. This notice announces a TAMWG meeting, which is open to the public. DATES: TAMWG will meet from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on Monday, September 10, 2012. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Trinity County Library, 351 Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meeting Information: Nancy J. Finley, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521; telephone: (707) 822-7201. Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) Information: Robin Schrock, Executive Director, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093; telephone: (530) 623-1800; email: rschrock at usbr.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), this notice announces a meeting of the TAMWG. The meeting will include discussion of the following topics: Designated Federal Officer (DFO) updates, Discussion of Charter, Discussion with Department of the Interior Solicitor, Executive Director's report, TMC Chair report, Update from TRRP Workgroups Update on the 2012 Water Year Presentation on Water Year Forecasting Hatchery Report (if available). Completion of the agenda is dependent on the amount of time each item takes. The meeting could end early if the agenda has been completed. Dated: August 14, 2012. Nancy Finley, Field Supervisor, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, Arcata, CA. [FR Doc. 2012-20366 Filed 8-17-12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P Respectfully, Vina Vina Frye U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata FWO 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone: (707) 822-7201 Fax: (707) 822-8411 vina_frye at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 22 12:28:44 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 12:28:44 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: New TRRP information bulletins References: Message-ID: <1EA65D30-E5F8-4D74-8159-4FB2AE3C34C4@att.net> Begin forwarded message: From: "Schrock, Robin M" Date: August 22, 2012 12:24:09 PM PDT To: Carrie Nichols , David Steinhauser , "Denn, Sandy " , "Ed Duggan" , Elizebeth Hadley , Emelia Berol , Gilbert Saliba , Jeffrey Sutton , 'Joseph McCarthy' , Kelli Gant , Kim Mattson , Liam Gogan , "Finley, Nancy" , Paul Hauser , Richard Lorenz , Tiffany Hayes , Tom Stokely , Travis Michel , "Frye, Vina" Cc: "Clifton, Diana L" , 'Jeff Morris' , 'Alex Cousins' Subject: New TRRP information bulletins As this information goes out to the TMC, TAMWG and is posted on the TRRP website and go out through all our distributions channels, we all need to thank first and foremost Diana Clifton. She soldiered her concept of TRRP outreach through the difficult and lengthy contract development and approval processes of the federal government to allow our collaboration with the RCD and the outreach coordinator to see her vision and that of the TRRP realized. The interpretive signs that exist at the hatchery and other sites were developed with her insights. The two brochures you received at the meeting on Monday were her vision of what was needed to share what we all appreciate about the Trinity River and our county. We have carried on her dedication to public outreach by providing the outreach coordinator with the information needed to answer the many public questions about the TRRP and the Trinity River. As the outreach coordinator develops further materials in collaboration with TRRP partners and their technical staff, your input and suggestions are welcome. These downloadable and printable bulletins are now available at: Direct links to the TRRP portal pages are: Water Releases and River Restoration http://odp.trrp.net/Data/Documents/Details.aspx?document=1741 Trinity River Rehabilitation Site Construction http://odp.trrp.net/Data/Documents/Details.aspx?document=1742 Gravel and Trinity River http://odp.trrp.net/Data/Documents/Details.aspx?document=1743 Robin M. Schrock Executive Director Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street Weaverville, CA 96093 TEL: (530) 623-1800 FAX: (530) 623-5944 CELL: (530) 945-7489 www.trrp.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 22 15:48:09 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2012 15:48:09 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Bilingual_News-In_the_Trenches_of_?= =?windows-1252?q?California=92s_Water_War=3A_A_Farmer=2C_an_Environmental?= =?windows-1252?q?ist_and_a_Republican_Envision_the_Future?= Message-ID: <24417DC4-780E-4D52-A546-2EDD3D929735@att.net> Ace free lance writer Deanna Wulff takes an in depth look at the Peripheral Tunnels through the eyes of three major players - http://bwnews.us/2012/08/22/in-the-trenches-of-the-water-war-a-farmer-an-environmentalist-and-a-republican-envision-the-future/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Aug 24 10:50:38 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 10:50:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Chico News and Review: Salmon return, but not for good? Message-ID: <1EC8718C-14FD-4F51-8F42-FB9452107E28@att.net> http://www.newsreview.com/chico/salmon-return-but-not-for/content?oid=7271288 Salmon return, but not for good? New study warns of salmon bust to follow this year?s boom Read 1 reader submitted comment This article was published on 08.23.12. Related stories: Where have all the salmon gone? Could it have something to do with those big pumps in the Delta? CN&R, 09.15.11. A decade-long high of 800,000 salmon are expected to run up the Sacramento River this year, compared to a low of 100,000 several years ago. But a $2 million California Hatchery Review Project study compiled by a panel of 11 fishery experts over a period of two years warned California?s boom-and-bust cycle is likely to repeat itself, according to The Sacramento Bee. As 90 percent of the returning salmon are hatched in one of eight hatcheries along the Sacramento, Trinity and Klamath rivers, interbreeding has reduced the salmon?s ability to survive environmental disruptions. The authors suggested discontinuing the practice of trucking young fish to San Francisco Bay, which improves their chances of survival by avoiding the predators and pollution in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, but ends up weakening their instincts to return to their birthplace to spawn. California?s Department of Fish and Game may begin adopting some of the report?s recommendations this fall. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: suswatch3.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 20164 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Aug 24 14:41:38 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 14:41:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: hatchery review/trucking to the estuary References: <002d01cd8230$73f59d90$5be0d8b0$@suddenlink.net> Message-ID: <640CBB43-4334-4A2B-B8D9-E976EC39809B@att.net> From: "Kier Associates" Date: August 24, 2012 12:41:27 PM PDT To: "'Tom Stokely'" , Subject: hatchery review/truckning to the estuary Tom Not sure the list has rec?d a copy of the 2012 hatchery review. See http://cahatcheryreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/CA%20Hatchery%20Review%20Report%20Final%207-31-12.pdf The issue highlighted in the Bee?s article on the hatchery review has been around a long time The State Water Contractors ?case? in the 1987 Bay-Delta water quality proceedings was 1- biological: the historic relationship between spring migration outflows for juvenile Sacramento River fall-run chinook salmon and the subsequent return of adult fall-run to the Sacramento River had ?broken? during the 1977-79 drought-let, never to be repeated again (at least not in the short period between the drought-let and those proceedings - SWC?s biological consultant was my former DFG boss, Don Kelley - ?downright embarrassing); and 2- policy: to provide flows for juvenile Sacramento River fall run chinook salmon outmigration was, therefore, an ?unreasonable use? of water barred by the State Constitution The testimony that appeared to have most effectively countered that of the Water Contractors was that presented by the U.S Fish & Wildlife Service (coordinated by Rick Morat, cc-ed here) which included biology ? the Marty Kjelson/Patricia Brandes study of the relationship between spring outflow past Rio Vista and the arrival of juvenile salmon at Chipps Island in the western Delta and Sacramento River adult fall run returns, a long-term mark-and-recapture (i.e., by trawling) project and 2- a policy statement : USFWS asserted, persuasively, that Coleman Natl Fish Hatchery, a mitigation hatchery, was bound by federal policy to accomplish its mitigation purpose at-or-near the area of impact. Ergo USFWS was bound by federal policy to release Coleman?s production, given the high incident of straying of fish trucked to/released in the estuary, near the hatchery ? and, therefore, streamflow sufficient to enable juvenile fall run chinook all the way down the river and through the Delta was necessary in order for USFWS to fulfill its federal mitigation policy obligations. And, of course, as juvenile migration habitat in the Delta-estuary has steadily worsened in the years since, more and more pressure has been brought on USFWS, successfully, to abandon its ?mitigation at?/near the pt of impact? policy and truck higher and higher numbers of hatchery salmon juveniles for release in the estuary I only recall all this because I suspect there?s no one in USFWS/Sacramento today with an inkling of what their office asserted, successfully, against all odds, as solemn federal policy 25 years ago. Dr Kjelson had a heart attack during the most intense days of cross-examination and the FWS regional deputy director was wrenched to D.C (this was the GHW Bush administration) on the eve of his policy testimony/spent a weekend in mtgs there explaining why the FWS and BurRec were on such different Bay-Delta pages It took the USFWS/Sacamento office two full years (1985-87) to secure their own counsel for those proceedings. The custom then, and I suspect today, is that counsel for both FWS/Sacto and Reclamation/Sacto is provided by the Sacramento office of the Interior Solicitor, which gets a lot more business from Reclamation than from USFWS - and strives to reconcile differences between the two agencies ?Doubt there?s much Marty Kjelson-type grit left in the fight to conserve Sacramento River salmon - but we?re going to have to find some pdq. The Kjelson-Brandes work, btw, has legs ? it?s been resubmitted into every significant SWRCB Bay-Delta proceeding over the 25 years since its first appearance. Bill Kier From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 10:51 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Chico News and Review: Salmon return, but not for good? http://www.newsreview.com/chico/salmon-return-but-not-for/content?oid=7271288 Salmon return, but not for good? New study warns of salmon bust to follow this year?s boom Read 1 reader submitted comment This article was published on 08.23.12. Related stories: Where have all the salmon gone? Could it have something to do with those big pumps in the Delta? CN&R, 09.15.11. A decade-long high of 800,000 salmon are expected to run up the Sacramento River this year, compared to a low of 100,000 several years ago. But a $2 million California Hatchery Review Project study compiled by a panel of 11 fishery experts over a period of two years warned California?s boom-and-bust cycle is likely to repeat itself, according to The Sacramento Bee. As 90 percent of the returning salmon are hatched in one of eight hatcheries along the Sacramento, Trinity and Klamath rivers, interbreeding has reduced the salmon?s ability to survive environmental disruptions. The authors suggested discontinuing the practice of trucking young fish to San Francisco Bay, which improves their chances of survival by avoiding the predators and pollution in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, but ends up weakening their instincts to return to their birthplace to spawn. California?s Department of Fish and Game may begin adopting some of the report?s recommendations this fall. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 20164 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Aug 24 15:30:27 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 15:30:27 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Deirdre Des Jardins analysis of claimed benefits of BDCP's Peripheral Tunnels on fisheries Message-ID: Deirdre Des Jardins analysis of claimed benefits of BDCP's Peripheral Tunnels on fisheries - http://h20research.com/2012/07/25/an-analysis-of-the-claimed-benefits-for-fish-in-bdcp-plus/ About Posted by: Deirdre Des Jardins | July 25, 2012 An analysis of the claimed benefits for fish in BDCP plus This is an analysis of the claimed benefits for fish in the BDCP Plus fact sheet, Current Conditions for Fish Compared with the Bay Delta Conservation Plan BDCP Plus has two claimed benefits for salmon: 1. Juvenile salmon would have better access to food on the Yolo Bypass floodplain, grow larger, and survive better as they enter the ocean. The decision to flood the Yolo Bypass is an operating decision by the Department of Water Resources, so it is not necessarily linked to construction of a new conveyance. The proposed BDCP restoration of habitat in the Yolo Bypass and Cache Slough could help salmon, if there was a significant increase in inundation of the floodplain. DWR has not proposed to increase bypass flows, but will wait for 12 inches of sea level rise to raise the level of the Sacramento River. This is forecast for mid-century under climate change models. 2. 95% of juvenile San Joaquin Chinook salmon and 60% of Sacramento River Chinook salmon do not survive the trip through the Delta. As the February BDCP effects analysis makes clear, major diversions on the Sacramento River would cause signficant entrainment of migrating spring and fall run Chinook salmon. DWR?s consultant recommended minimum Sacramento River flows of 7,000 cfs in the fall when the commercially important fall run Chinook are migrating. This would result in significantly reduced exports, and has been opposed by the water agencies. The minimum fall flows in the Feburary BDCP effects analysis are 4,000 cfs. Overall, BDCP benefits for Sacramento River Chinook salmon are unclear, and there is a significant risk to populations from increased entrainment of migrating spring and fall runs. BDCP plus has three claimed benefits for Delta smelt and Longfin smelt: 1. Estuary habitat quality and quantity would increase due to improved outflow and habitat restoration Suisun Bay is important feeding habitat for Delta smelt and Longfin smelt. Increased diversions since 2000 have increased salinity in the bay to the point that it is not usable in the summer by the pelagic fish, as well as creating an explosion in the population of the invasive clam, Corbula amurensis. Biologists have recommended reduced diversions and increased outflows in wet and above normal years. However, this was blocked as a result of a lawsuit by water agencies. New operating restrictions proposed as part of BDCP will also likely be subject to legal challenge. Benefits of proposed BDCP habitat restoration in Suisun Bay are linked to reducing salinity so that the Bay is usable by pelagic fish. 2. Plankton accumulation would improve through increased residence time in the Central and South delta, potentially enhancing foodweb support for longfin smelt and Delta smelt. Toxic algae blooms in the Delta first appeared in 2000. Research links the blooms to increased residence time in the Central and South Delta ? low flows and higher water temperatures. Sampling has also shown that the phytoplankton in the South Delta is almost entirely toxic algae. This is likely linked to the high level of nitrates in the San Joaquin River in the summer. Increasing residence time without cleaning up the San Joaquin River will likely increase toxic algal blooms, and could result in eutrophication and fish kills. Any benefits of BDCP habitat restoration in the South Delta would depend on sufficient flows, as well as reducing nitrates and selenium in the San Joaquin River. Currently there is no proposal to provide these flows, and reduction of nitrates has been delayed for over a decade. 3. New intakes in the North Delta would feature state-of-the-art fish screens. BDCP?s promise to provide state of the art fish screens is not new. The 2000 CALFED Record of Decision committed to putting fish screens on the existing pumps in the South Delta. The water agencies decided not to fund the project. Provision of adequate funding for BDCP mitigation commitments will be important in ensuring that mitigation commitments are met. Overall the benefits of BDCP for Delta smelt and Longfin smelt are unclear, and there are significant risks from potential degradation of water quality in the Delta. The most significant potential benefit for the Peripheral tunnel proposed as part of BDCP is in reducing reverse flows in the Central and South Delta. However, any reduction in reverse flows is strongly tied to the level of pumping. Increased water exports could actually increase reverse flows over existing conditions in some months. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Fri Aug 24 15:40:24 2012 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 15:40:24 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Mike Elster catches new state record inland king salmon at Trinity Lake In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <32B99DE8-D186-42C8-B626-9BBA06F9048C@fishsniffer.com> http://www.fishsniffer.com/reports/details/august-22-2012-mike- elster-bags-new-state-record-inland-chinook/ MIKE ELSTER BAGS NEW STATE RECORD INLAND CHINOOK Written By: Dan Bacher, August 22, 2012 ? Mike Elster of Mike's Fishing Guide Service set a new pending California landlocked king salmon record when he landed an 11.2-pound fish at Trinity Lake on August 13. His huge fish eclipses the existing inland Chinook record of 9 pounds, 9 ounces set by Leroy Mohr of Trinity Center at Trinity Lake on November 26, 2011. Elster took the lunker to the Department of Fish and Game office in Redding to be weighed, measured and examined. The fish measured 27? inches long and had an 18?-inch girth. "Jude, my wife and I hit Trinity Lake yesterday morning and weren?t in the water but 35 to 40 minutes and I got this monster hit,? recalled Elster in an email. ?He made my downrigger bounce and I thought I might have drug the bottom, but when I checked my depth we were in 220 feet of water and I was only fishing at 80 feet.? "First, he crossed over my stacked rod and got tangled with the Apex I had out, fortunately it wasn?t bad and I was able to cut it off my line," Elster stated. "While we were messing with the tangle, the fish made a lap around my downrigger cable. I raised the downrigger and figured out how to thread my rod through the 'rigger and around the cable and was able to free it.? Elster continued, "The fight was on, and when I got him to the surface I was excited. Finally, I got him close enough and Jude did a great job getting him in the net, but I had to drop the rod and take over the net because she couldn?t lift it in the boat." Elster hooked the fish while using a ?cop car? Apex lure. It took him around 20 minutes to land the fish on his Okuma 7 foot guide special rod, outfitted with an Abu Garcia 4600 level wind reel spooled with 10 lb. Maxima Ultra Green line. Elster is considering getting his trophy mounted. ?We caught two small kokanee that day, in addition to the big king,? noted Elster. ?The kokanee and king fishing is hit and miss at Trinity now, but I expect the fishing to pick up after Labor Day.? Elster guides on Trinity, Shasta and Whiskeytown lakes. For more information, contact him at (916) 215-6330 or Mikesfishingguideservice.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Trinity-King-State-Record-_-1-350x262.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 77991 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Aug 24 22:58:44 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 22:58:44 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Flow Release Schedule from Lewiston Dam for Lower Klamath River Flow Augmentation References: <469C3D002DBB944BBEAEC89CBE8D1DF73D30818E8B@IBR5DENMXCMX01.bor.doi.net> Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: From: "Person, Brian L" Date: August 24, 2012 5:24:26 PM PDT To: "rafting at whitewatertours.com" Cc: "tstokely at att.net" , "Schrock, Robin M" , "Washburn, Thuy T" , "Harral, Sheryl M (Sheri)" , "Reck, Donald R" Subject: Releases from Lewiston Dam for Lower Klamath River Flow Augmentation Lorraine, Your question about the increased flows was forwarded to me, and since I have no indication you received an earlier reply, I?ll respond. The augmentation flows will continue until approximately September 21, after which the release rate from Lewiston Dam will ramp down to 450 cfs. There is river travel time to be taken into account (Lewiston Dam to the Lower Klamath) and by that time there is the possibility of rainfall events in the Klamath River Basin that could influence the Lewiston Dam release rates and dates. I hope this is helpful?please let us know if you need more information. Brian Person Area Manager Northern California Area Office Bureau of Reclamation From: Tributary Whitewater Tours Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Change Order - Lewiston Dam Date: August 24, 2012 11:06:30 AM PDT To: Washburn, Thuy T Cc: Louis Moore , Tom Stokely I did see an original email about the higher flows going into September, but do not remember seeing an end date for those higher flows, though think it said it would be the last week of September? . Do you have any more specific information on when those releases from Lewiston will drop back down to less then 700 cfs? Thanks, Lorraine ________________________________________ Lorraine Hall, Business Manager Tributary Whitewater Tours LLC 20480 Woodbury Drive, Grass Valley, CA 95949 (530) 346-6812, Fax (530) 346-6499 Toll Free for clients: (800) 672-3846 rafting at whitewatertours.com www.whitewatertours.com Safely guiding California's finest rivers for 30+ years -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Aug 25 08:17:24 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 08:17:24 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Peripheral Tunnel News Links Message-ID: <108649B4-CFB5-4E42-9537-C531CC59B7C7@att.net> The California Water Impact Network (C-WIN, online at www.c-win.org) has news links to most of the Peripheral Tunnel articles over the past month. The links up to July 26 at located at: http://www.c-win.org/content/news-links-peripheral-canaltwin-tunnels-announcement.html The links from July 27 through August 23 are located at: http://www.c-win.org/content/peripheral-tunnels-news-clips-july-27-through-august-23.html Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From tstokely at att.net Sun Aug 26 08:08:09 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2012 08:08:09 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard: We can't turn a blind eye anymore'; feds, local law enforcement promise 'hot and heavy' season of pot busts Message-ID: http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_21404307/we-cant-turn-blind-eye-anymore-feds-local We can't turn a blind eye anymore'; feds, local law enforcement promise 'hot and heavy' season of pot busts Thadeus Greenson/The Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Created: Times-Standard.com Editor's note: This is the first story in a three part series looking at marijuana issues on the North Coast. The proliferation of large scale, outdoor marijuana grows in Humboldt County has law enforcement agencies sometimes feeling like they're fighting a forest fire with squirt guns. Consequently, agencies are trending toward collaboration as this growing season hits full swing, with federal and local police looking to work together to take out some of the most egregious operations. ?It's one of the most beautiful parts of this country, but it's just being destroyed by marijuana cultivation,? said Randy Wagner, the U.S Drug Enforcement Agency's special agent in charge of Northern California operations. ?I can tell you, we're going to be hot and heavy in Humboldt County from here on out.? The push to crack down on pot grows seems to be due to a confluence of factors that came to a head last summer. The federal government has been increasingly frustrated with the proliferation of medical marijuana dispensaries, and grow operations in general, throughout California. Further, because the state's Department of Justice's Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement's budget was essentially gutted -- in the midst of an ongoing fiscal crisis last summer -- the feds seem intent on picking up the slack. It seems to have been two events late last summer that really pushed things over the tipping point. In late August, Fort Bragg City Councilman Jere Melo was shot and killed by a mentally ill man at the scene of an opium poppy grow on timber land in Mendocino County. The shooting -- and subsequent month-long manhunt for Melo's killer -- drew new attention to the dangers surrounding what officials see as increasing lawlessness on park and timber lands throughout the region. In the wake of Melo's death, the League of California Cities Redwood Division pledged to make cracking down on illegal grow operations a major focal point of its efforts this year, according to Division Director and Arcata City Councilman Mark Wheetley. Just days after Melo was killed, Humboldt County Sheriff Mike Downey and Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos took to the air and did some flyovers of Southern Humboldt County. Downey said he got off the plane that day knowing he had to make going after some of the county's largest grows his chief priority this summer. ?We just saw large commercial grow after large commercial grow,? Downey said, adding that the scope of the marijuana production is staggering. ?When I saw that and realized that the state of California is broke, I realized we have to do something.? marijuana culture in the county has changed, morphing from the largely locally raised operators who kept a low profile, to being made up of growers who come from outside the area and cultivate on a massive scale with no regard for the environment or the community. ?They've come in like the gold rush days trying to make a buck, leaving in their wake environmental devastation that Humboldt County has to deal with,? Downey said, pointing to a recent bust near Hoopa that saw more than 26,000 plants eradicated. ?That's not a mom and pop trying to make a little smoke to help pay their taxes.? So, Downey reached out to the feds. Wagner said they were happy to get the call. ?Those guys need help, and we're going to provide it,? Wagner said. Everyone realizes prioritization must be the name of the game, as uprooting every plant in the county -- or even a majority of them -- is a impossible. ?By no means do I have the time or the resources to go after every marijuana grow in Humboldt County,? Downey said. ?I can't bite the whole apple here in Humboldt County, so I'm deciding to try to take the most egregious chunk out of it.? Downey said the priority will be large scale operations on park and timber lands that cause the most environmental damage -- the kinds of grows that are typically protected by men with guns and necessitate heavy soil grading, large water diversions and generally use high powered insecticides, rodenticides and fertilizers. Pointing to a recent study by UC Davis researchers that found high powered rodenticides at illegal marijuana grows were the likely cause of a high number of deaths of pacific fishers -- a member of the weasel family and a candidate for federal protection -- Wagner and Downey said they believe public support for a crack down is growing. Wagner said he attended a recent California League of Cities Redwood Division meeting on the subject in Arcata and walked away with a clear message. ?What I was hearing from the council people and the locals there is that culturally this has always been there in Humboldt County, but now people realize this has gotten out of hand,? Wagner said. ?Not being from California, you hear the Pacific Northwest referred to as a 'tree-hugger' area. Well, these are tree-hugger issues that are affecting the land right now. I think people up there realize, 'We can't turn a blind eye anymore.'? Thadeus Greenson can be reached at 441-0509 or tgreenson at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Mon Aug 27 09:01:36 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 10:01:36 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Lewiston Dam Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 8/17/2012 0900 1000 1050 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Supplementing flows in Lower Klamath River. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Mon Aug 27 09:03:26 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 10:03:26 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Lewiston Dam - REVISE In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: Washburn, Thuy T Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 9:02 AM To: Aguilar, Burney; Alpers, Charles N.; Anderson, Craig; Anderson, Larry D; Angerer, Stuart A; Bairrington, Phil; Ball, Larry S; Bandrowski, David J; Baumgartner, Steve; Boardman, Tom; BOR CVO-400 EMPLOYEES; BOR CVO-650 EMPLOYEES; BOR MPR All Public Affairs Employees MP-140; BOR SLO NCAO All Weaverville Office Employees (TRRP); BOR SLO NCAO Control Operators; BOR SLO NCAO Water Quality; Bui, Tuan; Burditt, Wayne; Chase, Robert D; COE Distribution List; Hilts, Derek; DWR Dispatchers; DWR Flood Mgmt; Ferguson, Jon E.; Franklin, Robert; Gaeuman, David A; Gibbs, Andrew; Giorgi, Bryant; Gotham, Gregory P; Harral, Sheryl M (Sheri); Hawthorne, Jean; Hemus, Bob; Hirabayashi, Joni; Jackson, Deanna L; Jennings, Cory; Polos, Joe; Rueth, John; Kabat, Tom; Kisanuki, Tom T; Kiteck, Elizabeth G; Krause, Andreas F; Latimore, Joshua J.; Leahigh, John; Martin, Janet L; Matilton, Billy; Matilton, Clyde; Brown, Matt; Rod Mendes; Merriweather, Audrey; Miller, Aaron; Milligan, Ronald E; Mortimeyer, Barry S; OCO Export Management Group-DWR; O'Neil, Christine S.; Oppenheim, Bruce; Petros, Paul; Pettit, Tracy; pokerbarbill; Ranieri, Julie; Reed, Timothy J.; River Forecast Center; Guinee, Roger; Rogers, Rick; Sandhu, Amerit; Schrock, Robin M; Shackleton, Chris; Shahcheraghi, Reza; Singh, Amardeep; Sinnen, Wade; Smith, Stacey M; Suppiger, Mary B; Tran, Loi; Trinity Chamber of Commerce; Trinity Dispatch; Trinity River Restoration Program; Vermeyen, Tracy B; WAPA-Group; White, Molly; Wilbur, Ryan; Wittler, Rodney J; Wong, Greg; Yamanaka, Dan; Yin, Wenli; Yip, Garwin; Zedonis, Paul A Subject: Change Order - Lewiston Dam Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 8/27/2012 0900 1000 1050 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Supplementing flows in Lower Klamath River. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Tue Aug 28 14:03:32 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 14:03:32 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Revised Trinity River trapping update Redux Message-ID: <503CCF74.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Please disregard the previous Trinity River trapping update. Please refer to this attachment for summary results of the first trapping week at the Willow Creek weir and the final trap summary for the Junction City weir. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRP_trapping_summary12.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 81920 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Wed Aug 29 09:38:47 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 10:38:47 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Lewiston Dam Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 8/31/2012 0400 1050 1300 8/31/2012 0600 1300 1550 8/31/2012 0800 1550 1650 9/01/2012 0001 1650 1550 9/01/2012 0400 1550 1450 9/01/2012 0800 1450 1350 9/01/2012 1200 1350 1250 9/01/2012 1600 1250 1150 9/01/2012 2000 1150 1050 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Pulse flow target -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Thu Aug 30 13:39:32 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 14:39:32 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Lewiston Dam Message-ID: Please make the following REVISE release changes to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 8/31/2012 0400 1050 1300 8/31/2012 0600 1300 1450 9/01/2012 0001 1450 1350 9/01/2012 0400 1350 1250 9/01/2012 0800 1250 1150 9/01/2012 1200 1150 1050 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Adjustment due to USGS updating rating curve at KNK -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bnorman at sonic.net Sat Sep 1 07:03:35 2012 From: bnorman at sonic.net (bnorman at sonic.net) Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2012 07:03:35 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Subscription Message-ID: <7C9DC2D8-96DF-49B6-AAD6-5AF3A25911E7@sonic.net> Hello, I would like to cancel my subscription ASAP. Thank You. Sincerely, Bob Norman From trinityjosh at gmail.com Sat Sep 1 15:20:34 2012 From: trinityjosh at gmail.com (Joshua Allen) Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2012 15:20:34 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Moving to Pendleton Oregon for Ameri-Corp Message-ID: Dear Trinity River Enthusiasts, Due to not being able to find meaningful employment in California after graduating Chico State University with a Masters of Public Administration (focus on local government & non-profit admin with policy development/implementation) I'm leaving the state. Though I did work this summer as a raft guide for Trinity River Rafting this summer which allowed me to be on the Trinity River to have some fun, save up some money to move with, and educate people about the river's issues (thanks Dave & Dana Steinhauser!).Tomorrow I'm heading for Pendleton Oregon. The reason for this move is to participate in the Ameri-Corp Resource Assistance for Rural Environments based out of the University of Oregon Eugene Community Service Center (http://csc.uoregon.edu/rare/). I have been placed with the Umatilla Basin Watershed Council (UBWC) in Pendelton (http://www.umatillawatershedcouncil.org/) which is working to improve salmonid species habitat on the Umatilla River (a tributary of the Columbia River). Within the UBWC I will be fulfilling the position of Program Manager of Watershed Restoration & Public Education. My duties for my next year of service will include grant administration, project implementation, water quality monitoring, manage stakeholder involvement, and educate the public about the watershed/salmon. Much of the work I'll will be doing is just like what I was doing with Tom Stokely in Trinity County on the Trinity River; with the exception that I'll also be working with a high school science class to teach them how to do water quality monitoring, salmon, watershed restoration, and setting up field trips (which should be interesting because I have never taught). Hopefully I can use what I have garnered from my education and experience to fulfill this public service position. If anyone has any insight about Columbia River salmonid issues, please by all means, let me know, and keep in touch! It has been a pleasure and honor to work with many of you on restoring the Trinity River, which, I would not be here today getting ready to move to work for the UBWC without you. Cheers! Joshua Allen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 277396_10151196500953066_8220486_o.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 217062 bytes Desc: not available URL: From moira at onramp113.com Sat Sep 1 17:58:50 2012 From: moira at onramp113.com (Moira Burke) Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2012 17:58:50 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Moving to Pendleton Oregon for Ameri-Corp In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <322B1AF0-62DF-45C3-92B4-5E86580567D4@onramp113.com> Josh, Thank you for all of your efforts; you'll be missed. Best wishes for your happiness and success on new horizons. Moira M o i r a B u r k e tel 707 678 3591 On Sep 1, 2012, at 3:20 PM, Joshua Allen wrote: > Dear Trinity River Enthusiasts, > > Due to not being able to find meaningful employment in California after graduating Chico State University with a Masters of Public Administration (focus on local government & non-profit admin with policy development/implementation) I'm leaving the state. Though I did work this summer as a raft guide for Trinity River Rafting this summer which allowed me to be on the Trinity River to have some fun, save up some money to move with, and educate people about the river's issues (thanks Dave & Dana Steinhauser!).Tomorrow I'm heading for Pendleton Oregon. The reason for this move is to participate in the Ameri-Corp Resource Assistance for Rural Environments based out of the University of Oregon Eugene Community Service Center (http://csc.uoregon.edu/rare/). > > I have been placed with the Umatilla Basin Watershed Council (UBWC) in Pendelton (http://www.umatillawatershedcouncil.org/) which is working to improve salmonid species habitat on the Umatilla River (a tributary of the Columbia River). Within the UBWC I will be fulfilling the position of Program Manager of Watershed Restoration & Public Education. My duties for my next year of service will include grant administration, project implementation, water quality monitoring, manage stakeholder involvement, and educate the public about the watershed/salmon. Much of the work I'll will be doing is just like what I was doing with Tom Stokely in Trinity County on the Trinity River; with the exception that I'll also be working with a high school science class to teach them how to do water quality monitoring, salmon, watershed restoration, and setting up field trips (which should be interesting because I have never taught). > > Hopefully I can use what I have garnered from my education and experience to fulfill this public service position. If anyone has any insight about Columbia River salmonid issues, please by all means, let me know, and keep in touch! It has been a pleasure and honor to work with many of you on restoring the Trinity River, which, I would not be here today getting ready to move to work for the UBWC without you. > > Cheers! > > Joshua Allen > > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 277396_10151196500953066_8220486_o.jpeg Type: image/jpeg Size: 29643 bytes Desc: not available URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Tue Sep 4 08:34:31 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2012 09:34:31 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Lewiston Dam Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 9/04/2012 1200 1050 950 9/05/2012 1200 950 850 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Supplementing flows in Lower Klamath River. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Tue Sep 4 14:59:46 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2012 14:59:46 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River trap summary Message-ID: <5046171D.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Hi All, Here is the latest Trinity River trapping summary for the Willow Creek weir. Trapping at the Junction City weir is over for this year. Please see attachment, Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRP_trapping_summary JWeek 35.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 83456 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 5 08:04:49 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 08:04:49 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Water Quality modeling Webinar 09/20/2012 - Advances in the Application of the USGS SPARROW Model in California References: Message-ID: -------- Original Message -------- Subject: CWQMCN Webinar 09/20/2012 - Advances in the Application of the USGS SPARROW Model in California Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 00:39:24 +0000 From: lyris at swrcb18.waterboards.ca.gov To: Mark Dowdle This is a message from the State Water Resources Control Board. California Water Quality Monitoring Collaboration Network Participant: Join the California Water Quality Monitoring Collaboration Network and USGS?s Joseph Domagalski from your own workspace for a special Webinar session, ?Advances in the Application of the USGS SPARROW Model in California?. Please join us on Thursday September 20, 11:30 AM -12:30 PM. Please see the instructions below to join the webinar. To watch the presentation ?join the online meeting? and to hear the meeting ?join the teleconference?, as we use voice over phone protocol. Advances in the Application of the USGS SPARROW Model in California To support the need for national and regional water-quality modeling, USGS scientists developed a model that integrates monitoring data with landscape information. This model, known as SPARROW (SPAtially-Referenced Regression On Watershed attributes) , is watershed based and designed for use in predicting long-term average values of water characteristics, such as concentrations and amounts of selected constituents that are delivered to downstream receiving waters. Statistical methods are used in SPARROW modeling to explain instream measurements of water quality in relation to upstream sources and watershed properties. Information on the SPARROW model and how it will be implemented in California will be discussed during this talk. This webinar is a follow-up to the webinar ?Application of the USGS SPARROW Model to Understand Nitrogen and Phosphorus Transport in California presented May 16, 11:30 AM -1:00 PM. Joseph Domagalski has been with the USGS since 1988 and has been involved with various water quality studies involving pesticides, nutrients, and mercury. He has published numerous reports from the State, Regional, to National level, and is currently Project Chief of the Sacramento River National Water Quality Assessment Program. Dina Saleh, a research hydrologist, has been with the USGS since 1999 and has completed several studies involving nutrients and pesticides focused on understanding the occurrence and transport of these compounds in hydrologic systems. The current focus of her research is the development and application of new analysis techniques to solve a variety of water quality problems especially from a modeling perspective. Meeting information ------------------------------------------------------- Topic: CWQMCN Webinar - USGS SPARROW Date: Thursday, September 20, 2012 Time: 11:30 am, Pacific Daylight Time (San Francisco, GMT-07:00) Meeting Number: 745 884 636 Meeting Password: wqwebinar ------------------------------------------------------- To join the online meeting ------------------------------------------------------- Go to https://waterboards.webex.com/waterboards/j.php?ED=189391197&UID=484113162&PW=NOTFiYjAxNTg5&RT=MiM0 ------------------------------------------------------- Teleconference information ------------------------------------------------------- Call-in toll-free number (Verizon): 1-866-761-8603 (US) Call-in number (Verizon): 1-517-652-7895 (US) Show global numbers: https://wbbc.verizonbusiness.com/wbbcClick2Join/servlet/WBBCClick2Join?TollNumCC=1&TollNum=517-652-7895&TollFreeNumCC=1&TollFreeNum=866-761-8603&ParticipantCode=5095154&customHeader=mymeetings&dialInNumbers=true Attendee access code: 509 515 4 ------------------------------------------------------- For assistance ------------------------------------------------------- 1. Go to https://waterboards.webex.com/waterboards/mc 2. On the left navigation bar, click "Support". To add this meeting to your calendar program (for example Microsoft Outlook), click this link:https://waterboards.webex.com/waterboards/j.php?ED=189391197&UID=484113162&ICS=MS&LD=1&RD=2&ST=1&SHA2=Iys7YgbjnzhJJt4JdRtSyszmpXBOvxRnm7ZMezfvNgY=To check whether you have the appropriate players installed for UCF (Universal Communications Format) rich media files, go tohttps://waterboards.webex.com/waterboards/systemdiagnosis.php. http://www.webex.com CCM:+15176527895x3359348# IMPORTANT NOTICE: This WebEx service includes a feature that allows audio and any documents and other materials exchanged or viewed during the session to be recorded. You should inform all meeting attendees prior to recording if you intend to record the meeting. Please note that any such recordings may be subject to discovery in the event of litigation. We have set up a webpage for the California Water Quality Monitoring Collaboration Network (CWQMCN) at: www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/monitoring_council/collaboration_network/index.shtml Webinar materials (if available), all past webinars (recordings and pdf?s) will be posted on the website. The recorded webinars and associated materials are located under 'Monthly Webinars'. We hope to use this webpage to help you network with each other and with the larger monitoring community. So, feel free to give us your ideas on how to make it better. CWQMCN Emails: New participants can join the webinar listserv by signing up on the web at: www.waterboards.ca.gov/resources/email_subscriptions/swrcb_subscribe.shtml. Enter your email address and name, place a check mark next to "Water Quality Monitoring Collaboration Network - Webinar Sessions", then click the "subscribe" button. California Water Quality Monitoring Professional Network : Share technical and support tools for water quality monitoring, assessment and reporting; Encourage discussion on common concerns like information management and program development; Provide a forum for networking and collaboration. This LinkedIn Group, California Water Quality Monitoring Professional Network, compliments the California Water Quality Monitoring Collaboration Network (CWQMCN) and was created so that water quality monitors and Network members would have the ability to further collaborate and communicate outside of the current CWQMCN Webinar series and emails If you are a member of LinkedIn please join the group. Not a member yet? Please consider doing so and joining this group of water quality monitoring professionals, www.linkedin.com Erick Burres Citizen Monitoring Coordinator SWCRB- Clean Water Team 320 West 4th Street, Suite 200 Los Angeles, CA 90013 213-576-6788 O 213-712-6862 C Clean Water Team www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/swamp/cwt_volunteer.shtml www.youtube.com/cleanwaterteamvideos http://creekwatch.researchlabs.ibm.com/ California Water Quality Monitoring Collaboration Network www.waterboards.ca.gov/mywaterquality/monitoring_council/collaboration_network/index.shtml Email Subscriptions www.waterboards.ca.gov/resources/email_subscriptions/ --- You are currently subscribed to wq_monitoring_webinar -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ATT00002.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1251 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 5 12:12:20 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 12:12:20 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] California Spigot on Peripheral Tunnels Debate/Details Message-ID: <3FC70F1E-6DC9-49A2-AE48-F4D28BDCBB8E@att.net> There are several blogs on the California Spigot going back a few months on the Peripheral Tunnels project, including a recent one at the top of the page regarding a recent meeting where some details were released, but many questions are still unanswered. See http://www.californiaspigot.blogspot.com/ Scroll down for the older ones. There is a big blank space after the most recent blog. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 5 12:21:57 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 12:21:57 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Trinity_Journal=3A_Stokely_to_spea?= =?windows-1252?q?k_in_Hayfork_Sept=2E_18_on_=91Peripheral_Tunnels=92_plan?= Message-ID: http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_ba3f2fda-f708-11e1-9358-0019bb30f31a.html Stokely to speak in Hayfork Sept. 18 on ?Peripheral Tunnels? plan Posted: Wednesday, September 5, 2012 6:15 am Tom Stokely will be the special speaker at the next Hayfork Cooperative meeting to be held at 7 p.m. Tuesday, Sept. 18, at Northern Delights coffeehouse on Main Street in Hayfork. Come learn more about our precious resource here in Trinity County ? water ? from someone who has been a leader in the huge fight to protect it for many years. Stokely, a former Hayfork resident and Trinity County natural resources planner now with the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN, online at www.c-win.org), will discuss the implications of Gov. Jerry Brown?s ?Peripheral Tunnels? project on the Trinity River, the state of Jefferson and all of California. On July 25, Governor Brown announced his plan to drill two 33-foot tunnels 150 feet under California?s Delta, big enough to siphon the entire Sacramento River to thirsty San Joaquin Valley agribusiness and Southern California cities. Previous plans to build a Peripheral Canal were defeated by California voters in 1982 during Brown?s first tenure as governor of California. Stokely lived and worked in Trinity County for 27 years prior to retiring from the Trinity County Natural Resources Division in 2008. He worked for 20 years on passage and implementation of the 2000 Trinity River Record of Decision that reallocated water back to the Trinity River for fishery restoration. He now works for the California Water Impact Network and lives in Mt. Shasta. He is a public member of the federal advisory committee for the Trinity River Restoration Program, the Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group. The California Water Impact Network promotes the equitable and environmental use of California?s water, including instream uses, through research, planning, public education, and litigation. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Thu Sep 6 09:54:41 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 10:54:41 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Lewiston Dam Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 9/06/2012 1000 850 800 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Supplementing flows in Lower Klamath River. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Fri Sep 7 14:30:13 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2012 15:30:13 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Lewiston Dam Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 9/07/2012 1500 800 850 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Supplementing flows in Lower Klamath River. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Sep 9 08:10:52 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2012 08:10:52 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard- Supes to discuss state's new water tunnel project; Trinity River concerns raised as plan moves forward Message-ID: <62538256-1964-4792-AB4E-4EA554A9733D@att.net> http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_21502568/supes-discuss-states-new-water-tunnel-project-trinity Supes to discuss state's new water tunnel project; Trinity River concerns raised as plan moves forward Megan Hansen/The Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Created: Times-Standard.com The role the Trinity River plays in a controversial state and federal plan to transport water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to Southern California will be discussed at Tuesday's meeting of the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors. After six proclamations and recognition items, the board will take up the new Bay Delta Conservation Plan at 10 a.m. Gov. Jerry Brown and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced the plan in July. The plan aims to provide a more reliable water supply to Southern California, while also implementing a 50-year Delta restoration program to protect fish and wildlife. The plan proposes two parallel tunnels, each 33 feet in diameter, to draw water from the Sacramento River and divert it around the Delta, according to a Humboldt County staff report. The water would be diverted about 37 miles to facilities near Tracy for delivery to Southern California. Humboldt County Senior Environmental Analyst Jill Duffy, a former county supervisor, is making a presentation to the board Tuesday about the Bay Delta Conservation Plan. She said there are concerns about the possibility for increased diversions from the Trinity River as the plan moves forward. The Trinity River is the Klamath River's largest tributary. The county, along with various Native American tribes and environmental groups, has been trying to increase and maintain the Klamath's flows for decades. Commercial, tribal and recreational fishermen have said keeping the Klamath healthy and robust is essential to their trade, as the river typically hosts large runs of salmon each fall. Duffy said the plan doesn't address Humboldt County's needs. It doesn't specifically recognize the June 19, 1959, contract signed by the county and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation that mandates the government release sufficient water from the Trinity River so that not less than 50,000 acre-feet is available each year for downstream users like Humboldt County. In addition, Duffy said, the plan doesn't address the Trinity River Division Act -- passed by Congress on Aug. 12, 1955 -- in which Humboldt County is named a party of interest. She said the 1959 water allocation contract is unresolved, as the county hasn't always received the 50,000 acre-feet of water it was promised -- thus it hasn't been included in the Bay Delta Conservation Plan's modeling assumptions. The county has asked multiple times that Salazar and the Bureau of Reclamation make that water available, according to the county report. Duffy said the supervisors need to take a stance on the Bay Delta Conservation Plan. ?It's an important opportunity for Humboldt County to assert its rights,? Duffy said. The supervisors are being asked by county staff to take a stance on the plan and its water rights by way of a resolution that will be sent to Brown, Salazar, Congressman Mike Thompson, Assemblyman Wesley Chesbro, Sen. Noreen Evans, the Hoopa Valley Tribe and Yurok Tribe. For the complete Board of Supervisors meeting agenda and supporting documents, go online to www.co.humboldt.ca.us/board/agenda/questys/. IF YOU GO: What: Board of Supervisors meeting Where: Supervisors' Chamber, first floor, Humboldt County Courthouse, 825 Fifth St. When: 9 a.m. Tuesday Megan Hansen can be reached at 441-0511 or mhansen at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Sep 9 08:13:24 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2012 08:13:24 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard:Blue-green algae study on Klamath reservoirs frustrates tribes; PacifiCorps says treatment is safe Message-ID: <06F85302-0D9C-4D84-BBBA-A065F9813365@att.net> http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_21502579/blue-green-algae-study-klamath-reservoirs-frustrates-tribes Blue-green algae study on Klamath reservoirs frustrates tribes; PacifiCorps says treatment is safe Luke Ramseth/The Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Created: Times-Standard.com The Hoopa and Karuk tribes are raising concerns about a PacifiCorps Energy algae study that took place in the Copco Reservoir of the Klamath River this week. According to PacifiCorps, the study is intended to look at whether a pesticide will knock down high levels of blue-green algae in the reservoir. The pesticide -- called aquatic algaecide -- is hydrogen peroxide and peroxyacetic acid-based. ?As it's being used, there's no scientific basis whatsoever to the notion that it poses any threat to fish, humans or other animals,? PacifiCorps spokesman Bob Gravely said in an email. The company applied the algaecide to a cove in the Copco Reservoir on Thursday. PacifiCorps Klamath project manager Tim Hemstreet said it was the only application scheduled for now -- at least until PacifiCorps determines whether it is effective at killing the blue-green algae. Representatives of the Hoopa and Karuk tribes said they are concerned about the effect it might have on the downriver and upset that they were not consulted by PacifiCorps before the test. ?We weren't even notified,? said Regina Chichizola, a spokeswoman for the Hoopa Tribe, adding that ceremonies are planned on the river this week. ?There's a concern that when you kill toxic algae with a pesticide, it could release its toxins into the river,? she said. Clayton Creager, an environmental scientist with the California Water Quality Control Board, said the concern is not with the toxicity of algaecide itself. Rather, he said, the algaecide PacifiCorps used has the potential to oxidize the cell membrane in blue-green algae, releasing microcystis -- a toxin that poses human health risks. Creager said the PacifiCorps permit did not address the issue. ?I originally put a hold on the permit because I didn't think it was adequate,? he said. ?It's a poorly written permit.? Creager said he did not have the jurisdiction to reject the permit on those grounds. ?I told PacifiCorps, there's a ground swell here. People are upset,? Creager said. ?They chose not to listen to that.? An online petition against using algaecides in Klamath reservoirs on change.org garnered more than 250 supporters by Friday afternoon. PacifiCorps' permit states that the study would take place on both the Copco and Iron Gate reservoirs -- although Hemstreet said the Copco reservoir is the only study location for now. Creager said PacifiCorps' plan was to use the Iron Gate Reservoir as a backup location for the algaecide study if there was too much wind to conduct the test at Copco. Crystal Bowman, water resources coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, wrote a letter to PacifiCorps saying that she was especially concerned about the algaecide if it was used in the Iron Gate reservoir, which empties directly onto Karuk land. ?Algaecides are not a sustainable, long-term solution to control toxic algae,? she wrote in the letter. ?The times of the year when the algaecide would be used coincides with the time of the year that World Renewal Ceremonies are occurring downstream of the dams.? Hemstreet and Gravely stressed the algaecide is safe, stating that it is approved by the Environmental Protection Agency. ?There are no public usage restrictions,? Gravely said. Hempstreet said discussing the study with the tribes was ?not a requirement.? ?Frankly, we don't think they'll be affected by this,? he said. ?They're 150 miles down the river.? Creager said he believes PacifiCorps has the right intent, to reduce the level of blue-green algae in their reservoirs. But he said more long-term solutions -- like a nutrient reduction program upstream from the reservoirs -- is a better option. ?But it's PacifiCorps' call, it's their liability,? Creager said. ?It's a tough problem for them, but this wasn't the solution.? Luke Ramseth can be reached at 441-0509 or lramseth at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Sep 9 18:50:08 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2012 18:50:08 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding's 3rd Annual California Water Series Message-ID: <9B16BABA-25B3-42A9-A216-A15FECFBA729@att.net> http://www.bvwd.org/pdf/California%20Water%20Series%202012.pdf From Pamela Clacker: The City of Redding has once again partnered with other agencies to bring the 3rd annual California Water Series to Shasta County and you are cordially invited to attend. This series was conceived to provide residents of the North State an interactive opportunity to enhance its understanding of California?s water supply, the challenges and pressures in allocating available water and the future of California water. The series consists of 2 evenings featuring different panels of California water leaders discussing topics of concern to all of us in Northern California. Both events will be held at the McConnell Foundation?s Lema Ranch. We are excited to be part of an effort to engage more citizens in the process of making informed decision about the future of water and hope that you can share in our efforts. Please see the attached agenda for both evenings and a poster for the first. RSVPs are requested as seating is limited and e-mail is preferred for tracking purposes. You may RSVP for either of the evenings or both. Thank you Pam Pamela Clackler Conservation Specialist - Water Utility Public Works Department 530.224.6032 phone 530.224.6071 fax mailing: 777 Cypress Avenue Redding, CA 96001 shipping: 20055 Viking Way Building #3 Redding CA 96003 pclackler at ci.redding.ca.us (See attached file: CWS 2012 Poster.pdf)(See attached file: Public Notice and Agendas - CWS 2012.pdf) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: California Water Series 2012.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 181444 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Sep 9 18:52:30 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2012 18:52:30 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: 2012 TAMWG correspondence References: Message-ID: <287549CC-0F08-4AFB-89DA-83930DBAF118@att.net> From: Date: September 6, 2012 9:06:44 AM PDT To: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Cc: Subject: 2012 TAMWG correspondence Hi Folks, I have attached an additional two letters that will soon be located in the June file 2012 under other documents. Please familiarize yourself with the web site (http://www.fws.gov/arcata) if you have not already done so, and let me know if you have suggestions. (See attached file: Letter from TAMWG to TMC March 27, 2012.pdf)(See attached file: Letter from TMC to TAMWG June 6, 2012.pdf) Respectfully, Vina Vina Frye U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata FWO 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone: (707) 822-7201 Fax: (707) 822-8411 vina_frye at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Letter from TAMWG to TMC March 27, 2012.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 87133 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Letter from TMC to TAMWG June 6, 2012.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 165351 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Sep 9 18:53:09 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 9 Sep 2012 18:53:09 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: September 10, 2012 TAMWG Meeting Agenda packet References: Message-ID: Begin forwarded message: From: Date: September 4, 2012 2:57:18 PM PDT To: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: September 10, 2012 TAMWG Meeting Hi Elizabeth, Here is the meeting materials electronic packet. Let me know if you would like to add anything else. Did you set a meeting date for the December TAMWG meeting? Nancy vaguely remembers December 5th? If that is the correct date let me know and I will book the Library. (See attached file: Signed pre-meeting letter.pdf)(See attached file: Agenda Sept 2012.pdf)(See attached file: June Minutes 2012.pdf)(See attached file: Letter TAMWG to TMC June 18 2012.pdf)(See attached file: Letter TMC to TAMWG August 27 2012.pdf) Vina Frye U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata FWO 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone: (707) 822-7201 Fax: (707) 822-8411 vina_frye at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Signed pre-meeting letter.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 33565 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Agenda Sept 2012.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 117201 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Letter TAMWG to TMC June 18 2012.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 619796 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Letter TMC to TAMWG August 27 2012.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 76569 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Mon Sep 10 09:24:26 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 10:24:26 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Lewiston Dam Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 9/10/2012 1000 850 900 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Supplementing flows in Lower Klamath River. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Sep 10 16:19:13 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2012 16:19:13 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Information on Trinity River Water Year Forecast 50% vs. 90% exceedance Message-ID: All, There was a discussion today at the TAMWG meeting about forecasting water year types for Trinity River fishery flows. The 2000 Trinity River Record of Decision called for an April 1 forecast using a 90% exceedance forecast. Thanks to Spreck Rosecrans, formerly of Environmental Defense Fund, the Trinity ROD was changed to a 50% exceedance forecast on April 1 because it more accurately reflects actual inflows after April 1. You can find the documents that Spreck put together on this issue on the USFWS's TAMWG website for the December 7, 2005 meeting under attachments for meeting minutes: http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/tamwg_2005documents.html#07Dec05 It is covered under items 4, 4a and 4b. This is the reason that Spreck was, for awhile, my "favorite corporate environmentalist." He subsequently lost that status due to several factors, including most recently, the fact that he is no longer corporate. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From tstokely at att.net Tue Sep 11 10:57:08 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 10:57:08 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard: Keep them out of the water Blue-green algae bloom poses fatal threat for the furry family member Message-ID: <8C6EBA5C-6847-4C35-A07B-5F121CF81398@att.net> I haven't heard of any blue-green algae of this kind in the Trinity River, but FYI. In addition to the Klamath River Reservoirs, there have been blooms in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta region. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org http://www.times-standard.com/ci_21514946/keep-them-out-water-blue-green-algae-bloom?IADID=Search-www.times-standard.com-www.times-standard.com Keep them out of the water Blue-green algae bloom poses fatal threat for the furry family member Jessie Faulkner/Tri-City Weekly Eureka Times Standard Created: Times-Standard.com Humboldt County is heading into the months that historically bring the best weather -- September and October. Good enough to take the family dog for a swim in one of the local rivers or lagoons. Don't do it. The Humboldt County Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) recently issued a warning that blue-green algae blooms are again possible in area rivers and lagoons. The floating algae -- that can be blue-green, brown or white -- can be quickly fatal to dogs that come in contact with the toxic growth. It often appears as foam or mats on the water's surface. ?Dogs are more vulnerable than people to the effects of blue-green algae because they can swallow the algae when they lick their fur,? according to the DHHS warning. ?Dogs have died within 30 minutes to one hour after leaving the water.? The speed of the toxicity in affecting dogs, according to the statewide Guidance for Blue-Green Algae Blooms, is linked to the neurotoxins' ability to paralyze life-sustaining functions. ?BGA (Blue-green algae) can kill animals within minutes by paralyzing the respiratory muscles, while the hepatotoxins can cause death within hours by causing blood to pool in the liver. The same BGA species can be toxic or nontoxic at different times. ... Reported neurological symptoms included stumbling and falling, followed by an inability to rise, elevated heart rate, foaming at the mouth, howling, tremors, loss of bowel control, eyes rolling back into the head and seizures.? The blooms can appear in late summer through a combination of specific conditions: low flow, higher water temperature and higher air temperature, said Kevin Metcalfe, a supervising environmental health specialist in the county's Environmental Health Division. Typically, he said, the algae blooms continue as long as the supportive conditions exist. Testing to confirm the presence of blue-green algae blooms is cost prohibitive, Metcalfe said. But, it may very well be in place. The state guidelines for dealing with blue-green algae blooms note that five dogs died after swimming in Big Lagoon between July and October 2001, another three dogs died after contact with the South Fork of the Eel River in the summer of 2002 -- two after swimming in the river near Standish-Hickey State Park and another after swimming near Tooby Park in Garberville. In 2009, a dog that swam in the South Fork of the Eel River near Phillipsville died. ?The vet who saw the dogs from Standish-Hickey stated that the animals had seizures within 5-10 minutes of exposure to the water, and were dead within 15 minutes,? according to the state guidance document. Exposure can cause eye irritation, skin rash, mouth ulcers, vomiting, diarrhea and cold or flu-like symptoms in people, children are more susceptible because of their body size and tendency to spend more time in the water, according to DHHS. Since 2001, 11 dogs are believed to have been killed by blue-green algae shortly after coming into contact with the algae in Big Lagoon and the South Fork of the Eel and Van Duzen rivers. One of the factors for the onset of blue-green algae at Big Lagoon in 2001, was that the spit had not been breached that year, Metcalfe said. ?A nerve toxin associated with blue-green algae was found in the stomachs of the dogs that died on the South Fork Eel River in 2002,? according to DHHS. ?The same toxin was found in water samples from the South Fork Eel and Van Duzen rivers in 2009 shortly after two dogs died. Blue-green algae blooms that produce a liver toxin have been documented in Klamath River reservoirs and the Klamath River this year.? One of the first steps is identify the algae bloom. ?The bloom can be green, blue-green, white or brown and may look like a floating layer of scum or paint,? according to a DHHS fact sheet on blue-green algae. While the algae may be present year-round, it's the bloom that causes the problem, most often in late summer or early fall. While some may be harmless, others may not. Prevention is relatively simple: stay out of the water and don't let children or pets swim or wade when any type of algae bloom is present. Keep dogs leashed around suspect areas. ?If you or your pets swim or wade in water with algae, rinse off with fresh water as soon as possible,? according to the statewide guidance for blue-green algae blooms. ?Always warn young children not to swallow any water, whether or not you see signs of algae.? Blue-green algae blooms may flourish in isolated ponds adjacent to sloughs or rivers, Metcalfe said, areas that are shallower and often inviting to children and dogs. Metcalfe said the Humboldt County Environmental Health Division has contacted all veterinarians in the area and provided a detailed fact sheet on the consequences of canine contact with blue-green algae bloom. So far this season, no reports of affected dogs have been received. The county also encourages the public to report any areas of blue-green algae they may have encountered while visiting North Coast rivers or lagoons. Fish caught in water with active algae blooms may also cause problems. Officials recommend removing the guts and liver and washing the fillets in tap water before cooking and eating. DHHS officials recommend the following guidelines for swimmers and boaters in all freshwater areas in Humboldt County: * Keep children, pets and livestock from swimming in or drinking water containing algal scums or mats; * Adults should also avoid wading and swimming in water containing algal blooms. Try not to swallow or inhale water spray in an algal bloom area; * If no algal scums or mats are visible, you should still carefully watch young children and warn them not to swallow any water; * Never drink, cook with or wash dishes with water from rivers, streams or lakes; * Get medical attention immediately if you think that you, your pet or livestock might have been poisoned by blue-green algae toxins. Be sure to tell the doctor about possible contact with blue-green algae. Human activities have been linked to blue-green algae blooms, particularly the introduction of phosphorous and nitrogen found in fertilizers and human and animal waste. But, there are steps that may be taken to prevent such developments, according to the DHHS. * Be conservative with the use of water, fertilizers and pesticides on your lawn, garden or agricultural operation; * Recycle any ?spent? soil that has been used for intensive growing by tilling it back into gardens or protect it from rainfall to avoid nutrient runoff; * Plant or maintain native plants around banks. These plants help filter water and don't require fertilizers; * Pump and maintain your septic system every three to four years; * Prevent surface water runoff from agricultural and livestock areas; * Prevent erosion around construction and logging operations. For more information, contact the Humboldt County Department of Health and Human Services Division of Environmental Health at 445-6215 or 1-800-963-9241. The California Department of Public Health website also has more details at www.cdph.ca.gov/healthinfo/environhealth/water/Pages/bluegreenalgae.aspx. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at suddenlink.net Tue Sep 11 13:06:42 2012 From: kierassociates at suddenlink.net (Kier Associates) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 13:06:42 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard: Keep them out of the water Blue-green algae bloom poses fatal threat for the furry family member In-Reply-To: <8C6EBA5C-6847-4C35-A07B-5F121CF81398@att.net> References: <8C6EBA5C-6847-4C35-A07B-5F121CF81398@att.net> Message-ID: <00a601cd9058$f69d5400$e3d7fc00$@suddenlink.net> Trinity River was 59 degrees yesterday, thanks to the Bureau's objective of maintaining flows in the lower Klamath at 3,300 cfs as a hedge against crowding, disease and all that scary stuff that happens when you have big returns into a shriveled river 'Hard to grow blue-green algae at 59 degrees - thank goodness ! Bill Kier Kier Associates, Fisheries and Watershed Professionals P.O Box 915 Blue Lake, CA 95525 (707) 668-1822 Mobile: 707.498.7847 www.kierassociates.net GSA Contractor GS10F0124U From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 10:57 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard: Keep them out of the water Blue-green algae bloom poses fatal threat for the furry family member I haven't heard of any blue-green algae of this kind in the Trinity River, but FYI. In addition to the Klamath River Reservoirs, there have been blooms in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta region. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org http://www.times-standard.com/ci_21514946/keep-them-out-water-blue-green-alg ae-bloom?IADID=Search-www.times-standard.com-www.times-standard.com Keep them out of the water Blue-green algae bloom poses fatal threat for the furry family member Jessie Faulkner/Tri-City Weekly Eureka Times Standard Created: Times-Standard.com Humboldt County is heading into the months that historically bring the best weather -- September and October. Good enough to take the family dog for a swim in one of the local rivers or lagoons. Don't do it. The Humboldt County Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) recently issued a warning that blue-green algae blooms are again possible in area rivers and lagoons. The floating algae -- that can be blue-green, brown or white -- can be quickly fatal to dogs that come in contact with the toxic growth. It often appears as foam or mats on the water's surface. "Dogs are more vulnerable than people to the effects of blue-green algae because they can swallow the algae when they lick their fur," according to the DHHS warning. "Dogs have died within 30 minutes to one hour after leaving the water." The speed of the toxicity in affecting dogs, according to the statewide Guidance for Blue-Green Algae Blooms, is linked to the neurotoxins' ability to paralyze life-sustaining functions. "BGA (Blue-green algae) can kill animals within minutes by paralyzing the respiratory muscles, while the hepatotoxins can cause death within hours by causing blood to pool in the liver. The same BGA species can be toxic or nontoxic at different times. ... Reported neurological symptoms included stumbling and falling, followed by an inability to rise, elevated heart rate, foaming at the mouth, howling, tremors, loss of bowel control, eyes rolling back into the head and seizures." The blooms can appear in late summer through a combination of specific conditions: low flow, higher water temperature and higher air temperature, said Kevin Metcalfe, a supervising environmental health specialist in the county's Environmental Health Division. Typically, he said, the algae blooms continue as long as the supportive conditions exist. Testing to confirm the presence of blue-green algae blooms is cost prohibitive, Metcalfe said. But, it may very well be in place. The state guidelines for dealing with blue-green algae blooms note that five dogs died after swimming in Big Lagoon between July and October 2001, another three dogs died after contact with the South Fork of the Eel River in the summer of 2002 -- two after swimming in the river near Standish-Hickey State Park and another after swimming near Tooby Park in Garberville. In 2009, a dog that swam in the South Fork of the Eel River near Phillipsville died. "The vet who saw the dogs from Standish-Hickey stated that the animals had seizures within 5-10 minutes of exposure to the water, and were dead within 15 minutes," according to the state guidance document. Exposure can cause eye irritation, skin rash, mouth ulcers, vomiting, diarrhea and cold or flu-like symptoms in people, children are more susceptible because of their body size and tendency to spend more time in the water, according to DHHS. Since 2001, 11 dogs are believed to have been killed by blue-green algae shortly after coming into contact with the algae in Big Lagoon and the South Fork of the Eel and Van Duzen rivers. One of the factors for the onset of blue-green algae at Big Lagoon in 2001, was that the spit had not been breached that year, Metcalfe said. "A nerve toxin associated with blue-green algae was found in the stomachs of the dogs that died on the South Fork Eel River in 2002," according to DHHS. "The same toxin was found in water samples from the South Fork Eel and Van Duzen rivers in 2009 shortly after two dogs died. Blue-green algae blooms that produce a liver toxin have been documented in Klamath River reservoirs and the Klamath River this year." One of the first steps is identify the algae bloom. "The bloom can be green, blue-green, white or brown and may look like a floating layer of scum or paint," according to a DHHS fact sheet on blue-green algae. While the algae may be present year-round, it's the bloom that causes the problem, most often in late summer or early fall. While some may be harmless, others may not. Prevention is relatively simple: stay out of the water and don't let children or pets swim or wade when any type of algae bloom is present. Keep dogs leashed around suspect areas. "If you or your pets swim or wade in water with algae, rinse off with fresh water as soon as possible," according to the statewide guidance for blue-green algae blooms. "Always warn young children not to swallow any water, whether or not you see signs of algae." Blue-green algae blooms may flourish in isolated ponds adjacent to sloughs or rivers, Metcalfe said, areas that are shallower and often inviting to children and dogs. Metcalfe said the Humboldt County Environmental Health Division has contacted all veterinarians in the area and provided a detailed fact sheet on the consequences of canine contact with blue-green algae bloom. So far this season, no reports of affected dogs have been received. The county also encourages the public to report any areas of blue-green algae they may have encountered while visiting North Coast rivers or lagoons. Fish caught in water with active algae blooms may also cause problems. Officials recommend removing the guts and liver and washing the fillets in tap water before cooking and eating. DHHS officials recommend the following guidelines for swimmers and boaters in all freshwater areas in Humboldt County: * Keep children, pets and livestock from swimming in or drinking water containing algal scums or mats; * Adults should also avoid wading and swimming in water containing algal blooms. Try not to swallow or inhale water spray in an algal bloom area; * If no algal scums or mats are visible, you should still carefully watch young children and warn them not to swallow any water; * Never drink, cook with or wash dishes with water from rivers, streams or lakes; * Get medical attention immediately if you think that you, your pet or livestock might have been poisoned by blue-green algae toxins. Be sure to tell the doctor about possible contact with blue-green algae. Human activities have been linked to blue-green algae blooms, particularly the introduction of phosphorous and nitrogen found in fertilizers and human and animal waste. But, there are steps that may be taken to prevent such developments, according to the DHHS. * Be conservative with the use of water, fertilizers and pesticides on your lawn, garden or agricultural operation; * Recycle any "spent" soil that has been used for intensive growing by tilling it back into gardens or protect it from rainfall to avoid nutrient runoff; * Plant or maintain native plants around banks. These plants help filter water and don't require fertilizers; * Pump and maintain your septic system every three to four years; * Prevent surface water runoff from agricultural and livestock areas; * Prevent erosion around construction and logging operations. For more information, contact the Humboldt County Department of Health and Human Services Division of Environmental Health at 445-6215 or 1-800-963-9241. The California Department of Public Health website also has more details at www.cdph.ca.gov/healthinfo/environhealth/water/Pages/bluegreenalgae.aspx. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Tue Sep 11 13:51:26 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 13:51:26 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Update Message-ID: <504F419D.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Attached is the Willow Creek Weir trapping summary update for JWeek 36 and revised data for JWeek 35. Also included is the first Trinity River Hatchery summary. The hatchery summary shows only 63 spring Chinook were processed, but as of Sept 9, approximately 500 Chinook were also being held in the round tanks until ready for spawning. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRP_trapping_summary JWeek 36.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 81408 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 12 07:32:15 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 07:32:15 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard: Supes want changes in water tunnel plan; concern: More Trinity River water could be diverted Message-ID: <829F70D0-FA3A-468A-91B1-A86460C3A9A5@att.net> http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_21523425/supes-want-changes-water-tunnel-plan-concern-more Supes want changes in water tunnel plan; concern: More Trinity River water could be diverted Megan Hansen/The Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Created: Times-Standard.com The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors is calling for changes to a state and federal water tunneling plan that could negatively impact fisheries. The board voted unanimously Tuesday to oppose the new Bay Delta Conservation Plan if certain conditions aren't met, including having state and federal agencies affirm the county's right to Trinity River water. Opponents of the plan are concerned it will cause more water to be diverted from the Trinity River, ultimately harming the Klamath River and local fisheries. If implemented, the plan -- introduced in July by Gov. Jerry Brown and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar -- would construct two parallel tunnels to transport water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to Southern California. Each tunnel would be 33 feet in diameter. Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations President Dave Bitts said the county needs to demand the plan not divert any more water from the area than is already redirected each year. ?This proposal is intended clearly to increase the level of diversions,? Bitts said. Humboldt County Senior Environmental Analyst Jill Duffy, a former 5th District county supervisor, said the plan could very well divert more water from the Trinity River to Southern California, causing concerns as the Trinity is the Klamath's largest tributary. ?Eighty percent of the demand for California's water is from Santa Barbara and the south,? Duffy said. ?Farmers in the Central Valley have come to rely on Trinity River water for their crops.? She said the plan aims to implement a 50-year Delta restoration program to protect fish and wildlife, but currently doesn't include a comprehensive restoration program. She said critics are concerned because operational criteria have yet to be developed. Assemblyman Wesley Chesbro representative Tom Weseloh expressed concern about the lack of operational data. He said there needs to be ?policy before pumping,? and that the county needs to assert itself. ?You need to continue to pursue protecting your rights,? Weseloh said. Congressman Mike Thompson representative John Driscoll agreed, saying the state could easily take water once the tunnels are built. Duffy said the plan is estimated to cost $14 billion, but that environmental mitigations and other issues not yet taken into consideration will vastly raise that figure -- a huge concern for the state's budget. ?The costs are likely to be running more in the $40 billion to $50 billion range,? Duffy said. After hearing from the public and taking written comments from the Hoopa Valley Tribe into consideration, the board passed a resolution formally opposing the plan if certain conditions aren't met. The initial staff proposal suggested the board flat out oppose the plan. Fifth District Supervisor Ryan Sundberg said he prefers placing conditions on the board's opposition -- as proposed by the Hoopa Valley Tribe -- so that the county isn't completely written off by state and federal agencies. ?I think we need to not be so (objectionable) to it that we're not at the table,? Sundberg said. As a result, the resolution incorporates language from the Hoopa Valley Tribe, asking for full implementation of the Trinity Record of Decision -- a 2000 plan that outlines how to restore the Trinity River and its fish and wildlife populations. The resolution also asks state and federal agencies to specifically recognize the June 19, 1959 contract signed by the county and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation that mandates the government release sufficient water from the Trinity River, so that not less than 50,000 acre-feet is available each year. In addition, it asks the Trinity River Division Act -- passed by Congress on Aug. 12, 1955 -- be recognized, as it also states the county's right to 50,000 acre-feet of Trinity River water. Duffy said the Trinity River Division Act and 1959 contract are unresolved because the county hasn't always received the water it was promised. Lastly, the resolution demands the county be given adequate funding to evaluate proposals developed in the Bay Delta Conservation Plan process. The resolution will be sent to Brown, Salazar, Thompson, Assemblyman Wesley Chesbro, Sen. Noreen Evans, Trinity County, the California State Association of Counties, the Hoopa Valley Tribe and the Yurok Tribe. Megan Hansen can be reached at 441-0511 or mhansen at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 12 07:34:17 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 07:34:17 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard: Blue-green algae warning for Klamath Message-ID: http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_21523412/blue-green-algae-warning-klamath Blue-green algae warning for Klamath The Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Created: Times-Standard.com Water quality officials are posting blue-green algae warnings along the Klamath River and its reservoirs, encouraging people to stay out of the water. ?It's a human health issue,? said Craig Tucker, a Klamath campaign coordinator for the Karuk tribe. ?The hotter and drier it is, the worse the algae blooms.? Users are warned to avoid contact with the blue-green algae, which contains the microcystis toxin. Microcystin is a known tumor promoter and liver toxin, according to a press release from the Karuk Tribe Department of Natural Resources. Craig said that the blooms affect reservoirs along the Klamath every year, but do not always contaminate the river downstream. This year, however, posted warning areas include Copco Reservoir, Iron Gate Reservoir and the river itself downstream to Turwar on the Yurok Reservation. The algal blooms usually occur between June and October because shallow, nutrient-rich water trapped behind the Klamath dams heats up. This provides an optimal environment for algae to bloom. ?We think the only way to deal with it is dam removal,? Tucker said. Blooms normally occur while downstream tribes are holding annual World Renewal ceremonies. According to the release, the ceremonies require spiritual leaders to bathe in the river, which puts them at risk of exposure. Tucker said, the Karuk medicine men who do the rituals are at an elevated risk. ?They're going to bathe in the river, no matter what,? he said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 12 07:54:50 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 07:54:50 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Speakers gather to talk about water Message-ID: <1AA289F7-848F-43E6-9613-604E2B292B84@att.net> http://www.redding.com/news/2012/sep/12/speakers-gather-talk-about-water/ Speakers gather to talk about water By Record Searchlight Staff Several north state agencies are hosting an educational forum tonight on Northern California water and the San Joaquin-Sacramento river delta. Topics include the history of California?s water system, the proposal to raise the height of Shasta Dam, stressors on the delta and the economics of water in the state. Speakers include Holly Dawley, a rancher and engineer; Brian Person, area manager for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation; and Ellen Hanak, senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California. The forum is from 5-7:30 p.m. today at the McConnell Foundation headquarters, 900 Shasta View Drive in Redding. Seating is limited, so those wishing to attend should contact Pam Clackler at 224-6032 or pclackler at ci.redding.ca.us. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Thu Sep 13 14:46:46 2012 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:46:46 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Sisk. Daily News: Habitat Restoration Bill passes Message-ID: <006d01cd91f9$45df51c0$d19df540$@sisqtel.net> Siskiyou Daily News Description: http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/Global/images/spacer.gif By John Bowman http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20120910/NEWS/120919995 September 10. 2012 10:00AM Habitat restoration bill passes . The process of restoring coho salmon habitat may get a bit easier for local landowners willing to undertake voluntary projects along Siskiyou County streams and rivers. Description: http://CAweb.GAT.atl.publicus.com/storyimage/CA/20120910/NEWS/120919995/AR/0 /AR-120919995.jpg&MaxH=225&MaxW=225 PHOTO/ submitted In 2010 the California Department of Fish and Game declared that two of the three brood years of Shasta River coho were functionally extinct, meaning there are no longer enough adults returning to the river in those years to sustain a viable population. The process of restoring coho salmon habitat may get a bit easier for local landowners willing to undertake voluntary projects along Siskiyou County streams and rivers with the California legislature's passage of Assembly Bill 1961, introduced by Assemblyman Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael). The bill passed its final legislative hurdle on Aug. 27 with its approval by the California Assembly and now heads to the governor's desk for his signature. First introduced in February, AB 1961 would expedite the approval process for voluntary habitat restoration projects by implementing a 30-day approval process and eliminating many of the usual regulatory hurdles for such in-stream projects. "Coho salmon cannot afford to wait and neither can the communities where these restoration projects would provide much needed jobs," said Huffman. "This bill lets us work together in a new way so that immediate actions can yield near-term results." Coho salmon generally have a three year life cycle. In 2010, the California Department of Fish and Game declared that two of the three brood years of Shasta River coho were functionally extinct, meaning there are no longer enough adults returning to the river in those years to sustain a viable population. According to the text of the bill, "An urgency exists due to the extraordinarily small numbers of coho salmon remaining in California. In order to prevent their extinction from northern California waters, it is imperative that habitat restoration efforts be expedited and increased as soon as possible." Siskiyou County landowners and Resource Conservation Districts (RCDs) have cumulatively implemented millions of dollars worth of habitat restoration projects since coho were listed as threatened by both California and the federal Endangered Species Act in 1997. State and federal agencies say much more work must be done to aid the recovery of the species, though many landowners and stakeholders have complained that the permitting and regulatory processes create too many roadblocks. AB 1961 directs state agencies to "expedite and streamline the permitting and approval of coho salmon habitat enhancement projects, including, in particular, large woody debris restoration projects, in northern California streams." The three main categories of projects eligible for the expedited process are as follows: . Modification of existing water crossings for the purposes of eliminating a barrier to fish passage; . Restoration of eroded or denuded streambanks by utilizing nonrock bioengineering practices and revegetating stream corridors with native riparian species; and . Wood placement that benefits naturally reproducing fish stocks by creating or enhancing fish habitat, increasing stream complexity, or both. The bill stipulates, "Within 30 days after the [Department of Fish and Game] receives a written request to approve a coho salmon habitat enhancement project containing the information required pursuant to subdivision (c), the director shall determine whether the coho salmon habitat enhancement project is consistent with subdivision (a). If the director determines within that 30-day period, based upon substantial evidence, that the coho salmon enhancement project is consistent with subdivision (a), no further departmental approval shall be necessary." Executive director of the Scott River Water Trust Sari Sommarstrom has worked on many local habitat restoration projects and said, "Expediting state permitting was one of the few issues that everyone could agree on at the legislative hearing on coho last year. I'm glad that some cooperative progress in Sacramento was finally made, but the bill's provisions are pretty limited. More progress from the state is still needed for those of us trying to help coho." http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20120910/NEWS/120919995 Top of Form Bottom of Form -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 182 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8126 bytes Desc: not available URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Thu Sep 13 20:03:12 2012 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 20:03:12 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Irrigator petition to delist Klamath coho salmon rejected In-Reply-To: <111A03D0-1BA3-40B3-8817-49D01B404A5B@fishsniffer.com> References: <92B066D4-AC8C-4474-80BA-6D4322BB459D@fishsniffer.com> <48D8D96D-D132-4C80-A394-14ADAA77A6D6@fishsniffer.com> <111A03D0-1BA3-40B3-8817-49D01B404A5B@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <15C88B66-094B-43A9-8692-1CD8A51FFD74@fishsniffer.com> http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/09/12/18721544.php http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/09/13/1131355/-Irrigator-petition- to-delist-Klamath-coho-salmon-rejected ?Hopefully this will put to rest the assertion that achvuun* (the Karuk word for coho) are not native to the Klamath Basin," said Karuk Tribal Chairman Buster Attebery. "Our People have harvested this fish for time immemorial and now it?s time to focus on recovery.? ? coho.gif Irrigator petition to delist Klamath coho salmon rejected by Dan Bacher The federal government has decisively rejected the latest bid by the Siskiyou County Water Users Association (SCWUA) to remove Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast coho salmon from the Endangered Species list. This is the fifth time in 3 years that SCWUA and Richard Gierak, the Petitioners, have unsuccessfully attempted to delist coho, a fish that until several decades ago was abundant in the Klamath and other California coastal rivers. The take of coho (or silver) salmon is prohibited in all California ocean and river fisheries to protect central coast and southern Oregon-northern California coast coho stocks. Both stocks are in severe decline and are listed under both the state and federal Endangered Species Acts. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) published its denial in the Federal Register on Monday, September 10 (http://www.gpo.gov/ fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-09-10/pdf/2012-22209.pdf). The attempt by these groups to mount a legal and scientific argument in favor of delisting failed to meet any reasonable standard of merit, according to NMFS. "We find that the petition does not present substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted," NMFS stated. Key to the Petitioners? claims is the assertion that the coho are "not native" to the Klamath and California . "Coho were not native to California waters," the latest petition stated. "Failed plantings in 1895, 1899 by Fish & Game were then followed by introduction of Coho Salmon from Cascadia, Oregon which appeared to have a minimal effect of survival in California waters." (http://www.siskiyoucountywaterusers.com/announcements.html) However, NMFS addressed this claim back in their denial of previous petitions in October 2011. The argument is based almost solely on a 2002 Fish and Game reference to a 1913 California Fish and Game Report that NMFS found to be taken out of context, according to a statement from the Karuk Tribe. A NMFS 2007 response to earlier petition stated, ?The quotes that the petitioners provided from the 2002 California Department of Fish and Game report, taken from the 1913 California Fish and Game Commission report, are taken out of context. The 2002 report actually concludes the opposite of the petitioners: that coho salmon are native to the upper Klamath River system, and historically occurred there prior to hatchery stocking.? Earlier petitions also revealed "an utter failure" by the Petitioners to understand which specific Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) of coho was even relevant to the discussion. The Petitioners tried to correct this shortcoming in the most recent petition, but NMFS responded that the additional information provided wasn't relevant to the petition. ?We carefully analyzed this additional information and found that it is: Not relevant to the petitioned action? not supported by literature citations or other references in the Petition?and therefore constitutes unsupported assertions; or it simply does not support the petitioned action (e.g., information about coho and Chinook salmon fishing seasons in Oregon streams that are not within the range of this ESU)," according to NMFS. ?Hopefully this will put to rest the assertion that achvuun (the Karuk word for coho) are not native to the Klamath Basin," said Karuk Tribal Chairman Buster Attebery. "Our People have harvested this fish for time immemorial and now it?s time to focus on recovery.? The Klamath was once the third most productive salmon river in the U.S. with up to 1.1 million adult fish spawning annually, including chinook, coho, pinks and chum salmon as well as abundant steelhead. For thousands of years Native People, including the Klamath, Karuk, Hoopa and Yurok Tribes, sustained themselves on the bounty of the river. Unfortunately, the once abundant Southern Oregon-Northern California coho are now listed as "threatened" on the federal Endangered Species List, and are considered "endangered" by the states of California and Oregon. According to the Klamath Riverkeeper, less than 70% of streams where coho historically lived in the Klamath Basin still contain small populations of coho, and in some places, such as the Trinity River, wild coho stocks are at as little as 4% of their previous numbers (NRC 2004). It is also difficult to tell to what extent hatchery production of coho supplement wild stocks, though one study estimated that 90% of adult coho returned to Iron Gate and Trinity River hatcheries for spawning (Brown 1994). "Many factors can be blamed for the Klamath?s decline, but none are greater than the dams which stand between salmon and their home spawning grounds in the Upper Basin," according to the Karuk Tribe. (http://www.karuk.us/press/bring_salmon_home.php) For more information, contact: Craig Tucker, Klamath Coordinator, Karuk Tribe: 916-207-8294. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: unknown.gif Type: image/gif Size: 50522 bytes Desc: not available URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Fri Sep 14 10:05:04 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 11:05:04 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Lewiston Dam Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 9/14/2012 1000 900 950 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Supplementing flows in Lower Klamath River. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Fri Sep 14 10:11:37 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 11:11:37 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Lewiston Dam Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 8/18/2012 0900 950 850 8/18/2012 1300 850 750 8/18/2012 1700 750 650 8/18/2012 2100 650 550 9/19/2012 0100 550 450 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Ramp down of the supplementing flows in Lower Klamath River. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Fri Sep 14 10:13:16 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 11:13:16 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Lewiston Dam -- REVISE Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 9/18/2012 0900 950 850 9/18/2012 1300 850 750 9/18/2012 1700 750 650 9/18/2012 2100 650 550 9/19/2012 0100 550 450 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Ramp down of the supplementing flows in Lower Klamath River. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Sep 16 11:29:56 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 11:29:56 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou Daily News: High algae warnings issued Message-ID: <50A183AC-4046-4415-B5CD-2B99CF2DD2DA@att.net> http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20120914/NEWS/120919822 September 14. 2012 5:21PM High algae level warnings issued Matt, a rafter from Oregon, was enjoying the Klamath River on Thursday at the Tree of Heaven river access where algae warnings have been posted. He said he is unhappy with the water quality in the river but it wouldn't stop him from enjoying a beautiful day. Daily News Photo/John Bowman Blue-green algae blooms are again causing health risk warnings to be posted for recreators on Copco and Iron Gate reservoirs as well as the mainstem Klamath River. The North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (NCRWQCB) has posted signs at reservoir access points and the Klamath National Forest has posted warnings at river access points along the river stating the health risks associated with direct contact and ingestion of the algae. According to water sampling results by state and tribal agencies, the cell counts of blue-green algae on the reservoirs and along the river's edge have exceeded World Health Organization and the State Water Resources Control Board's public health guideline levels. According to a press release from the NCRWQCB, "Cyanobacteria (Microcystis aeruginosa) cell counts and toxin levels in Copco Reservoir and toxin levels in Iron Gate Reservoir exceeded the public health advisory threshold during recent public health monitoring." The release advises, "The algal blooms look like green, blue-green, white or brown foam, scum or mats floating on the water. Recreational exposure to toxic blue-green algae can cause eye irritation, allergic skin rash, mouth ulcer, vomiting, diarrhea, mouth ulcers, vomiting, diarrhea, and cold and flu-like symptoms. Liver failure, nerve damage and death have occurred in rare situations where large amounts of contaminated water were directly ingested." The blooms are among the water quality issues referenced by environmentalist and some government agencies when making the case for Klamath dam removal. Some dam removal opponents question the level of risk posed by the algae. The Siskiyou County Department of Public Health is not participating in the effort to warn citizens about potential health hazards posed by the algae blooms. However, the NCRWQCB, the California Department of Public Health and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are partnering in the effort. Siskiyou County Director of Public Health Terry Barber told the Daily News, "The county is on record as opposing the posting of blue-green algae warnings." She said the posting is voluntary and there are no laws or regulations stipulating when or if postings must occur. "The county doesn't have an active monitoring program for microcystis and the science doesn't support the theory that there is a strong risk," Barber said. However, Executive Officer of the NCRWQCB Matt St. John, said, "As blue-green algae (cyanobacteria) can pose health risks, especially to children and pets, we urge people to be careful where they swim when visiting Copco and Iron Gate reservoirs. We recommend that people and their pets avoid contact with the blooms, and particularly avoid swallowing or inhaling water spray in an algal bloom area." Statewide guidance on harmful algal blooms recommends the following: ? Avoid wading and swimming in water containing visible blooms or water containing algae, scums or mats. ? If no algae, scums or mats are visible, one should still carefully watch young children and warn them not to swallow the water. ? Do not drink, cook or wash dishes with untreated surface water under any circumstances; common water purification techniques (e.g., camping filters, tablets) may not remove toxins. ? People should limit or avoid eating fish. If fish are consumed, remove guts and liver, and rinse meat in clean drinking water. ? Take care that pets and livestock do not drink the water or swim through heavy algae, scums or mats, nor lick their fur after going in the water. Rinse pets in clean drinking water to remove algae from fur. ? One should get medical treatment immediately if pets or livestock might have been poisoned by blue-green algae toxins. Be sure to alert the medical professional of the possible contact with blue-green algae. While recreators are being warned of the health risks of direct contact with the algae, the NCRWQCB press release does state, "people can still visit Copco and Iron Gate reservoirs and enjoy camping, hiking, biking, canoeing, picnicking or other recreational activities, excluding direct contact with the algal bloom." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AR-120919822.jpg&MaxH=225&MaxW=225 Type: image/jpeg Size: 6896 bytes Desc: not available URL: From windhorse at jeffnet.org Sun Sep 16 17:53:02 2012 From: windhorse at jeffnet.org (Jim Carpenter) Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 17:53:02 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou Daily News: High algae warnings issued References: <50A183AC-4046-4415-B5CD-2B99CF2DD2DA@att.net> Message-ID: <9924DA382E854414A80BCA91F9820A80@windhorse> No problemo, Just spray the algaecide, kill the bloom and disperse the microcystins throughout the river. Out of sight, out of mind. Visit our Websites: www.CarpenterDesign.com www.BirdingandBoating.com 541 885 5450 ----- Original Message ----- From: Tom Stokely To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2012 11:29 AM Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou Daily News: High algae warnings issued http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20120914/NEWS/120919822 September 14. 2012 5:21PM High algae level warnings issued Matt, a rafter from Oregon, was enjoying the Klamath River on Thursday at the Tree of Heaven river access where algae warnings have been posted. He said he is unhappy with the water quality in the river but it wouldn't stop him from enjoying a beautiful day. Daily News Photo/John Bowman Blue-green algae blooms are again causing health risk warnings to be posted for recreators on Copco and Iron Gate reservoirs as well as the mainstem Klamath River. The North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (NCRWQCB) has posted signs at reservoir access points and the Klamath National Forest has posted warnings at river access points along the river stating the health risks associated with direct contact and ingestion of the algae. According to water sampling results by state and tribal agencies, the cell counts of blue-green algae on the reservoirs and along the river's edge have exceeded World Health Organization and the State Water Resources Control Board's public health guideline levels. According to a press release from the NCRWQCB, "Cyanobacteria (Microcystis aeruginosa) cell counts and toxin levels in Copco Reservoir and toxin levels in Iron Gate Reservoir exceeded the public health advisory threshold during recent public health monitoring." The release advises, "The algal blooms look like green, blue-green, white or brown foam, scum or mats floating on the water. Recreational exposure to toxic blue-green algae can cause eye irritation, allergic skin rash, mouth ulcer, vomiting, diarrhea, mouth ulcers, vomiting, diarrhea, and cold and flu-like symptoms. Liver failure, nerve damage and death have occurred in rare situations where large amounts of contaminated water were directly ingested." The blooms are among the water quality issues referenced by environmentalist and some government agencies when making the case for Klamath dam removal. Some dam removal opponents question the level of risk posed by the algae. The Siskiyou County Department of Public Health is not participating in the effort to warn citizens about potential health hazards posed by the algae blooms. However, the NCRWQCB, the California Department of Public Health and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency are partnering in the effort. Siskiyou County Director of Public Health Terry Barber told the Daily News, "The county is on record as opposing the posting of blue-green algae warnings." She said the posting is voluntary and there are no laws or regulations stipulating when or if postings must occur. "The county doesn't have an active monitoring program for microcystis and the science doesn't support the theory that there is a strong risk," Barber said. However, Executive Officer of the NCRWQCB Matt St. John, said, "As blue-green algae (cyanobacteria) can pose health risks, especially to children and pets, we urge people to be careful where they swim when visiting Copco and Iron Gate reservoirs. We recommend that people and their pets avoid contact with the blooms, and particularly avoid swallowing or inhaling water spray in an algal bloom area." Statewide guidance on harmful algal blooms recommends the following: ? Avoid wading and swimming in water containing visible blooms or water containing algae, scums or mats. ? If no algae, scums or mats are visible, one should still carefully watch young children and warn them not to swallow the water. ? Do not drink, cook or wash dishes with untreated surface water under any circumstances; common water purification techniques (e.g., camping filters, tablets) may not remove toxins. ? People should limit or avoid eating fish. If fish are consumed, remove guts and liver, and rinse meat in clean drinking water. ? Take care that pets and livestock do not drink the water or swim through heavy algae, scums or mats, nor lick their fur after going in the water. Rinse pets in clean drinking water to remove algae from fur. ? One should get medical treatment immediately if pets or livestock might have been poisoned by blue-green algae toxins. Be sure to alert the medical professional of the possible contact with blue-green algae. While recreators are being warned of the health risks of direct contact with the algae, the NCRWQCB press release does state, "people can still visit Copco and Iron Gate reservoirs and enjoy camping, hiking, biking, canoeing, picnicking or other recreational activities, excluding direct contact with the algal bloom." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AR-120919822.jpg&MaxH=225&MaxW=225 Type: image/jpeg Size: 6896 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Sep 17 11:18:42 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 11:18:42 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] aNewsCafe: Tom Stokely, Former Trinity County Natural Resources Planner, to Talk in Hayfork about Peripheral Tunnel Message-ID: http://anewscafe.com/2012/09/15/tom-stokely-former-trinity-county-natural-resources-planner-to-talk-in-hayfork-about-peripheral-tunnel/ Tom Stokely, Former Trinity County Natural Resources Planner, to Talk in Hayfork about Peripheral Tunnel By Tom Stokely, Water Policy Analyst and Media Contact for California Water Impact Network September 15, 2012 1 Comment Printer-Friendly On July 25, Governor Brown announced his plan to drill two 33-foot tunnels 150 feet under California?s Delta, big enough to siphon the entire Sacramento River to thirsty San Joaquin Valley agribusiness and Southern California cities. Previous plans to build a ?Peripheral Canal? were defeated by California voters in 1982 during Brown?s first tenure as governor of California. The Governor is refusing to define any specifics of the project and is asking citizens to just ?trust us.? Water export amounts and fishery protection flows are being put off until after the project is constructed, a ?plumbing before policy? decision to misinform the public about the true costs. Cost estimates are significantly underestimated. While Peripheral Tunnel proponents claim that the beneficiaries of the project will pay for it, they are planning on substantial subsidies from state and federal taxpayers amounting to billions more borrowed dollars. Much more cost effective means of providing water supply reliability including recycling, conservation, storm water capture, desalination and reinstatement of the urban water preference in State Water Project contracts. A cost/benefit study found for every $2.50 spent on the project, there would be only $1 in benefits. On Tues., Sept. 18, at 7 pm at Northern Delights Coffeehouse on Main Street in Hayfork, Trinity County, Tom Stokely will present his program on this crucial issue regarding water in northern California. All are welcome to this free event. Tom Stokely, a former Trinity County natural resources planner, worked for 20 years on passage and implementation of the 2000 Trinity River Record of Decision that reallocated water back to the Trinity River for fishery restoration. Now Tom works with the California Water Impact Network, which promotes the equitable and environmental use of California's water, including instream uses, through research, planning, public education and litigation. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Delta-photo-by-Tim-Stroshane-of-C-WIN-420x279.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 37748 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Delta-Water-Export-Strategies-image-courtesy-of-C-WIN.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 40910 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Tom-Stokely-200x200.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 11432 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Tue Sep 18 09:37:39 2012 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 09:37:39 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey update Message-ID: Hi all, It's that time of year again. The U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, Yurok Tribe, Hoopa Valley Tribe, and U.S. Forest Service will have crews out on the mainstem Trinity River on a weekly basis from now to December (and in select tribs too in the case of the U.S. Forest Service). We'll announce weekly updates throughout the season on env-trinity and post them at the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office Fisheries webpage: http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/ . The first of our 2012 updates is available there now. Look for our crews on the river and say "Hi". I hope you all get to enjoy an abundant 2012 Chinook salmon run! Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Tue Sep 18 09:37:39 2012 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 09:37:39 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey update Message-ID: Hi all, It's that time of year again. The U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, Yurok Tribe, Hoopa Valley Tribe, and U.S. Forest Service will have crews out on the mainstem Trinity River on a weekly basis from now to December (and in select tribs too in the case of the U.S. Forest Service). We'll announce weekly updates throughout the season on env-trinity and post them at the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office Fisheries webpage: http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/ . The first of our 2012 updates is available there now. Look for our crews on the river and say "Hi". I hope you all get to enjoy an abundant 2012 Chinook salmon run! Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Tue Sep 18 10:45:29 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 10:45:29 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Update Message-ID: <50585086.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Please see attachment for updates to the Willow Creek Weir and Trinity River Hatchery trapping summaries. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRP_trapping_summary JWeek 37.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 81408 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Sep 20 11:15:28 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 11:15:28 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] GGSA salmon announcement References: <418E638BF3544384A24EFE94365A20DA@coats01> Message-ID: <6BF194B5-DF8E-4BFC-9FBA-A6FA9C17209B@att.net> From: "Michael Coats" Date: September 20, 2012 9:32:57 AM PDT FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: EARLY SEASON WRAP ON 2012 SALMON SEASON Average Season, Much Better Than Last Few PETALUMA, CA (September 20, 2012) ? The Pacific Fisheries Management Council issued the first preliminary salmon counts showing how many salmon have been caught in the 2012 season. As of August 31, close to 300,000 salmon were taken off the California coast by both the sport and commercial salmon fishing fleets. Commercial fishermen caught 172,914 king salmon, about two and a half times as many as they caught in 2011, but only about one-fourth of their average harvest over the past 40 years. Sport fishermen brought in111,196, which is more than two times the 49,020 caught last year. Although this year?s catch obviously is an improvement over 2011?s, it was still only considered an average year by recent historical standards. ?We?re happy to have had a decent season but unless we can maintain restrictions on delta water pumping, we could soon be back to low salmon returns,? said GGSA president Victor Gonella. (www.goldengatesalmonassociation.com) ?It is too early to judge whether pre- season forecasts estimating 880,000 adult Sacramento River salmon in the ocean may have been a bit optimistic. The counting of fish returning to the hatcheries has only just begun and will continue for at least another month or so.? Rebounding salmon runs all along the coasts of Washington, Oregon and California all benefited from increased fresh water flows won in court rulings. Klamath River salmon, estimated to number close to 1.6 million, were helped by a 2006 court ruling ordering more water released from upriver reservoirs to help salmon. Likewise, Columbia and Snake River salmon benefited from a 2005 court order mandating greater salmon water releases. Here in California a 2008 court ruling won by salmon advocates resulted in additional water flows for salmon that supported this year?s returns. Other factors including an apparent uptick in food available to young salmon in the ocean likely also contributed to this year?s resurgence. ?More salmon translate directly into more good, family wage jobs throughout the west coast,? said GGSA chairman and party boat captain Roger Thomas. ?The commercial salmon fishing fleet is still suffering from the tremendous hit we took prior to the 2008 court order requiring more water be set aside for salmon in our rivers and the bay delta,? said GGSA board member and PCFFA executive director Zeke Grader. ?This year our commercial fishermen began to regain a little ground with some decent catches and prices.? ?Recreational salmon fishermen enjoyed the good fishing we had in the early and mid season,? said GGSA and Coastside Fishing Club board member Marc Gorelnik. ?Our fishing supports thousands of jobs and provides our families with one of California?s finest foods. It?s essential that we do everything we can to make sure freshwater resources in northern California are managed in a balanced way that always leaves enough to support a strong salmon fishery.? Prior to major increase in freshwater diversion in the SF Bay Delta that began in the early 2000?s, commercial salmon fishermen regularly landed in excess of 300,000 to 400,000 salmon annually. The increased water diversions of the last decade sent Central Valley salmon into steep decline. Looking ahead, supervisors in Humboldt County have taken steps to keep the proposed peripheral canal from damaging Klamath River salmon runs. Canal proponents hope to capture and ship even more northernCalifornia south to agricultural operations in the San Joaquin Valley. Some of this water could come from the Klamath River?s main tributary, the Trinity River. Supervisors have asked the state for assurances this won?t happen. Taking any more water out of the Klamath could lead to a repeat of the disastrous fish kill that occurred in the Klamath in 2002 when upstream agriculture operations withheld too much water. The Golden Gate Salmon Association is a coalition of salmon advocates that includes commercial and recreational salmon fisherman, businesses, restaurants, tribes, environmentalists, elected officials, families and communities that rely on salmon. Their mission is to protect and restore California?s largest salmon producing habitat comprised of the Central Valley river?s that feed the Bay-Delta ecosystem and the communities that rely on salmon as a long-term, sustainable, commercial, recreational and cultural resource. Currently, California?s salmon industry is valued at $1.4 billion in economic activity annually and about half that much in economic activity and jobs again in Oregon. The industry employs tens of thousands of people from Santa Barbara to northern Oregon. This is a huge economic bloc made up of commercial fishermen, recreational fishermen (fresh and salt water), fish processors, marinas, coastal communities, equipment manufacturers, the hotel and food industry, tribes, and the salmon fishing industry at large. Please check out our new salmon video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0ct3gSUiTU # # # # Media contact: Michael Coats, michael at coatspr.com or (707) 935-6203 Michael Coats Coats Public Relations Michael at coatspr.com 707-935-6203 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: clip_image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8092 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Sep 21 11:46:32 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 11:46:32 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] SJ Mercury News- Barbara Barrigan-Parilla and Robert Pyke: Yo Gov. Brown--fixing Delta levees IS feasible Message-ID: http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_21601120/barbara-barrigan-parilla-and-robert-pyke-yo-gov From tstokely at att.net Mon Sep 24 09:18:09 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 09:18:09 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou Daily news; Big run on the Shasta Message-ID: <442F1B77-A083-4A8E-86B6-D04493B898BA@att.net> http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20120918/NEWS/120919758 Big run on the ShastaThe Yreka Office of the California Department of Fish and Game?s (CDFG) adult salmonid counting facility on the Shasta River is up and running and so are the Chinook salmon. By John Bowman September 18. 2012 1:40PM Yreka, CA Zoom The California Department of Fish and Game's Shasta RIver salmonid counting weir has collected official salmon population data since 1978. The Yreka Office of the California Department of Fish and Game?s (CDFG) adult salmonid counting facility on the Shasta River is up and running and so are the Chinook salmon. According to CDFG Environmental Scientist Morgan Knechtle, as of Sunday morning, 2,927 Chinook have entered the Shasta River and passed through the counting weir on their way upstream in search of a mate and suitable spawning habitat. This year?s run of Klamath River fall Chinook is predicted to be one of the most robust in more than a decade and early data indicates the run is on track to meet that prediction. ?The predicted number of adult Chinook for the Klamath basin is the highest since formal monitoring started in 1978. We?re off to an incredible start, especially considering that the historic peak of migration doesn?t occur until late September to early October,? according to Knechtle. According to CDFG data, the 35-year average total run of fall Chinook in the Shasta River is 5,263. With more than a month of migration on the horizon, this year?s Shasta River run has already exceeded half of that average. Knechtle said the Shasta River fish counting facility was installed on Aug. 23. The Bogus Creek fish counting facility adjacent to the Iron Gate Hatchery began operating on Sept. 9 and the Scott River fish counting facility is planned for installation in late September. The 2012 run of fall Chinook for the Klamath basin (including Trinity River) is predicted to be approximately 380,000 fish with a tribal harvest allocation of 160,000 fish and an in-river sport allocation of 67,600 fish. The fall Chinook in-river fishing season started Aug. 15 on the Klamath River and Sept. 1 on the Trinity River. The season ends Dec. 31 for both rivers. A valid California fishing license and salmon report card are required when fishing the Klamath Basin for Chinook salmon. Other area and gear restrictions do apply and anglers should consult the 2012-2013 freshwater regulations and 2012-2013 supplemental fishing regulations for the applicable restrictions, according to a CDFG press release. The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) has been releasing additional flow from Lewiston Dam on the Trinity River since mid-August. The additional water release was approved as a measure to ward off the risk of a massive fish kill as hundreds of thousands of salmon enter the Klamath River system under low water conditions. In 2002, low flows, high water temperatures and increased fish density combined with the natural occurrence of disease carrying, parasitic polychaete worms, resulting in a massive fish kill in which at least 34,000 Chinook died before spawning, according to official estimates. BOR says this year?s additional flows are specifically intended to flush the disease-carrying worms from the river and maintain a lower density of worms and fish during the Chinook migration, thereby reducing the infection rate. The Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors voted to oppose the additional flow release, stating, ?it does not appear that there has been sufficient consideration as to whether this action may be detrimental to other populations of Chinook and Coho.? According to the board?s official comments submitted to BOR, they feared the additional flow would create a premature migration cue for Chinook, ?resulting in fish moving into the Klamath River and its tributaries at times when temperature and flow conditions are marginal or even lethal.? District 2 Supervisor Ed Valenzuela supported the flow release and was the only supervisor to vote against the submitted comments. So far, no fish kills have been reported in the Klamath Basin this year. Knechtle says he will be providing weekly updates on fish count numbers from each counting facility throughout the season. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AR-120919758.jpg&MaxW=300&MaxH=240 Type: image/jpeg Size: 14847 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Mon Sep 24 10:45:47 2012 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 10:45:47 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey update Sept 24 Message-ID: Hi, We've refreshed the update for the Trinity River spawning survey at the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office link below. Things are slowly starting to pick up. Our crews mapped the locations of 40 carcasses and 135 redds last week. Charlie P.S. I took a day off to recreate on the lower river Friday and there appeared to be a ton of fish on the way. Get out there yourself if you get a chance! ----- Forwarded by Charles Chamberlain/AFWO/R1/FWS/DOI on 09/24/2012 10:34 AM ----- Charles Chamberlain/AFWO/R1/FWS/DOI 09/18/2012 09:37 AM To env trinity cc Subject Trinity River spawning survey update Hi all, It's that time of year again. The U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, Yurok Tribe, Hoopa Valley Tribe, and U.S. Forest Service will have crews out on the mainstem Trinity River on a weekly basis from now to December (and in select tribs too in the case of the U.S. Forest Service). We'll announce weekly updates throughout the season on env-trinity and post them at the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office Fisheries webpage: http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/ . The first of our 2012 updates is available there now. Look for our crews on the river and say "Hi". I hope you all get to enjoy an abundant 2012 Chinook salmon run! Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Mon Sep 24 17:03:30 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 17:03:30 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Update Message-ID: <50609233.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Chinook numbers from the Willow Creek Weir (WCW) increased slightly last week from previous weeks. We trapped a 2012 season daily high of 115 fish on 9/18. We trapped the first coho of the season for a weekly total of 10 fish. Also, last week the supplementing flow release from the Trinity to cool the lower Klamath was ramped down from over 1,000 to 450 cfs. Please see attachment for updates to the WCW and Trinity River Hatchery trapping summaries. Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRP_trapping_summary JWeek 38.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 81920 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Tue Sep 25 10:34:45 2012 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:34:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Sisk.Daily: Scott Valley Water Users Work Toward Solutions Message-ID: <018101cd9b44$0e025e10$2a071a30$@sisqtel.net> Description: http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/Global/images/siskiyoudailynews_logo.png September 24. 2012 1:06PM http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20120924/NEWS/120929913 Water users work toward solutions Description: http://CAweb.GAT.atl.publicus.com/storyimage/CA/20120924/NEWS/120929913/AR/0 /AR-120929913.jpg&MaxH=225&MaxW=225PHOTO/ Submitted Above, Preston Harris checks well levels in Scott Valley as part of a community effort to understand the valley's groundwater system. In drought years, certain sections of the Scott River go dry by late summer and, inevitably, accusations fly about who or what is to blame, with groundwater pumping often the target. As a response to this controversy, local efforts are seeking to reduce the conflict between groundwater use and environmental needs. According to a recent press release from the Scott River Watershed Council (SRWC), the Scott Valley community is taking a "Grab the bull by the horns" approach to tackle this long-running debate over groundwater's effect on the surface flows of the Scott River. As a key step toward better understanding of groundwater in the Scott Valley, the community has been collecting data on groundwater levels. Monthly measurements are made at 36 wells around the valley through a voluntary program that began in April 2006 led by a partnership effort. One of those partners, Dr. Thomas Harter of the Groundwater Cooperative Extension Program at the University of California at Davis (UCD), calls this groundwater level monitoring program "a significant cornerstone of Scott Valley's groundwater management actions." According to the SRWC, this well data and some historic data has already helped answer a key question: Is the valley's aquifer being overdrafted? An overdraft condition is the continued decline in groundwater levels during years of normal precipitation and recharge. Based on data collected so far, Harter says Scott Valley is not in an annual overdraft situation. Understanding how groundwater affects surface water through a scientific approach is the goal of the Scott Valley Groundwater Study Plan, the release said. Prepared with the help of UCD, the study plan is one of the tasks in the Scott Valley Temperature Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Action Plan of the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (NCRWQCB). The Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors adopted the plan in February 2008. Included in the plan are hypotheses to be tested, including Scott Valley geologic and hydrologic conditions, how groundwater dynamics work, proposed research methods, and a "road map" of tasks to carry out the plan in three phases over a 20 year period, as funding is available. According to the SRWC, "UCD has made significant progress on developing a sophisticated groundwater model, now in version two." Bryan McFadin, Senior Water Resource Control Engineer with the NCRWQCB, says that he thinks the Scott Valley Groundwater Study is going very well. "The Regional Water Board expects that the groundwater model Dr. Harter is developing with the County and the community's assistance will be a powerful tool for evaluating opportunities to manage the resource to improve water quality and provide a reliable water supply," says McFadin. He adds, "The hydrology of Scott Valley is quite complex. Development of a tool to understand and manage a system this complicated can't be accomplished overnight." To help the county manage and coordinate its water resources, the board of supervisors created the Scott Valley Groundwater Advisory Committee in December, 2010 - the first one in the county. Its 11 appointed members represent various groundwater users in the valley. They've met monthly for a year and a half, advising the board and the UCD groundwater model team about crop acreage, irrigation methods and water application rates. According to the release, "Growers in this small farming community use some of the most efficient and modern irrigation systems available for the alfalfa, pasture and grain crops grown in this mountain environment." "I feel I am going above the call of duty by volunteering to modernize my irrigation system for maximum efficiency at my own expense," says Tom Menne, Scott Valley alfalfa grower. Menne has installed center pivot sprinklers to irrigate his alfalfa fields, replacing the less efficient wheel line sprinklers. "I have 12 of these automated systems, which have increased my water efficiency by more than 20 percent," Menne said. Monitoring soil moisture helps ensure that farmers like Menne don't over-irrigate, which could also add excessive costs to their operation due to the cost of electricity. Menne, along with other farmers are cooperating in a detailed field study by UC Farm Advisor Steve Orloff and UCD irrigation specialists. Its intent is to gather data on actual water application rates by local growers and compare that with values based on weather instruments so the groundwater model is not based on theoretical values. Scott Valley rancher and member of the groundwater advisory committee, Preston Harris said, "We have an opportunity to do some remarkable things to manage and enhance our groundwater in Scott Valley." He added, "The uniqueness of our watershed and the willingness of the Scott Valley community will make this possible. The partnerships we have developed with UC Davis, Siskiyou County, the Scott Valley Groundwater Advisory Committee, watershed council and government agencies will play a huge role as well. This is an exciting time in Scott Valley restoration." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8189 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 3412 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Sep 27 08:23:25 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 08:23:25 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Tunnel Tensions Message-ID: http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_a4a5289a-0780-11e2-a920-001a4bcf6878.html Tunnel tensions By Amy Gittelsohn The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 6:15 am The Bay Delta Conservation Plan with its proposed twin tunnels to get water past the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta threatens the Trinity River and Trinity Lake and will not even help fish in the Delta as promised, a longtime Trinity River advocate said. About 35 people gathered Sept. 18 at Northern Delights in Hayfork to hear Tom Stokely's take on the state and federal plan unveiled July 25 by Gov. Jerry Brown and U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. "This is like going to a contractor and saying I'd like you to build me a house. I have no financing. I have no plans. I have no permits but I'd like you to do it," said Stokely, former natural resources planner for Trinity County and now a director for the California Water Impact Network. Stokely is scheduled to speak to the Trinity County Board of Supervisors on the issue the morning of Oct. 3. A draft environmental impact statement and report on the project known as the BDCP is being prepared. Among the main beneficiaries of sending more water south of the Delta will be the 600,000-acre Westlands Water District and the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority, Stokely said, calling them 800-pound gorillas with resources to hire the best attorneys and lobbyists. The two proposed tunnels ? each 33 feet in diameter ? would take water under the Delta, an inland estuary through which water from the north, including diverted Trinity River water, is pumped to get to farms and cities in the south. The pumps can grind up fish and displace them by causing the San Joaquin River to flow backward. As a result, there are restrictions on that pumping. In addition to alleviating that problem, the tunnels are also billed as a way to prevent interruption of water deliveries in the event of a levee failure in the Delta. The plan is estimated to cost about $24 billion, including $14 billion for construction of the tunnels to be paid for by water users and $10 billion for habitat restoration in the Delta to come from taxpayers. A water bond to pay for some of the restoration is set for the November 2014 ballot. A similar project Brown pushed for ? construction of a peripheral canal ? was rejected by voters in 1982. Stokely shares the concern of many North State residents that relieving the bottleneck caused by the pumping restrictions will open the spigot wide to send even more water south. That could happen to the Trinity River in spite of the 2000 Trinity River Record of Decision that gave the river about half its water back and set specific flows down the river based on water year type, Stokely said. Under the Record of Decision, releases to the Trinity River are to average 594,500 acre-feet but Stokely pointed out that the federal Bureau of Reclamation has water rights for the river that would allow minimum flows well below those figures at 120,500 acre-feet. That leaves 474,000 acre-feet of what Stokely calls "paper water." "When we go into a multi-year drought Trinity Lake will basically be emptied," Stokely said, adding that one of the few benefits Trinity County gets from construction of the Central Valley Project's Trinity River Division is low-cost power. "Even that is threatened by draining Trinity Lake," he said. In a telephone interview, Bureau of Reclamation BDCP Program Manager Federico Barajas in Sacramento said, "BDCP is not about getting additional water. It's about changing the configuration by which the water gets conveyed through the Delta ? It is to have a more reliable water supply mechanism in place." Another aspect of the plan is habitat restoration, he said. As yet unanswered is the amount of water available for Delta exports after completion of the project, or if those exports will increase. "We're in the midst of trying to figure that out," Barajas said. "We're continuing to honor the Trinity Record of Decision of 2000 flows as a foundation to the BDCP modeling," he said. "We're not planning to make any changes or adjustments to what you have seen in the past." While the scale of the new facilities has been downsized from transporting 15,000 cubic feet per second of water to 9,000 cfs, the current system could still be used as needed. "It's a dual facility," Barajas said. "It allows additional flexibility." There are many reasons not to believe what proponents of the plan say, Stokely said, from the price tag to the benefits. Legislation for a cost benefit analysis was killed, he said, but an independent estimate from the University of the Pacific's business forecasting center found that for every $2.50 spent, $1 in benefits would be realized. Although a firm figure as to what Delta water exports would be if the plan is implemented has not been provided, earlier figures put forth raised concerns from scientists saying the plan will hurt species ? not help them. Planners who say otherwise -- "they're just flat-out lying," Stokely said. There are other solutions to the problems in the Delta and water shortages, Stokely said, including improvements to the levees, recycling and storm water capture. Asked how the plan can be stopped, he suggested that residents talk to their county supervisors asking for a resolution opposing it. And, he said, residents with friends in the cities who get their water from the Delta can ask that they tell their water boards they don't want this project. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Sep 27 08:25:30 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 08:25:30 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard; Victor Gonella-Klamath salmon could be harmed by planned canal Message-ID: <1C26B050-9CD4-4ED5-8336-285E156C001F@att.net> http://www.times-standard.com/ci_21642320/klamath-salmon-could-be-harmed-by-planned-canal?IADID=Search-www.times-standard.com-www.times-standard.com Klamath salmon could be harmed by planned canal Victor Gonella/for the Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Created: Times-Standard.com The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors was right when it recently acted to protect the Trinity and Klamath River salmon runs from the looming peripheral canal. The peripheral canal is a grandiose water project being pushed by a handful of corporate agricultural operations in the San Joaquin Valley and southern California's biggest water supplier to grab more of northern California's salmon water. These water users have their eye on the Trinity River, the Klamath's biggest tributary. Because of dams and plumbing, the Trinity can be redirected away from the Klamath and to central and southern California. However, Trinity River water is desperately needed to sustain the strong salmon runs in the Trinity and Klamath like the one we saw this summer. Local Eureka fishing guides and fishermen say this salmon season was the best they've seen in a long time and perhaps ever. Guides regularly put their customers on early limits of salmon every day the weather would allow from July through the first part of September when the season closed. Fishing was spectacular. A huge run of salmon estimated at 1.6 million headed for the Klamath and Trinity this year. What a contrast to the years immediately following 2002 when the Klamath experienced perhaps the most disastrous salmon kill in West Coast history. That great Klamath salmon kill happened after the Bush/Cheney administration changed the rules and allowed growers in southern Oregon to seize more of the Klamath's headwaters. An estimated 60,000 adult Klamath salmon died in the low oxygen, heated trickle or a stream left over after growers upstream diverted the lifeblood waters for their fields. Salmon advocates sued and won a court order requiring the federal government to reallocate the Klamath's water to better protect salmon. It's working and with a little help from Mother Nature we got this year's bumper return. But just as we're seeing the run rebuild we're confronted with yet another group of growers, this time far to the south, who just can't get it through their heads that northern waters are needed to grow salmon. Unfortunately, these growers and their ilk have friends in high places, including the governor's office. They are working to build a huge new plumbing system and they will take more Trinity water if they possibly can. The Golden Gate Salmon Association applauds the recent actions of the board of supervisors, the president of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, Dave Bitts, Congressman Mike Thompson's office, the Hoopa Valley tribe and others who are taking these sensible steps to protect your local waters and a salmon run that provides food and jobs not just in Humboldt County, but throughout the state. Victor Gonella is the president of the Golden Gate Salmon Association. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Mon Oct 1 08:17:53 2012 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 08:17:53 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Spawning Survey update Message-ID: Hi all, See http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/ for the latest from the Trinity River Spawning Survey. Salmon spawning activity is starting to ramp up. Our crews mapped 340 redds and 63 carcasses last week. Have a great week! Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Oct 1 15:13:29 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 15:13:29 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Board of Supervisors Water Workshop Agenda 10.3.12 References: <278303F1-0EED-459C-9257-3B80E9F06AED@att.net> Message-ID: http://www.trinitycounty.org/Departments/Admin-Bos-Cao/Agenda%20Min/20121003A.pdf -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 20121003A.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 250460 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- From Vina_Frye at fws.gov Tue Oct 2 14:10:54 2012 From: Vina_Frye at fws.gov (Vina_Frye at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 14:10:54 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group Webex/Teleconference October 17th Message-ID: Hi Folks, The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group has scheduled a webex/teleconference on October 17th from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. The meeting topics are listed below. [Federal Register Volume 77, Number 191 (Tuesday, October 2, 2012)] [Notices] [Pages 60138-60139] >From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [ http://www.gpo.gov/] [FR Doc No: 2012-24158] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-FHC-2012-N222; FXFR1334088TWG0W4-123-FF08EACT00] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group; Public Teleconference/ Web-Based Meeting AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce a public teleconference/web-based meeting of [[Page 60139]] the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG). DATES: Teleconference/web-based meeting: Wednesday October 17, 2012, from 9 a.m. to 11 a.m. Pacific time. Deadlines: For deadlines and directions on registering to listen to the meeting by phone, listening and viewing on the Internet, submitting written material, or giving an oral presentation by phone, please see ``Public Input'' under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. ADDRESSES: You may participate in the teleconference/web-based meeting from your home computer or phone or in person at one of the following locations: U.S. Fish and Wildlife, Arcata Office, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone (707) 822-7201; or TRRP Office, 1313 South Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093 Telephone (530) 623-1800. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth W. Hadley, Redding Electric Utility, 777 Cypress Avenue, Redding, CA 96001; telephone: 530-339- 7327; email: ehadley at reupower.com. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with the requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App., we announce that the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) will hold a teleconference/web-based meeting. Background The TAMWG affords stakeholders the opportunity to give policy, management, and technical input concerning Trinity River (California) restoration efforts to the Trinity Management Council (TMC). The TMC interprets and recommends policy, coordinates and reviews management actions, and provides organizational budget oversight. Meeting Agenda Draft FY 13 Budget, Science Program, Overview of Peer Review Report, Implementation Program, Administration, and Reconsideration of September 10, 2012, TAMWG meeting issues (see Sept. 10, 2012, agenda at http://www.fws.gov/arcata for items potentially to be discussed). The final agenda will be posted on the Internet at http://www.fws.gov/arcata. Public Input ------------------------------------------------------------------------ You must contact Elizabeth If you wish to Hadley (FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) no later than-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Listen to the teleconference/web-based October 10, 2012. meeting via telephone or Internet. Give an oral presentation by phone..... October 10, 2012. Submit written information or questions October 10, 2012. for the TAMWG to consider during the teleconference. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Submitting Written Information or Questions Interested members of the public may submit relevant information or questions for the TAMWG to consider during the teleconference. Written statements must be received by the date listed in ``Public Input,'' so that the information may be available to the TAMWG for their consideration prior to this teleconference. Written statements must be supplied to Elizabeth Hadley in one of the following formats: One hard copy with original signature, and one electronic copy with original signature, and one electronic copy via email (acceptable file formats are Adobe Acrobat PDF, MS Word, PowerPoint, or rich text file). Registered speakers who wish to expand on their oral statements, or those who wished to speak but could not be accommodated on the agenda, may submit written statements to Elizabeth Hadley up to 7 days after the teleconference. As time permits, the public may also speak after each agenda item after the chair opens the floor for comment period. No registration beyond initial meeting registration is required for this. Meeting Minutes Summary minutes of the teleconference will be maintained by Elizabeth Hadley (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). The minutes will be available for public inspection within 90 days after the meeting, and will be posted on the TAMWG Web site at http://www.fws.gov/arcata. Dated: September 25, 2012. Joe Polos, Supervisory, Fish Biologist, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, Arcata, California. [FR Doc. 2012-24158 Filed 10-1-12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P Vina Frye U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata FWO 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone: (707) 822-7201 Fax: (707) 822-8411 vina_frye at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Tue Oct 2 16:12:00 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 16:12:00 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Message-ID: <506B121B.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Hi All, Please see attached for the Trinity River trapping summary update for JWeek 39, Sept. 24 to Sept. 30. Coho arrived in good form at the WCW last week, Chinook numbers increased slightly and Steelhead numbers doubled from the previous week's trap counts. Chinook dominated the show at TRH. Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRP_trapping_summary JWeek 39.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 81920 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Wed Oct 3 10:50:38 2012 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 10:50:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Conservation Magazine: Turning Fish Vegetarian Message-ID: <00a101cda18f$997fb090$cc7f11b0$@sisqtel.net> - Conservation Magazine - http://www.conservationmagazine.org - Turning Fish Vegetarian Posted By roberta On October 3, 2012 @ 2:00 am In Conservation Science,Flora+Fauna,Oceans,Technology | No Comments Description: http://www.conservationmagazine.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/iStock_000001 246180XSmall-square.jpg[1]Aquaculture is helping to meet people's growing demand for seafood, and fish farms often use fishmeal and fish oil as feed. But carnivorous fish can be coaxed to accept a more sustainable vegetarian diet, researchers have shown in a PLoS ONE study. Worldwide seafood consumption is rising fast, and fish farms have stepped in to fill the supply gap. Many farms have partially replaced fish-based feed with plant products. But meat-eating fish that are forced to go completely vegetarian may grow poorly or be less healthy. The authors reasoned that since wild fish can adapt to changes in diet through evolution, farmed fish should be able to do the same. The team started by feeding rainbow trout strictly plant-based meals. In a process called selection, the researchers sorted the fish by size every one to four months and kept the biggest ones. The large fish then bred to produce the next generation of trout. Next, the researchers fed the offspring either a plant-based or fish-based diet. They did the same with "control" fish, whose parents ate only the fish-based food and didn't undergo selection. The vegetarian fish had a lower survival rate and body weight than meat-eating fish. But the selection process improved the offspring's chances of survival, the team found. While 77 percent of the selected fish's plant-eating offspring survived at 145 days post-fertilization, only 66.9 percent of the control group's plant-eating offspring did. Selection also appeared to increase body weight among the vegetarian fish. The results show that "domesticated populations of rainbow trout have the genetic potential to adapt to major dietary changes," the authors write. With more rounds of selection, the vegetarian fish's survival and body weight could come closer to those of meat-eating fish. The team cautions that some ingredients used in this study's plant-based diet aren't sustainable, however, so they will eventually need to be replaced with more environmentally-friendly alternatives. - Roberta Kwok | 3 October 2012 Source: Le Boucher, R. et al. 2012. Selection for adaptation to dietary shifts: Towards sustainable breeding of carnivorous fish. PLoS ONE doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0044898. Image C Tootles | iStockPhoto.com * Description: Facebook[2] * Description: Twitter[3] * Description: StumbleUpon[4] * Description: LinkedIn[5] * Description: Tumblr[6] * Description: Reddit[7] * Description: Share/Bookmark[8] _____ Article printed from Conservation Magazine: http://www.conservationmagazine.org URL to article: http://www.conservationmagazine.org/2012/10/turning-fish-vegetarian/ URLs in this post: [1] Image: http://www.conservationmagazine.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/iStock_000001 246180XSmall-square.jpg [2] Image: http://www.addtoany.com/add_to/facebook?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservatio nmagazine.org%2F2012%2F10%2Fturning-fish-vegetarian%2F&linkname=Turning%20Fi sh%20Vegetarian [3] Image: http://www.addtoany.com/add_to/twitter?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservation magazine.org%2F2012%2F10%2Fturning-fish-vegetarian%2F&linkname=Turning%20Fis h%20Vegetarian [4] Image: http://www.addtoany.com/add_to/stumbleupon?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.conserva tionmagazine.org%2F2012%2F10%2Fturning-fish-vegetarian%2F&linkname=Turning%2 0Fish%20Vegetarian [5] Image: http://www.addtoany.com/add_to/linkedin?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservatio nmagazine.org%2F2012%2F10%2Fturning-fish-vegetarian%2F&linkname=Turning%20Fi sh%20Vegetarian [6] Image: http://www.addtoany.com/add_to/tumblr?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationm agazine.org%2F2012%2F10%2Fturning-fish-vegetarian%2F&linkname=Turning%20Fish %20Vegetarian [7] Image: http://www.addtoany.com/add_to/reddit?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationm agazine.org%2F2012%2F10%2Fturning-fish-vegetarian%2F&linkname=Turning%20Fish %20Vegetarian [8] Image: http://www.addtoany.com/share_save?linkurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationmaga zine.org%2F2012%2F10%2Fturning-fish-vegetarian%2F&linkname=Turning%20Fish%20 Vegetarian Click here to print. Copyright C 2010 Conservation Magazine. All rights reserved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8021 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 176 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 782 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.png Type: image/png Size: 1310 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.png Type: image/png Size: 1082 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.png Type: image/png Size: 1078 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image007.png Type: image/png Size: 621 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image008.png Type: image/png Size: 1181 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Oct 4 16:38:02 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 16:38:02 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Watch C-WIN's Video, Broken Promises Message-ID: <0FFD35BA-4388-4256-8F34-3DEE5A26554F@att.net> Watch the new C-WIN Video, Broken Promises at https://vimeo.com/50777941 Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From flevitan at hotmail.com Fri Oct 5 16:36:07 2012 From: flevitan at hotmail.com (Fred Levitan) Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 16:36:07 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Hi Friend... Message-ID: Make a lot of money working from home http://mrbilltaxman.com/blondedot/robertwhite44/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Oct 8 08:06:19 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 08:06:19 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Stockton Record- Bill would require cost study of Delta tunnels Message-ID: <3F23592D-828C-41B6-B3C3-79DD969612E0@att.net> http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20121007/A_NEWS/210070312 Bill would require cost study of Delta tunnels A bill in Congress would require the federal government to study the full costs and benefits of Gov. Jerry Brown's twin tunnels plan - something the state has said it will not do. By Alex Breitler Record Staff Writer October 07, 2012 12:00 AM U.S. Rep. John Garamendi, a Democrat from Walnut Grove who opposes the plan and is running for re-election, said he hopes to appeal to fiscal conservatives in the GOP-controlled House of Representatives. Similar legislation at the state level by Assemblyman Bill Berryhill, a Republican from Stockton, failed earlier this year. "If they're going to build something, what's it going to cost and what's the benefit?" Garamendi said last week. "This is something the Republicans scream they've got to have on every project - 'Do a cost-benefit analysis.' OK, we agree. Let's do it." Garamendi authored the bill along with Democrats Jerry McNerney, George Miller, Mike Thompson and Doris Matsui. Brown's plan, known as the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, would pipe Sierra snowmelt toward San Joaquin Valley farms and Southern California cities. Less water would flow through the Delta. The cost of the tunnels has been estimated at $14 billion, with billions more needed to restore Delta habitat. Officials are also calculating the potential benefits for those who receive the water and would have to pay for the tunnels. However, no broader statewide analysis of all costs - social, environmental and financial - has been undertaken. Garamendi's HR6484 requires the U.S. Secretary of the Interior to conduct such a study and report back by June. The bill also requires officials to study at least one solution that does not involve building the tunnels. Those who would receive the water have said a cost-benefit study is not necessary, because the project already must go through what they consider a rigorous process of analysis and approval. Garamendi said he believes they don't want a study done because the results will not support their cause. "This project will have to be sold to the farmers and the Southern California urban water users, and they're going to find out it's going to be extremely expensive water," Garamendi said. Tom Zuckerman, an attorney for central Delta farmers, said south-state interests will try to "squash" the bill as they did in the Legislature but said the difference is those interests are proportionately less numerous in Congress. "It's worth a try, I think," he said. Officials say some water will continue to be sent through the Delta even if the tunnels are built, so Garamendi's bill also calls for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to assist in maintaining the levees that are needed to securely convey that water. Most maintenance today is paid for by local landowners and by the state, despite that the federal Central Valley Project relies on the levees, too. The Bureau of Reclamation said Friday that it has no position on Garamendi's bill. Contact reporter Alex Breitler at (209) 546-8295 orabreitler at recordnet.com. Visit his blog at recordnet.com/breitlerblog. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: persbilde.gif Type: image/gif Size: 43 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Oct 8 08:06:19 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 08:06:19 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Stockton Record- Bill would require cost study of Delta tunnels Message-ID: <3F23592D-828C-41B6-B3C3-79DD969612E0@att.net> http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20121007/A_NEWS/210070312 Bill would require cost study of Delta tunnels A bill in Congress would require the federal government to study the full costs and benefits of Gov. Jerry Brown's twin tunnels plan - something the state has said it will not do. By Alex Breitler Record Staff Writer October 07, 2012 12:00 AM U.S. Rep. John Garamendi, a Democrat from Walnut Grove who opposes the plan and is running for re-election, said he hopes to appeal to fiscal conservatives in the GOP-controlled House of Representatives. Similar legislation at the state level by Assemblyman Bill Berryhill, a Republican from Stockton, failed earlier this year. "If they're going to build something, what's it going to cost and what's the benefit?" Garamendi said last week. "This is something the Republicans scream they've got to have on every project - 'Do a cost-benefit analysis.' OK, we agree. Let's do it." Garamendi authored the bill along with Democrats Jerry McNerney, George Miller, Mike Thompson and Doris Matsui. Brown's plan, known as the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, would pipe Sierra snowmelt toward San Joaquin Valley farms and Southern California cities. Less water would flow through the Delta. The cost of the tunnels has been estimated at $14 billion, with billions more needed to restore Delta habitat. Officials are also calculating the potential benefits for those who receive the water and would have to pay for the tunnels. However, no broader statewide analysis of all costs - social, environmental and financial - has been undertaken. Garamendi's HR6484 requires the U.S. Secretary of the Interior to conduct such a study and report back by June. The bill also requires officials to study at least one solution that does not involve building the tunnels. Those who would receive the water have said a cost-benefit study is not necessary, because the project already must go through what they consider a rigorous process of analysis and approval. Garamendi said he believes they don't want a study done because the results will not support their cause. "This project will have to be sold to the farmers and the Southern California urban water users, and they're going to find out it's going to be extremely expensive water," Garamendi said. Tom Zuckerman, an attorney for central Delta farmers, said south-state interests will try to "squash" the bill as they did in the Legislature but said the difference is those interests are proportionately less numerous in Congress. "It's worth a try, I think," he said. Officials say some water will continue to be sent through the Delta even if the tunnels are built, so Garamendi's bill also calls for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to assist in maintaining the levees that are needed to securely convey that water. Most maintenance today is paid for by local landowners and by the state, despite that the federal Central Valley Project relies on the levees, too. The Bureau of Reclamation said Friday that it has no position on Garamendi's bill. Contact reporter Alex Breitler at (209) 546-8295 orabreitler at recordnet.com. Visit his blog at recordnet.com/breitlerblog. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: persbilde.gif Type: image/gif Size: 43 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Oct 9 12:06:53 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 12:06:53 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] California Water Series Reminder References: <97CA3245418BF94EB68A7ED628E975BB012705F4@corexchg2.ci.redding.ca.us> Message-ID: <654D4B83-488D-4A02-A6C2-B28F85F04BEE@att.net> Pamela Clackler Conservation Specialist - Water Utility Public Works Department 530.224.6032 phone 530.224.6071 fax mailing: 777 Cypress Avenue Redding, CA 96001 shipping: 20055 Viking Way Building #3 Redding CA 96003 pclackler at ci.redding.ca.us -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Public Notice and Agendas - CWS 2012.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 14272 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Tue Oct 9 14:59:59 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 14:59:59 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping update Message-ID: <50743BD5.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Hi All, Weekly captures of Chinook, coho and steelhead at Willow Creek Weir continue to increase, while counts of Chinook (spring run) at the Trinity River Hatchery declined from the previous week. Please see attachment for Jweek 40 summary updates. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRP_trapping_summary JWeek 40.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 82432 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Oct 10 07:51:27 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 07:51:27 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Water tunnel plan prompts task force here Message-ID: http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_7ed4cf3a-128e-11e2-a089-0019bb30f31a.html Water tunnel plan prompts task force here Sally Morris The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 6:15 am Aiming to fast-track the formation of a Trinity County position on the proposed Bay Delta Conservation Plan and its twin tunnels many view as nothing more than a ruse to convey more water south, the Board of Supervisors has enlisted help from an ad hoc task force of local talent to report back with recommendations by its Nov. 6 session. Board members also recognized long-term involvement is critical if the county is to have any say in what becomes of its resources. ?Our water policies date back to the 1980s. A lot of good work was done, but we really need to update it with a firm policy that protects our county of origin rights and makes sure Trinity County is at the table and represented on these issues,? said Board Chairman Roger Jaegel. He acknowledged the county is facing many tough issues and competing priorities, ?but I think water is the biggest one.? Last Wednesday?s board meeting was entirely devoted to the topic, with a presentation about the proposed federal and state Bay Delta plan by Tom Stokely, retired Trinity County natural resources planner for Trinity County and now a director for the California Water Impact Network. He was followed by Weaverville attorney Liz Johnson who spent the early years of her career working for a wealthy water lobbying firm in Sacramento. ?That?s my confession, but in the process I learned a lot about the players. We are facing a thirsty beast that really knows how to use the system and has the money to. It?s been pretty much a closed club ? very hard to penetrate though not impossible, but it will take much creativity and I advise you to approach this as you would a very lethal enemy,? she told the board. Stokely presented a traveling slide show he has prepared on the proposed Bay Delta Conservation Plan unveiled in July by Gov. Jerry Brown and U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. A draft environmental impact statement is being prepared on the project that envisions two tunnels, 30 to 40 feet in diameter, running 150 feet under the Delta for 35 miles. Their purpose is to bypass the environmental and pumping constraints of the Delta and provide a more reliable flow of water from north to south, particularly if rising sea level causes the levees to fail, making the supply for Southern California unusable because of salt. ?They aren?t telling us how much water will be pumped. They say they?ll build it and figure that out later. They say this plan will save fish. It is so dishonest it bothers me. They show a six percent dead pool at Trinity Lake with water so low you?d have to pump water up to the hole to let it out, yet they conclude no negative impact,? Stokely said. He believes the $14 billion estimated price tag is also false ? it will more likely reach as high as $65 billion ?and once you start a project like this, you have to finish it. They?ll study the fish needs and wetlands results for 15 years and determine fish flows and diversion rates later in 15 years.? Stokely said a proposed cost/benefit analysis of the project died in the Legislature ?because they don?t want the public to know. If it were really so great, you?d think they?d welcome that analysis.? He and Johnson both encouraged Trinity County to engage with neighbors and partners throughout the Northern California region to obtain a seat at the table as future decisions are being made. Other suggestions include fighting for a minimum carryover storage at Trinity Lake to ensure cold water temperature objectives can be met for instream fish survival; enforcement of existing water quality regulations statewide; a statewide water availability analysis; improvement of Delta levees; reduction of Delta exports by retiring selenium contaminated ag land from production and increasing efficiency and water conservation measures in the metropolitan areas. ?The more agencies we can encourage to withdraw their support for the tunnels, the more costly it becomes for the rest, making it less feasible,? Stokely said, adding farmers who hold senior water rights are on board for a fight because ?they have everything to lose. The state has allocated about four times more water than is actually available. It?s supposed to be surplus water, but in dry years it isn?t. It?s paper water that is already over-allocated.? Sup. Debra Chapman said she is ?appalled ? farmers with fallowed land full of toxins are allowed to sell their unused water back to Westlands Water District, yet Trinity County gets not one penny. I don?t know how we get to the table without lawyers and we don?t have money for that.? Johnson advised that Trinity County has creative and knowledgeable people engaged on its behalf, but cautioned that at least on water, ?We need to coalesce and speak with a unified voice.? She added the existing Delta bottleneck ?is significant to us because it is what keeps our water from going south. It is also a demanding resource that dictates some pumping of our water to the south to address other problems created by other projects. Unfortunately, we are in the ballgame as long as our water goes through there, but we are looked at as yokels. We really have to align ourselves with some other folks.? She noted that in 1982, Brown?s proposed peripheral canal was voted down by an atypical canvas of voters representing not only diverse Northern California interests, but also by Southern Californians concerned about cost. ?There are other options. We are an arid state with water poorly distributed so it?s incumbent on us to be creative. If Dubai can get along with desalinized water, why can?t we? We live on the Pacific Ocean. You do not need to bring our water down when you can do those kinds of projects more efficiently and create jobs,? Johnson said. Stokely and Johnson offered their volunteer service on a task force to help create an immediate response from Trinity County to the proposed tunnels. Others assigned to the group include Arnold Whitridge, a long-time Trinity River advocate and former county supervisor; current Sups. Debra Chapman and Judy Pflueger who have the Trinity River and Trinity Lake in their districts; County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler and a representative of the Trinity Public Utilities District. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Oct 11 07:53:25 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 07:53:25 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] John Dennis Liu @ Weaverville Library 10/17 References: Message-ID: Safe Alternatives for our Forest Environment & University of California Cooperative Extension Present John Dennis Liu internationally acclaimed documentary film maker Wednesday, October 17, 7 PM Supervisors Chambers, Weaverville Library Mr. Liu, an American, has written and directed ecological films for the BBC, and National Geographic, among others. He will discuss and show his documentary ?Hope in a Changing Climate? about successful land restorations achieved by local people in a short time working together on huge devastated landscapes, in China, Zimbabwe and Ethiopia. John Liu is a dynamic engaging speaker leading audiences towards higher levels of motivation and most importantly, action. A variety of refreshments will be served. Also, updates will be given on Proposition 37 mandating labeling of foods sold in California that are genetically engineered. Vote YES on 37! ALL are WELCOME to this FREE EVENT -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Thu Oct 11 11:11:07 2012 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 11:11:07 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: Trinity River Spawning Survey update Message-ID: Howdy river folks, Our weekly report has been refreshed with data from the week of October 1 to 5. Our crews mapped 295 carcasses and 739 new redds over that period. Later, Charlie ----- Forwarded by Charles Chamberlain/AFWO/R1/FWS/DOI on 10/11/2012 11:04 AM ----- Charles Chamberlain/AFWO/R1/FWS/DOI 10/01/2012 08:17 AM To env trinity cc Subject Trinity River Spawning Survey update Hi all, See http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/ for the latest from the Trinity River Spawning Survey. Salmon spawning activity is starting to ramp up. Our crews mapped 340 redds and 63 carcasses last week. Have a great week! Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From TWashburn at usbr.gov Fri Oct 12 07:33:56 2012 From: TWashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy T) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 08:33:56 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Lewiston Dam Message-ID: Please make the following release changes to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 10/16/2012 0100 450 400 10/17/2012 0100 400 350 10/18/2012 0100 350 300 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Trinity River ROD winter base flow -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Oct 12 11:38:19 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 11:38:19 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Shasta Big Springs Ranch Open House flyer References: <913E9FF80DA0F946AA54B5B380C2DBD20FE940D4@MAILBOX3.TNC.ORG> Message-ID: <415E1684-0A43-4C7D-8C56-52B444DF08CD@att.net> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: shasta flyer final copy.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 1044239 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Oct 13 15:17:46 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 15:17:46 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] "Over Troubled Waters" Documentary, Sisson Museum, Mt. Shasta 10/23/12 Message-ID: <75E1FF3A-776F-4CD3-B81B-D2C9406B9D43@att.net> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PRESS RELEASE- water documentary and slide show at Sisson Museum 10.23.12.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 71571 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From tstokely at att.net Mon Oct 15 09:24:11 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 09:24:11 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune-Tribe Objects to Chemical Tests on Klamath River Message-ID: http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2012/10/tribe-objects-to-chemical-tests-on-klamath-river/ Tribe Objects to Chemical Tests on Klamath River Algae blooms spread from the reservoirs into the river itself, and are a health hazard because of the toxin microcystin that the algae releases into the water. / Photo courtesy of Regina Chichizola, Communications for Hoopa Valley Tribe By KRISTAN KORNS, Two Rivers Tribune Tribes with territory along the Klamath River are not happy about a Sept. 6, 2012, PacifiCorp test of the algaecide GreenClean on water in the Copco Reservoir during the traditional world renewal ceremonies. Regina Chichizola, the communication coordinator for the Hoopa Valley Tribe, said that the tribe was not notified about the test. ?We read about it in the Siskiyou County paper,? Chichizola said. ?This is especially troubling because Hoopa has its own approved EPA.? PacifiCorp operates several hydroelectric dams along the Klamath River. The company tested the hydrogen peroxide and peroxyacetic acid-based algaecide as a way to improve water quality in the river. Each year blue-green algae blooms in the reservoirs behind the dams along the Klamath, fed by nutrient runoffs from agriculture. The algae contains microcystin toxin, which is hazardous. Levels of microcystin have been recorded in the Klamath that are over 3000 times the limits set by the World Health Organization. Bob Gravely, a spokesman for PacifiCorp, said, ?We did a one-day fairly limited pilot test in Copco Reservoir in Siskiyou County.? ?The product we chose is EPA approved for use in drinking water supplies. It breaks down quickly into oxygen and water,? Gravely said. Crystal Bowman, the water resource coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, questioned PacifiCorp?s safety precautions and pointed out that the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lists Peroxy compounds in Toxicity Category I. According to the EPA website, ?These compounds are corrosive and severely irritating to the eyes, skin and mucous membranes. They have been placed in Toxicity Category I, indicating the greatest degree of acute toxicity, for eye and dermal irritation.? Dean Brockbank, vice president and general counsel of PacifiCorp responded to critics of the algaecide tests in a letter to the Times-Standard editor. Brockbank wrote, ?PacifiCorp has closely coordinated the study with Klamath basin stakeholders for nearly two years prior to testing it in a very small cove at Copco reservoir. These stakeholders include the State Water Resources Control Board, the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, the California Department of Fish and Game, and the Karuk and Yurok Tribes.? Brockbank didn?t specify what he meant by ?closely coordinated,? but spokespersons for the Karuk Tribe said they made it known that they opposed the algaecide test, both before and after it took place. In a letter to PacifiCorp dated seven days before the Copco Reservoir test, Bowman wrote, ?The times of year when the algaecide would be used coincides with the time of the year that World Renewal Ceremonies are occurring down stream of the dams.? ?We cannot in good faith encourage the use of chemicals in the water during times of the year when medicine men are bathing in the river and when ceremonial activities center around the health of the river,? she added. Gravely said, ?We?re required to take steps to try to improve water quality, environmental conditions, and habitat within the area of our hydro project.? Craig Tucker, the Klamath coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, said PacifiCorp is under a lot of pressure by regulatory agencies to mitigate the impacts of the dams and the algae blooms on the river. ?It is inconsistent with Karuk cultural practices to solve this problem by adding algaecides to the water. What would be consistent would be to remove the dams and have the river heal itself,? Tucker said. The first hydroelectric dam on the Klamath River, Copco I, was started in 1918 and finished in 1921. Fish could no longer migrate up the river past the dam to spawn. More dams were built along the river, and water was diverted away from the Klamath River and its tributaries for use by farmers. At one time, the Trinity River, which flows into the Klamath near Weitchpec, had 90 percent of its water flow diverted to the Sacramento Valley. The salmon population collapsed, canneries were closed, and tribes in California were banned from fishing along the river until the 1970s. The combination of stagnant water behind the dams, polluted return flows filled with fertilizer from farms, and warmer temperatures in the reservoirs creates the perfect living conditions for toxic algae. ?The dams create the algae,? Chichizola said. ?It?s kind of like if you filled a bathtub with fertilizer and let it stagnate.? Diverting water away from the rivers for agriculture can also lead to health hazards far worse than blooms of toxic blue-green algae. In 2002, water was diverted away from the Klamath to desperate farmers during a drought, despite Endangered Species Act regulations designed to protect the river?s fish. Political pressure was brought to bear on behalf of agribusinesses in Oregon, and the National Academy of Sciences delivered a report that there was ?no substantial scientific foundation? to think that lower flows could harm fish. Gale A. Norton, then Secretary of the Interior, flew to Klamath Falls to personally open the head gate to divert water away from the river and to the farmers in March 2002. By September 2002, tens of thousands of fish were dead and rotting along the banks of the river. Since then, minimum flow levels have been maintained on the river to protect fish under the Endangered Species Act, but toxic algae is still a problem. ?We have two relatively large reservoirs that have massive blooms of algae each year,? Tucker said. ?For the past three weeks, the Klamath has been posted with warnings against contact with the water throughout Karuk territory.? The Karuk Tribe, along with the Yurok Tribe, the Klamath Tribes, the US Secretary of the Interior, and the states of California and Oregon, signed an agreement with PacifiCorp to begin a process that could lead to removal of its four hydroelectric dams along the Klamath River. The Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA) would require the cost of dam removal to be shared between PacifiCorp ratepayers and the State of California. Under the agreement, California would pay $250 million for dam removal, and dismantling of the dams would start in 2020. The Hoopa Tribe, the Resighini Rancheria, and the Quartz Valley Indian Reservation did not sign the agreement even though all tribes favor dam removal. The Hoopa and Resighini support simply decommissioning the dams through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Leonard Masten, the chairman of the Hoopa Valley Tribal Council, said PacifiCorp should be held responsible for their pollution. ?There is no question dam removal is needed, however the stalled out agreements have led to an air of lawlessness,? Masten said. ?These agreements are not moving, yet Clean Water Act regulation has been stalled for seven years. It is time to use existing laws to get the dams out.? In the meantime, PacifiCorp claims they are allowed to release algaecides into the river as an interim measure under the KHSA, despite the objections of tribes living downriver. Gravely said PacifiCorp hasn?t decided whether or not they?ll release more algaecide into the river. The company is looking at the test samples and will be releasing a report towards the end of the year. ?There are no plans at this time to further use GreenClean on the river system,? Gravely said. ?This was a limited pilot test which we?re evaluating. The Karuk Tribe is still investigating whether or not the use of the algaecide was allowed under Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) pollution standards set by the regional water board. ?If PacifiCorp tries to expand these algaecidal treatments on the river, we?re going to fight them,? Tucker said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 18-41-Algae-One.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 73474 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Mon Oct 15 10:45:50 2012 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 10:45:50 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Mainstem Trinity River Salmon Spawning Survey update Message-ID: Hi all, The latest update for our mainstem Trinity River Spawning Survey is available here: http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/ Redds were not mapped in reach 2 (Bucktail to Steelbridge) or reach 5 (Douglas City Camp to Round House) due to technical difficulties. Next week's totals for those reaches will reflect two weeks of accumulation. Even missing redds in the two reaches mentioned above, our crews mapped the locations of 1,043 new redds this week! Our crews encountered 739 carcasses (all surveyed reaches). Figure from this week's update. Will update you again next week, Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ATT00001 Type: image/gif Size: 21830 bytes Desc: ATT00001 URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Tue Oct 16 15:19:04 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 15:19:04 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River trapping summary Message-ID: <507D7AA7.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Greetings, The weekly numbers of Chinook trapped at the WCW declined this week to a season low. Coho and steelhead numbers also declined from previous weekly totals. Please see attachment for trapping summary results for JWeek 41. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRP_trapping_summary JWeek 41.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 82432 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Oct 17 08:25:20 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 08:25:20 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou Daily News- Looking for rain Message-ID: http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20121016/NEWS/121019821 By John Bowman October 16. 2012 10:02AM Looking for rain As near record numbers of Chinook salmon continue to flood into the Klamath River and its tributaries, the heightened focus on this year's run has produced some controversy. PHOTO/ JOHN BOWMAN Several hundred Chinook salmon have been schooling in a pool at the mouth of the Scott River. The Karuk and Yurok tribes say the US Forest Service should be doing more to acquire more water. But the Forest Service says that can't be done. As near record numbers of Chinook salmon continue to flood into the Klamath River and its tributaries, the heightened focus on this year's run has produced some controversy. On Oct. 10, the Karuk and Yurok tribes issued a joint press release accusing the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) of ignoring their "responsibility to protect endangered salmon." The charge is based on the fact that the USFS has an adjudicated water right on the Scott River that has not been met at times during the late summer and early fall months when Chinook salmon return to the river to spawn. The tribes say the issue is especially pressing because several hundred Chinook are currently holding in a pool at the mouth of the Scott River "waiting for enough water to migrate up into the valley and spawn." According to Yurok Fisheries Program Manager Dave Hillemeier, "these kinds of conditions can lead to disease outbreaks and fish kills." The Daily News visited the Scott River on Thursday and confirmed that several hundred salmon are indeed holding at the mouth of the river. However, salmon were also observed in groups of five to 40 fish throughout the canyon reaches of the river on the same day. As of Oct. 13 the California Department of Fish and Game's (CDFG) Scott River salmon counting weir at river mile 18 had recorded at least 356 Chinook passing through the weir. CDFG employees are continuing to review videos and release periodic updates of fish numbers. The Forest Service's adjudicated water right for the month of October is 40 cubic feet per second (c.f.s.) as measured at the USGS flow gage just downstream of the transition from valley to canyon topography. As of 10:30 a.m yesterday, the gage shows the surface flow at 22 c.f.s. According to the graph, flows at that location have been slowly but continuously increasing over the past week. Karuk Tribal Chairman Buster Attebery said, "During meetings between the USFS and the Karuk Tribe, the tribe has asked that attention be brought to the failure of meeting water needs. The Klamath National Forest has yet to take any action regarding the reported shortage in water and the obvious failure to protect the fishery." But Patty Grantham, Klamath National Forest supervisor said there is no other water available to meet the adjudication. "I understand the concerns with low flows in the Scott River," Grantham said on Thursday. "I am concerned also. I feel the best approach to addressing this complex issue is for interested parties to work together toward a solution. That's how lasting solutions are built." She says the USFS has been actively working with stakeholder groups interested in the Scott River. "We've also been in contact with local elected government and tribal officials and other local, state and federal agencies to discuss the situation and look for opportunities to improve flows," she added. But the tribes are pushing for a different approach. In their press release, they urge the USFS to formally notify the California Water Board of the situation and make a call on any junior water rights holders to release more water. But according to Grantham, "From a water rights perspective, based on agency research, there are no junior water rights holders diverting that could be called upon to furnish water to fulfill the right held by the Forest Service." According to Scott River Watermaster John Clement, the USFS adjudication is in schedule D4 of the 1980 Scott River Decree. Clement says rights from on schedule cannot be commandeered to satisfy an adjudication on a different schedule. Scott River Water Trust Executive Director Sari Sommarstrom says there are currently no active junior diversions in the D4 schedule that could be taken. She said because of the excessively dry water year, only the highest priority adjudications received their full allotment, leaving many junior adjudications short of their allotted quantity. She said it's important to remember that this situation is occurring in the context of a drought year, a circumstance which she says has become more and more common since the 1980 decree was established. Preston Harris, a Scott Valley rancher and member of the Scott Valley Irrigation District board of directors said of the tribes' press release, "Insisting that people or agencies make demands is not the correct approach when dealing with Scott Valley water issues. To do so only causes the resources to suffer and moves us further away from a positive end result. It's more important to work towards a solution instead of creating division and starting new conflicts." CDFG Senior Environmental Scientist for the Klamath/Trinity Program, Wade Sinnen said "The CDFG does have concern over fish health and is monitoring the situation. However, current environmental temperature parameters indicate water temps at 50 degrees fahrenheit, which are highly suitable for salmonid survival and less suitable for many pathogens and their life cycle completion time scales." "Although flows are low and many fish are 'staging' in the lower river," Sinnen added, "migration is occurring and fish are spread out through the lower half of the system and we have observed (counted on video) fish moving through the Scott River weir at river mile 18." He did note that if sections of the river are inaccessible to spawners, available habitat and distribution of spawners will be negatively affected. Sinnen noted that this has been an especially dry year in the region and said CDFG anticipates that fish will quickly migrate upstream after the first significant rain storm of the season. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AR-121019821.jpg&MaxH=225&MaxW=225 Type: image/jpeg Size: 4509 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Oct 19 10:05:40 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 10:05:40 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: TMC Oct 23_24 Final draft agenda References: Message-ID: Please note that this is a DRAFT agenda. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From: Schrock, Robin M [mailto:rschrock at usbr.gov] Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 5:02 PM To: Ann Garrett; Brock, William; Curtis Milliron; Hadley, Elizabeth; Clarke, Ernest; Finley, Nancy; George Kautsky; Gil Saliba; Hayden, Tim; Hillemeier, Dave; Judy Pflueger (jpflueger at trinitycounty.org); Kim Mattson; Orcutt, Mike; Person, Brian L; Polos, Joe; Reck, Donald R; rjaegel at trinitycounty.org; Schrock, Robin M; Seth Naman; Heywood, Sharon; Suzie White; Teresa Connor Subject: TMC Oct 23_24 Final draft agenda Dear TMC members, Attached you will find the final draft agenda with a major reorganization of the agenda items. The Program Implementation and Science updates, including the results of the Annual Work Plan External Review Panel with SAB recommendations will take place on Tuesday afternoon October 23. You received the External Review Panel Report and accompanying SAB memo on Monday, October 15, 2012. This week you have already received the proposed FY2013 Admin, RIG and Science Budgets, and attached is the proposed Program budget in the context of past years. Also attached are two documents prepared at the request of TAMWG. One is a summary of TMC discussions about watershed work from 2001-2012, accompanied by the 31 page version with the entire quotes from the TMC minutes. The other is a summary of watershed citations from TRRP founding documents. The 2012 Temperature WG products was sent on Monday, as well, but was 3MB so you may not have been able to open it. Notes copies will be available at the meeting. The ED report and WG update will be sent tomorrow. Robin M. Schrock Executive Director Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street Weaverville, CA 96093 TEL: (530) 623-1800 FAX: (530) 623-5944 CELL: (530) 945-7489 www.trrp.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: FY2013 Proposed TRRP Program Budget 10-16-12.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 87369 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TMC_Agenda October 2012_draft Final docx.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 32599 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Foundational Documents Watershed References Sept 2012.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 287281 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Overview of TMC Watershed Discussions 2001_2012.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 298739 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TMC_Watershed_TMC minutes 31 pg.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 708333 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Oct 21 07:50:27 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 07:50:27 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] SacBee: Medical pot growers ravage California forest habitat Message-ID: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/10/21/4926571/medical-pot-growers-ravage-california.html# Medical pot growers ravage California forest habitat mweiser at sacbee.com PUBLISHED SUNDAY, OCT. 21, 2012 California's annual medical marijuana harvest is just about done, but this year brings a new revelation sweeping the nascent industry: The feel-good herb may not, in fact, be so good for the environment. From golden Sierra foothills to forested coastal mountains, an explosion of pseudo-legal medical marijuana farms has dramatically changed the state's landscape over the past two years. A rush to profit from patient demand for pot has resulted in irresponsible forest clearing, illegal stream diversions, and careless pesticide and fertilizer use that has polluted waterways and killed wildlife, state and local government officials said. The problem has become so big and so unregulated that the California Department of Fish and Game has resorted to aerial surveys to assess its scale. It has a new high-resolution, computer-controlled camera mounted in the belly of an aircraft to help pinpoint problem marijuana areas. In a recent flight over Nevada County, game warden Jerry Karnow was "astounded" at the increase in obvious marijuana grows visible from the air. They pop out as tightly clustered patches of vivid green plants in an otherwise sunbaked landscape, usually surrounded by tall fences. In the course of a 90-minute flight, the visible grows numbered in the hundreds, often carved out of mixed oak and pine forests on steep, erosion-prone hillsides. "I flew this last year and I'm seeing a whole bunch more than I did then," said Karnow, a warden in the region for 15 years. "This year it was unbelievable." Medical marijuana grows fall into a different category from illegal "trespass grows," which tend to be hidden on public land and maintained by criminal organizations. Pot grown for medicinal use is found on private land and legally permitted under state law. But the environmental problems they create are similar, in large part because the state's ability to regulate marijuana cultivation remains hazy. Though state law makes it legal to grow and use medical marijuana, it provides little guidance on how to regulate it. In addition, medicinal grows remain illegal under federal law, putting state and local agencies on uncertain ground when they attempt to set limits. "The impacts of water withdrawal, herbicide and pesticide use, unpermitted grading ? all of these things in any other legal industry would be regulated. And we know how to regulate them," said Mark Lovelace, a Humboldt County supervisor who is grappling with the dilemma. "In this case you can't bring them into compliance because the activity they are doing is fundamentally illegal according to the federal government." 1996 law didn't set limits California voters legalized marijuana for medicinal purposes in 1996 when they approved Proposition 215. The law allowed patients with a doctor's recommendation to possess and grow marijuana in limited quantities, but did not set clear limits. The Legislature tried to fix that loophole with Senate Bill 420, which took effect in 2004. It allowed Proposition 215 patients to cultivate no more than six mature or 12 immature plants. But the law was challenged in the state Supreme Court, which ruled in 2010 that the limit on plant numbers was invalid. Many growers took this as endorsement to cultivate all the marijuana they wanted. This may have triggered the explosion of medicinal grow sites across the state that is now prompting environmental concern. "The belief is to get what you can while the growing's good, because it won't last forever," said Lovelace, who supports legal use of medicinal marijuana. "There are a lot of folks out there who just don't care about the environmental harm they are doing." In California, local governments have authority over land use. They issue permits to grade new roads, terrace hillsides for agriculture and build ponds. When the matter exceeds local authority, such as withdrawing water from a stream to irrigate a crop, they require a property owner to obtain permission from the appropriate state or federal agency. But their efforts to regulate medicinal marijuana cultivation have been largely unsuccessful. In 2008, the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors adopted an ordinance regulating marijuana cultivation. It was a groundbreaking attempt to legitimize the medical marijuana industry and address environmental concerns and nuisance complaints from neighbors. Under the ordinance, growers paid the county $50 per marijuana plant, each of which was then marked with a unique numbered "zip-tie" tag. The fee covered county regulatory costs, including inspections to ensure compliance with environmental standards. The grower industry welcomed the move and helped draft the rules. But in January, the county decided to gut the ordinance after the U.S. Department of Justice warned that it violated federal law by permitting growers to cultivate a federally controlled substance. The notice included a warning that local government officials might be prosecuted individually. This put a fast chill over other local government attempts to control the environmental effects of the rapidly growing industry. Stream illegally dammed Many marijuana growers strive to minimize environmental harm. Among other things, they want to create a product that is safe for humans to consume, free from harmful chemicals. Patricia Smith, a Nevada County grower, adheres to a voluntary industry program called "Clean Green Certification" which licenses marijuana that meets certain environmental standards. She also supports appropriate government regulation. "I don't care if you're giving it away for free. Certain safety standards have to be met," said Smith, who chairs the county's chapter of Americans for Safe Access, a marijuana advocacy group. "I'll be the first to say not every person that is growing out there is an ethical person or a steward of the environment. I've seen some horrific things." In one recent case, game warden Karnow cited a Nevada County grower for illegally damming a stream that flows into Dry Creek, a tributary of the American River that supports salmon and steelhead. The grower excavated an 8-foot-tall earthen dam across the creek so he could pump water to a giant bladder, which then fed his cultivation site. The grower pleaded no contest on Aug. 27 to a misdemeanor charge of illegally diverting the stream. "He didn't realize, apparently, the havoc he was wreaking by diverting the stream. And many of them don't," said Nevada County District Attorney Clifford Newell, whose office prosecuted the case. "They flaunt it being a natural herb. But many times there's nothing natural about the plants they grow." Part of the problem is that marijuana consumers are often blind to the methods used to grow the crop ? where the pot they are smoking was grown, or whether it was treated with pesticides. "There's a huge population of people who eat organic food for breakfast and don't have any awareness at all of how their cannabis was cultivated or harvested," said Alison Sterling Nichols, a Humboldt County environmental consultant working with county leaders to reduce the environmental cost of marijuana growing. "They don't even think about what was put on it or what trees came down to plant it. There's just a complete disconnect." Pot grown in clearcuts The consequences of that disconnect are especially acute in Humboldt and Mendocino counties, long the hotbed of marijuana cultivation in the state. The demand for medical marijuana has produced thousands of new clearcuts in North Coast forests. In each case, dozens of trees are cut, the land is graded for planting, and water is procured ? usually from the nearest stream ? to irrigate the crop. The region is struggling to restore endangered coho salmon in its coastal creeks. Millions of dollars have been spent on restoration projects, and logging and agriculture are under strict regulation. At the same time, marijuana cultivation has exploded. "What I've seen is kind of similar to how logging used to take place back in the early days, before laws were really strong," said Scott Bauer, an environmental scientist and coho recovery coordinator at the Department of Fish and Game office in Eureka. "It's this gold-rush mentality right now, where everybody's out to get their piece of the action. So you see these grows have gotten substantially bigger over the past couple of years." One reason is that Proposition 215 allows medical marijuana users to form "collectives" to grow marijuana. A single grower can gather the doctor certificates from many patients and grow marijuana on their behalf. Instead of one person growing six mature plants, large grows have become common with hundreds of plants cultivated on behalf of many patients. Bauer said some growers fell trees, push them over the edge of a hillside, then bulldoze dirt on top of the trees to create flat planting areas. The bulldozed trees eventually rot, and in the next big storm, the piled soil cascades into the creek below, burying fish-spawning habitat. Most of these grows get water from the nearest stream, Bauer said. Normally this requires a stream alteration permit from Fish and Game. But many growers either don't know that or don't care, and set about engineering makeshift dams and ponds. Wildlife put at risk Growers are tapping this water when wildlife need it most. The North Coast is known for its heavy rainfall. But that usually stops by June, and wildlife must survive through summer and fall on water that fills the streams from springs and seeps. This is also when marijuana plants demand the most water. Often water cannot be delivered by gravity flow to a cultivation site. So growers run diesel generators to power water pumps, which in turn fill storage tanks. The pumps may only run a few hours a day, but that can be enough to do serious harm. "During that time, there is a dewatering process that will occur for hundreds of feet below the pump site," said Jackie Krug, a Humboldt County game warden. "You may not even realize the impacts you've just had, but you've just killed everything in that stretch of stream." State officials are caught in the same legal bind that precludes local governments from regulating the industry. Fish and Game, for instance, is happy to consider issuing streambed alteration permits to marijuana growers, but only under a kind of "don't ask, don't tell" policy. "If somebody were to call and say, 'I'm diverting water, I need a permit,' we're not going to ask what that diversion is for," said Bauer. Fish and Game is working to assess the industrywide water demand on the North Coast. It will start by examining a single watershed using aerial surveys to count marijuana grows. The goal is to understand how the industry is affecting the regional environment. Others hope consumer and grower education help address the problem. "As long as we can't regulate it as a community, we have to rely on it being successfully self-regulated, which is rare in any industry," said Nichols. "It's just time to be less greedy and more responsible." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Oct 21 10:50:15 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 10:50:15 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle- Dianne Feinstein: 4 decades of influence Message-ID: <8E169D90-FF0D-44FF-A2E6-1D34A926BA9E@att.net> http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Dianne-Feinstein-4-decades-of-influence-3968314.php#page-1 From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Mon Oct 22 08:24:15 2012 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 08:24:15 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey update for week October 15-19 Message-ID: Hi all, The latest update for our mainstem Trinity River Spawning Survey is available here: http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/ Remember last week, redds were not mapped in reach 2 (Bucktail to Steelbridge) or reach 5 (Douglas City Camp to Round House) due to technical difficulties. This week's totals for those reaches reflect two weeks of accumulation. We started covering the lower river this week (Hawkins Bar to Weitchpec) and will continue to do so every other week for the remainder of our season (mid-December) or until storms color up the water too much. Our crews mapped the locations of 804 redds and 1,106 carcasses October 15 to 19. Here's a figure clipped from this week's report showing how this year's running total from Lewiston dam to Cedar Flat compares to years previous. Our guys report seeing fish everywhere. Get out there and observe some spawning if you can! Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ATT00001 Type: image/gif Size: 22023 bytes Desc: ATT00001 URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Mon Oct 22 15:14:37 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 15:14:37 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Message-ID: <50856298.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Hi all, Chinook and coho salmon numbers at the Willow Creek Weir during Jweek 42 remained about the same Jweek 41. However, we had a slight rain and steelhead numbers increased from the prior week. The Trinity River Hatchery was closed during Jweek 42 for a spawning break to help separate the spring and fall Chinook run, although a few Chinook were removed from the system. Please see attachment for the trapping summary update. Thanks, Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRP_trapping_summary JWeek 42.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 82944 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Oct 23 14:31:07 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 14:31:07 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Free Documentary and Slide Show on CA Water Wars, Sisson Museum, Tuesday 10/23 7 pm References: <29DA3A38-00A6-4FD3-8689-D51582F5777F@att.net> Message-ID: <85659D95-5729-4247-8122-13B9DCFB8220@att.net> Please distribute. Sorry for any cross postings. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Over Troubled Water Poster Mt Shasta.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 495176 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- From tstokely at att.net Wed Oct 24 07:31:24 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 07:31:24 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Letter from TAMWG to TMC References: Message-ID: <1BA68702-16C0-470C-B6CE-1FA96B424033@att.net> Begin forwarded message: From: "Hadley, Elizabeth" Date: October 22, 2012 4:53:00 PM PDT To: Cc: "Schrock, Robin M" , "Ann Garrett" , "Brock, William" , "Curtis Milliron" , "Clarke, Ernest" , "Finley, Nancy" , "George Kautsky" , "Gil Saliba" , "Hayden, Tim" , "Hillemeier, Dave" , , "Kim Mattson" , "Orcutt, Mike" , "Polos, Joe" , "Reck, Donald R" , , "Seth Naman" , "Heywood, Sharon" , "Suzie White" , "Teresa Connor" , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Letter from TAMWG to TMC Brian ? Attached please find a letter dated October 22, 2012 from the TAMWG to the TMC summarizing our most recent meetings and subsequent recommendations. I look forward to presenting these recommendations to the TMC at your meeting tomorrow. Thanks. Elizabeth W. Hadley Legislative & Regulatory Program Supervisor Redding Electric Utility City of Redding Office (530) 339-7327 Cell (530) 722-7518 ehadley at reupower.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TAMWG Letter to TMC 10-22-12.pdf.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 268926 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Oct 24 09:47:25 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 09:47:25 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] TAMWG Minority opinion on TRRP 2013 budget Message-ID: <4C8360F6-08B4-4DED-876B-42E4E0D24DDB@att.net> The prior e-mail forwarded by me from Elizabeth Hadley contained a minority report on the TAMWG budget recommendation by me and Emelia Berol. I am sending it as a separate message as text below, since some folks may not have noticed it in the packet. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org ***************************************************** October 22, 2012 Elizabeth Hadley, Chair Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group P.O. Box 1300 Weaverville, CA Subject: Minority opinion on TAMWG FY 2013 Budget Recommendation to TMC Dear Elizabeth; We strongly support a science-based Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) that complies with the 2000 Trinity River Record of Decision. We strongly support the goals of the TRRP and believe that the Trinity River still has the opportunity to be a national model for restoration of an aquatic ecosystem that supports robust sport, tribal and commercial fisheries. We submit you this minority opinion regarding our abstention from the October 17, 2012 recommendation of the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) to the Trinity Management Council in support of the funding priorities as presented in the proposed FY 13 budget. We do not object to the two caveats that funding be increased for watersheds or that the SAB review the efficacy of the Lower Trinity River sport harvest survey. Instead, we have the following concerns with the funding priorities in the proposed FY 13 budget: ? We object to the inclusion of funding for additional channel rehabilitation projects without having the benefit of the long-delayed Phase 1 review being conducted by the Science Advisory Board. Based on the schedule the TAMWG was provided, final design team meetings with the public will be convened prior to receipt of the final Phase 1 report. The budget priorities blindly assume the outcome of the Phase 1 Review. The ROD called for a review of Phase 1 projects following their completion. This has yet to be completed, but millions are planned to be spent in the face of scientific uncertainty and public concern. ? We object to plans to perform additional gravel injections into the Trinity River without the benefit of independent scientific review of past projects. Given the large number of complaints from the public that numerous pools in the Trinity River have been filled with spawning gravel, it behooves the TRRP to investigate and substantiate the concerns before proceeding. To date we have not seen any analysis of how much the pools have filled, even though it was promised months ago. To the best of our knowledge, the Phase 1 review does not address the biological benefits and impacts of gravel injection, nor is there an intention to do so. Despite the fact that no FY 2012 funds are being provided for this project, we object to gravel injection in 2013 as part of the overall TRRP funding priorities. ? We object to the chronic underfunding of watershed restoration. There is, in part, inadequate funding for watershed planning and restoration because the TMC failed to approve the Watershed Assessment Project in FY 2012. Failure to approve the project resulted in a semi-permanent reduction in watershed funding due to continuing federal budget resolutions. The watershed component of the Trinity ROD was intended to provide $1.8 million/year of funding in all areas of the Trinity River basin, but has been chronically underfunded due to a bias against work outside of the upper 40 miles of the Trinity River. In conclusion, we do not believe that the TRRP is proceeding in compliance with the 2000 Trinity ROD. Watershed restoration activities to reduce fine sediment inputs into the Trinity River are long-neglected and chronically underfunded. Mainstem restoration projects and gravel injections are being planned to be constructed without the benefit of independent scientific review in the face of increasing public scrutiny and skepticism. That being said, we believe that the large fish runs being experienced this year are a direct result of the higher flows that have been implemented in recent years by the Trinity River Restoration Program. Furthermore, the supplemental flows provided to the Lower Klamath River in August and September of this year were important pieces in protecting the large salmon returns moving up the river at that time. We strongly support those higher flows and the involvement of the TRRP to ensure that the water is wisely used to meet the fishery restoration goals mandated by Congress. Sincerely, Emelia Berol & Tom Stokely TAMWG Members -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Oct 25 07:39:07 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 07:39:07 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard- Hoopa Tribal Council calls a halt to Tish Tang access pilot program Message-ID: <66C4D096-0E7A-4290-B43E-181188F28BC9@att.net> http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_21851619 Hoopa Tribal Council calls a halt to Tish Tang access pilot program Grant Scott-Goforth/The Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Created: Times-Standard.com A pilot program designed to give non-tribal member river guides access to the Trinity River on the Hoopa Valley Reservation was discontinued after 30 days. At its Oct. 18 meeting, the Hoopa Tribal Council -- based on recommendations from staff -- decided not to continue the program, which was adopted on an emergency basis last month. In January, the tribal council announced it would look into a permit program after the chairman's office asked the tribe's forestry department to close gates and post no trespassing signs on the Tish Tang access road in early December. Fishing guides and tribal members raised concerns over the restricted access of non-tribal members. The Hoopa Valley Tribe has sovereign authority over its territory. ?In recent years, the tribe has been confronted with increasingly disrespectful and destructive conduct by users of tribal lands and resources,? the tribe said in a statement last year. ?This includes repeated incidents of illegal dumping, theft of resources, habitat destruction, contamination of lands and waterways and other public offenses. In response to what has reached an emergency level, action has been taken to restrict access via posting of designated roads and river access locations, together with the installation of gates in some instances.? Tribal Council Vice Chairman Byron Nelson Jr. is frustrated with the dissolution of the pilot program, though he said the council would be revisiting the issue, likely at the next meeting. ?I'm just a little disappointed about how the bureaucracy has taken over the effort,? Nelson said. ?It really shouldn't be that hard to come up with an ordinance that would be fair all the way around.? Nelson said issues raised by tribal staff led them to recommend discontinuing the program. ?Whether or not that's a real practical way, I don't know,? Nelson said. Willow Creek Chamber of Commerce President Ed Duggan said he was upset immediately after the decision, but he understands the reasoning better now. He said the amendment to tribal code would have given approved river guides access to all tribal lands. ?What we were after was access to the river, not the whole reservation,? said Duggan, who is a member of the Trinity River Guides Association. ?There are places on the reservation that are ceremonial spots.? Nelson said that for years, anyone with a state fishing license could fish on the Trinity River. Only the tributary creeks were reserved for tribal members. He said the chairman, Leonard Masten Jr., basically took action himself to close Tish Tang to combat destruction of the popular river access site. ?We're really trying to keep the valley clean,? Nelson said. Calls placed to Masten's office, as well as the Hoopa Tribal Forestry and Fisheries departments, were not returned by press deadline. Fishing guides grumbled about the restriction, but Trinity River Guides Association board member Michael Caranci said that it's ultimately the tribe that's affected by the restriction. ?Most of the people that do fish down there are going somewhere else,? Caranci said. ?The only people it's hurting is the Hoopa Tribe.? Without a local draw to fishermen, businesses in the Hoopa Valley are missing out on economic opportunities like selling guide services, equipment sales and gas sales, Caranci said. Duggan agreed, saying that towns upriver gained the business that Willow Creek, Hoopa and Weitchpec lose. ?It's a crying shame if [fishermen] say they're gonna stay upriver,? Duggan said. Caranci added that fishing guides weren't the ones trashing river access sites in the first place. ?Most of the guides are in favor of a fee or payment system for access,? Caranci said. ?It's in the tribe's best interest.? Frank Galusha, publisher of North Coast recreation website myoutdoorbuddy.com, lamented the restricted access. ?Except for salmon and steelhead, everyone has everything to gain and nothing to lose as a result of what has become a stale and totally silly stalemate,? Galusha said in an email. Nelson said that the council, though in disagreement about the pilot program, designated a staff work group to coordinate solutions. ?I might have to voice my opinion a little bit more about what we should do,? Nelson said. ?It's really gonna be on the council to step up and give clear directions and timelines.? Duggan is optimistic that the tribal council will let guides back onto the river. ?I think we might be able to salvage the attitude of the council and start over with gaining accessibility,? he said. Grant Scott-Goforth can be reached at 441-0514 or gscott-goforth at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Oct 25 10:23:28 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 10:23:28 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Restore_the_Delta_media_release=3A?= =?windows-1252?q?_=93Over_Troubled_Waters=94=3A_Selected_as_Finalist_in_1?= =?windows-1252?q?1th_Annual_Wild_=26_Scenic_Film_Festival?= References: Message-ID: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Release OTW Wild & Scenic Film festival.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 75480 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Tue Oct 30 07:35:30 2012 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 07:35:30 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey update for week October 22-26 Message-ID: Hi all, The latest in-season update for our mainstem Trinity River spawning survey is available at our website http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/ Our crews mapped the locations of 1,259 Trinity River redds and 1,656 carcasses last week. Things are getting busy! Here's a figure clipped from this week's report showing how this year's running total from Lewiston Dam to Cedar Flat compares to years previous. Thanks for tuning in, Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ATT00001 Type: image/gif Size: 22496 bytes Desc: ATT00001 URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Oct 30 10:35:09 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 10:35:09 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Water for Seven Generations Conference, Sierra Nevada Brewery, Chico 11/29 and 11/30 Message-ID: Env-trinity subscribers, I strongly recommend that you go to this important conference. It is not the typical California Water conference. The difficult issues in California water will be discussed by a wide range of presenters. Check out the agenda below. See you there! Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org Water for Seven Generations: Will California Prepare For It? This prestigious conference will be held on Thursday, November 29th and Friday, November 30th at Sierra Nevada Brewing Company in Chico. The conference can accommodate 300 people and is tailored to reach policy makers, activists, academics, agencies, and the interested public. The conference will provide valuable historical, scientific, legal, political, and visionary information regarding current and planned threats to the Sacramento River and the Delta's ecosystems, aquatic and terrestrial species, economies, and communities. It will also provide specific scenarios in which these vital waters can be sustained into the future. Water for Seven Generations will review California?s short, 160-year history in which it developed massive water supplies that propelled its economy into the global top ten, but with devastating environmental consequences. Professionals and novices will have a valuable opportunity to consider what brought the state to such a precarious and unsustainable position and what credible and economically viable possibilities exist that could move our collective thinking and behavior toward a Seven Generations reality. November 29th will cover surface water and includes panels or sections that will cover History, Watersheds of Origin, Rivers, the Central Valley and State Water Projects, Species, and Economics. A no host bar/reception and poster session will take place after the speakers conclude. November 30th will cover ground water and the future. Sections or panels will cover History, Law, Science, and Present Conditions. A vision for the future will close the conference. To view the program and attend the conference, go to http://www.aqualliance.net/water-conference-2012/. Lodging arrangements may also be found at our web site. -- Barbara Vlamis Executive Director AquAlliance P.O. Box 4024 Chico, CA 95927 (530) 895-9420 www.aqualliance.net Program DAY ONE: SURFACE WATER ? Thursday, November 29, 2012 Registration & Continental Breakfast 7:30 - 8:30 History Donald Pisani, PhD, retired from University of Oklahoma Watershed of Origin Panel Greg Gartrell, Contra Costa Water District Michael Jackson, attorney Tim O?Laughlin, attorney John Mills, consultant Rivers Steve Evans, Friends of the River Don Mooney, attorney Lunch Keynote Speaker ? John Herrick, Manager, South DeltaWater Agency Central Valley Project/State Water Project Panel Don Glaser, Regional Director, US Bureau of Reclamation, CVP Felix Smith, retired US Fish and Wildlife Service Tom Stokely, California Water Impact Network Speaker from Department of Water Resources (awaiting confirmation) Bill Kier, consultant Species Brian Ellrott, National Marine Fisheries Service Mike Chotkowski, Field Supervisor for the San Francisco Bay-Delta Fish and Wildlife Service Paul Maslin, PhD, CSU, Chico Professor (emeritus) Economics Speaker to be announced Poster Session, reception, hors d?oeuvres and no-host bar 5:30 ? 7:00 ? ? ? DAY 2: GROUND WATER AND THE FUTURE ? Friday, November 30, 2012 Registration & Continental Breakfast 7:30 ? 8:30 History Sally Manning, PhD, Environmental Director, Big Pine Paiute Tribe of the Owens Valley Daniel Prichet Harry Williams, Bishop Paiute To Be Announced Law Michael Jackson, Ground water law Adam Keats, Center for Biological Diversity, Monterey Lunch Keynote Speaker ? Michelle Sneed, US Geological Survey Science Todd Greene, PhD, CSU, Chico Jean Moran, PhD, CSU, East Bay Claudia Faunt, US Geological Survey The Future Bill Jennings, California Sportfishing Alliance -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Tue Oct 30 15:23:10 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 15:23:10 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Message-ID: <508FF0BE.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Hi All, Please see the attachment for the Trinity River Trapping Summary update. Summary data for the Trinity River Hatchery is not available for Jweek 43 at this time. Let it be known that a large number of Chinook salmon entered the hatchery upon its re-opening after the spawning break. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRP_trapping_summary JWeek 43.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 83456 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Oct 30 16:53:57 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 16:53:57 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] CA Progress Report-Delta Leaders Line Up in Opposition of "Water Tunnels" Plan Message-ID: <4727E4BD-133D-47B5-9BEA-0158D04DA490@att.net> http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/site/delta-leaders-line-opposition-water-tunnels-plan Delta Leaders Line Up in Opposition of "Water Tunnels" Plan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Oct 31 10:25:47 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 10:25:47 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Indian Country Today- 10 Years After Klamath Fish Kill, New Water Proposals and Weakening of Indian Water Rights Threaten Salmon Gains Message-ID: <93E2F14B-8FDF-4F87-B080-3D6CE219374B@att.net> http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/ict_sbc/10-years-after-klamath-fish-kill-new-water-proposals-and-weakening-of-indian-water-rights-threaten-salmon-gains 10 Years After Klamath Fish Kill, New Water Proposals and Weakening of Indian Water Rights Threaten Salmon Gains By Leonard Masten October 29, 2012 RSS Read More: Bay Delta Conservation Plan George W. Bush Jerry Brown Klamath River Leonard Masten PacifiCorp Salmon Warren Buffett SHARE THIS STORY 6 5 4 Get News Alerts Submit this story Ten years ago thousands of adult salmon died in the Lower Klamath River in far Northern California when extremely low flows ordered by the Bush administration created lethal conditions for fish. This year, as we celebrate the first good run of salmon since the fish kill let?s remember the ten years of advocacy that got us here. Proposed projects like California governor Jerry Brown?s massive tunnels to Southern California could siphon water from the Klamath watershed via diversions of its largest tributary the Trinity River. What?s more, water planning, and proposed legislation which calls for assurances against Tribal water rights, on the Klamath proves the threats to the ailing watershed are far from over. In 2002 the Bush administration using manipulated science, ordered flows mandated by the Endangered Species Act be lowered in the Klamath River to appease farmers. The result: about 68,000 dead adult salmon. The fish kill led to a decade of suffering in California and Oregon?s fish-dependent communities, which rely on the Klamath run. Low runs of Klamath Salmon led to congressionally declare economic disasters. It also lead years where there was not enough salmon to support Tribal ceremonies, let alone subsistence fishing. To California?s three largest Tribes the impacts where devastating. Klamath River Tribes, other community members, and coastal fishermen mourned this tragedy and began to fight harder than ever for the salmon, and the cultures and jobs they support. There has been positive change since. In the last decade we saw the beginning of large-scale restoration on the Trinity River, the Klamath?s largest, most fish producing tributary; the movement to take down four dams owned by Warren Buffett?s PacifiCorp in the Klamath River; and a myriad of efforts to restore our watersheds and the people and cultures who depend on them. In 2010 PacifiCorp committed to taking out their antiquated dams to aid salmon. The actions of Tribal people, and the assertion of water and fishing rights by Tribal governments, have been motivators for all of these actions. This year, as a result of good ocean conditions and salmon action, an estimated 378,000 salmon came up the Klamath River. These salmon lead to a boom for coastal fishing communities in a poor economy, and a large salmon allotment for struggling Klamath River Tribes. This run was facing conditions similar to 2002 until the government heeded the advice of Tribes, fishermen and scientists and allocated more water to avoid another fish kill. As we enjoy the fruits of our victories let us remember the fish that died in 2002, and all those who have fought for the salmon before and since. There is no guarantee we will see more years like this unless we stay committed to restoration, increased flows and the preservation of Tribal rights on the Klamath and Trinity rivers. Back steps like Governor Brown?s proposed peripheral tunnels and Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP), which aim to bring more of Northern California?s water to Southern California, threaten the Trinity and Klamath River flows. The Trinity is the only out-of-basin watershed imported into the BDCP and Sacramento Valley. It is also the largest and cleanest watershed that enters the Klamath. The tunnel proposal could increase the demand to send the Trinity?s water to Southern California, reversing of the biggest win the Klamath salmon have seen, the decision to restore the Trinity River. Unfortunately it was not until after the 2002 fish kill that a thirty-year struggles for the Trinity?s water was resolved and 48% of historical flows were returned to the river. (Up to 90 percent of the river had been diverted south.) This water was secured due to language in the 2000 Trinity Record of Decisions that provides for a restored fishery for subsistence use. It is Tribal fishing and water rights that created this mandate. It is also essential to salmon survival that Buffett?s PacifiCorp stands by its promise to take out the Klamath dams and stop stalling with the proposed Klamath settlement legislation. Dam relicensing, which occurs every fifty years provides an opportunity to surrender the dams? though public processes. This could have happened years ago; instead dam removal is stalled by expensive legislation that compromises flow for salmon and Indian water rights. This legislation set a dangerous precedent by assuring the government will not protect water rights for Tribes that do not sign the settlement legislation The assertion of Tribal water rights and sovereignty is key not only to salmon recovery, but also the preservation of Native cultures, and therefore this legislation is unacceptable. The communities that depend on salmon cannot let bureaucracy and inaction kill the Klamath Salmon and return us to 2002. Let us remember the dead fish the blanketed the shores of the Klamath by taking action for our communities and rivers. Leonard Masten is the chairman of the Hoopa Valley Tribe. He has been active with the Tribal council for the last fourteen years and is a retired law enforcement officer with over 26 years of experience. His main goal as Tribal chairman is to make the Hoopa Valley a safe and drug free environment. Read more:http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/ict_sbc/10-years-after-klamath-fish-kill-new-water-proposals-and-weakening-of-indian-water-rights-threaten-salmon-gains http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/ict_sbc/10-years-after-klamath-fish-kill-new-water-proposals-and-weakening-of-indian-water-rights-threaten-salmon-gains#ixzz2AtgKhDRP -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Screen-Shot-2012-10-24-at-12.53.59-PM-e1351097777294.png Type: image/png Size: 324901 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Screen-Shot-2012-10-24-at-2.44.32-PM-270x187.png Type: image/png Size: 84608 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Oct 31 11:18:25 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 11:18:25 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou Daily News: Hundreds watch Shasta salmon Message-ID: http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20121030/NEWS/121039954 Hundreds watch Shasta salmonBy John Bowman Oct. 30, 2012 5:38 p.m. Zoom Butteville Elementary School science and math teacher Lenny May points out spawning salmon on the Nature Conservancy?s Shasta Big Springs Ranch. Students attending the event had the opportunity to watch as salmon competed over mates and spawning habitat. Daily News photo/John Bowman BIG SPRINGS -- Hundreds of visitors, including over 400 local students, attended the Nature Conservancy?s Shasta Big Springs Ranch salmon viewing open house on Friday and Saturday. Visitors came to catch a look at this year?s unusually large run of Shasta River Chinook salmon. The carcass of a salmon, which had already spawned and died, drew a wide range of commentary and eager pointing from the kids, as did the female Chinook noisily splashing and flapping her tail against the stream bed to build her redd (nest) just under the Louie Road bridge where the students stood watching. This year?s run of fall Chinook salmon on the Klamath River is likely to be the biggest since 1978, with scientists predicting a total near 380,000 fish for the Klamath River system. The Shasta River has already seen the return of over 22,000 Chinook this fall and this year?s large run has been providing increased opportunities for viewing the annual migration. Jason Singleton, outdoor education specialist for the Siskiyou County Office of Education said the field trip provided a valuable learning tool for students and the general public. ?You don?t often get the chance to watch this kind of thing in the wild. It's one thing to talk about it in the classroom, but you can?t beat this kind of direct observation,? Singleton explained. He said the students were able to inspect a salmon carcass up-close and learn about the different features of their anatomy, in addition to a lesson on the salmon life cycle and habitat requirements. The Nature Conservancy operates the Shasta Big Springs Ranch as a working cattle ranch while undertaking stream restoration projects on the property to help protect and improve salmonid spawning and rearing habitat. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AR-121039954.jpg&MaxW=300&MaxH=240 Type: image/jpeg Size: 12222 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Nov 2 07:54:39 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 07:54:39 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Tribe bashes federal officials; claims they're endangering salmon Message-ID: http://www.redding.com/news/2012/nov/01/tribe-bashes-federal-officials-claims-theyre/ Tribe bashes federal officials; claims they're endangering salmon Government says migrating fish in Klamath River are OK By Damon Arthur Thursday, November 1, 2012 Officials with the Hoopa Valley Tribe are claiming federal officials are illegally harming threatened coho salmon by reducing water flows in the Klamath River. Beginning Thursday, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation was supposed to increase water flowing from Irongate Dam to 1,300 cubic feet per second on the river near Yreka. But bureau officials decided to keep Irongate releases at 1,000 cfs to help fill Upper Klamath Lake, said Kevin Moore, a bureau spokesman. Hoopa Valley tribe officials claim the bureau's actions are illegal under the Endangered Species Act and the National Marine Fisheries Service was not doing its job to protect the salmon. "Now for the second year in a row, the BOR (bureau) and the National Marine Fisheries Service are violating Endangered Species Act flows for the coho salmon," said Hoopa Valley tribal Chairman Leonard Masten said. "If this is any indication of the bureau's future water planning, I do not see how the salmon can recover." Coho salmon, listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act, are in the early stages of their run up the Klamath River, officials said. Hoopa officials are worried the fish, a large part of their culture, won't have adequate habitat for spawning. "Salmon are the Hoopa people's most important resource," Masten said. But a National Marine Fisheries report on the flow releases said coho salmon can successfully migrate and spawn in the river when the water is running at 1,000 cfs in November and December. As of Thursday afternoon, the river was flowing at 1,200 cfs below Irongate, said Jim Simondet, national marine fisheries' Klamath Basin supervisor. He said during the next two months the flows may vary, but won't go below 1,000 cfs. Moore said Upper Klamath Lake in Southern Oregon is at an 18-year low and holding back water in the lake would help fill it. If there is more water in the lake come spring, that water can be used for higher flows in the Klamath next spring when juvenile coho are migrating to the Pacific Ocean. In addition to ensuring flows to protect the coho salmon, the bureau also has to keep the lake level up to meet legal requirements to protect the endangered Lost River sucker and short-nosed sucker, Moore said. Regina Chichizola, a spokeswoman for the Hoopa Tribe, said Upper Klamath Lake was low because the bureau provided "full agricultural deliveries" to farmers in the Klamath Basin. Moore disagreed, saying agricultural water users did not get 100 percent of their contracted amounts. Many farms in the region also pumped more groundwater for irrigation and many fields were left fallow to reduce water taken from the Klamath River system, he said. Craig Tucker, Klamath coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, said he was not happy with the way the bureau has managed water in the basin, but agreed that keeping river flows at 1,000 cfs would help the juvenile salmon migrating to the ocean next spring. "The most important time to have good flows in the river is in the spring," Tucker said. "Right now the Upper Klamath is really low, so if you don't fill up Upper Klamath Lake, you don't get good flows in the spring," Tucker said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Nov 4 12:26:23 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 12:26:23 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Siskiyou County Sheriff Jon Lopey says he's fighting to protect rural America Message-ID: Siskiyou County Sheriff Jon Lopey says he's fighting to protect rural America http://www.redding.com/news/2012/nov/03/siskiyou-county-sheriff-says-hes-fighting-to/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Tue Nov 6 11:54:19 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:54:19 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Update Message-ID: <5098FA50.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Hi All, Attached is the Trinity River trapping summary update for Jweek 44. Note that we trapped more Chinook so far this season at the Willow Creek Weir than any other season total since 2001. The season total for 2001 was 2,931 Chinook. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRP_trapping_summary JWeek 44.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 83968 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Tue Nov 6 16:28:45 2012 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 16:28:45 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey update for week October 29-November 2 Message-ID: Hi all, The latest in-season update for our mainstem Trinity River spawning survey is available at our website http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/ Look under "Fisheries Current Events:" Our crews mapped the locations of 852 Trinity River redds and 1,592 carcasses last week. The figure below is clipped from this week's update showing how this year's running total from Lewiston Dam to Cedar Flat compares to years previous. Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 22888 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Nov 8 12:42:58 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 12:42:58 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity County Board of Supervisors resolution opposing BDCP Message-ID: Attached is Trinity County Board of Supervisors Resolution No. 2012-063: "Adopting a Position of Opposition to the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to construct a major isolated water conveyance system in the Delta and move additional Northern California water south of the Delta" Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Trinity Board Reso 2012-063.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 290623 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Nov 12 08:10:07 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:10:07 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Two_Rivers_Tribune=3A_Rural_Areas_?= =?windows-1252?q?=91Under_Siege=92_by_Marijuana?= Message-ID: Rural Areas ?Under Siege? by Marijuana Geoffrey Rushe, left, and his friend Niko, right, said they were traveling along Highway 299 with their dog when they ran out of gas in Willow Creek./Photo by Kristan Korns, Two Rivers Tribune By KRISTAN KORNS, Two Rivers Tribune The marijuana harvest season is coming to a close, and the rapid growth of the quasi-legal industry has some residents in eastern Humboldt County feeling under siege. In Hoopa, where tribal law prohibits any and all marijuana cultivation, unknown numbers of armed men have set up illegal plantations in the forest. Tribal Forestry workers as well as local high school students have been shot at when they stumbled across hidden grow operations. In Willow Creek, where California?s Proposition 215 gives semi-legal status to marijuana grown for medical patients, more and more travelers looking for work as trimmers use the downtown area as home base. On Tuesday, Oct. 30, around 40 people with backpacks and traveling gear sat in small groups in the park, on the lawn in front of the grocery store, and along Highway 299. A group of three young men watched as a young woman used a utility box cover alongside the road as a table, while she crumbled up marijuana nuggets and filled a pipe. People in town said there were at least four times as many a few weeks earlier, during the peak of harvest season. Nick Wilde said, ?Three weeks ago I saw over 20 people standing in the median near the post office. They were holding signs and one guy had a big cardboard scissors.? Karen Maki, who works in Willow Creek, said, ?It?s been a nightmare. It?s worse than it?s ever been.? Steve Paine said, ?We spent years and thousands of dollars developing our little park. They defecate in the playhouse and they completely remove the feeling of safety for mothers and children.? The sigs in Willow Creek?s small park aren?t always effective./Photo by Kristan Korns, Two Rivers Tribune ?People resent the fact that they can?t leave their windows down or leave their cars unlocked anymore,? Paine said. Judy Gower said, ?I live near the park and I can?t even take my kids there because they have those transients over there with pit bulls and mastiffs. It?s just scary.? John Salazar, a truck driver for Nor Cal Produce, said, ?I can tell you they?re everywhere. I see them on the side of the road hitchhiking with dogs.? Liesel Waters, who works at the Willow Creek Community Resource Center, said people come out during the harvest season each year and end up hanging around Willow Creek. ?It?s so noticeable because we go from the few local homeless people to a huge number of them here for a few months,? Waters said. Chris Edgar, a route salesman for Franz Bakery, said, ?They?re here for labor work ? traveling trimmers, I assume.? That assumption doesn?t apply, however, to everyone passing through. Some travelers are simply that: travelers. Taylor Dawson and Bradley Llewellyn sat on the curb near the Raging Creek Pub Eatery, with their backpacks and dogs. ?We?ve been here a couple of days trying to hitch a ride out, and no one picks us up,? Dawson said. Llewellyn said, ?I?m just traveling in the summertime, gone to a few fairs and attended a few festivals, and met a lot of really cool people, and trying to make it home before winter.? Llewellyn said that the flood of trimmers has a negative effect on him and his traveling companion. ?It?s making it hard for people like me to make it down the road,? he said. Dawson said she?s been traveling back and forth across the country for the past four years, and the trimmers aren?t following the usual rules of the road. ?I feel you should pass through or get a job, but don?t just stay there for a week in the middle of a town like this with one grocery store and two gas stations,? Dawson said. The hopeful trimmers camping downtown, however, are only the most visible part of an industry that has sunk deep local roots. The marijuana industry is expanding to fill every available bit of space in Humboldt County. The distinctive skunk-like smell of marijuana wafts through almost every neighborhood in Willow Creek throughout each growing season. In some neighborhoods, marijuana plants could be easily seen growing in yards between homes. ?This was a nice quiet retirement community,? Paine said. ?There?s been a total change in perception of Willow Creek as a community. What 65-year-old wants to come here to retire now?? Humboldt County 3rd District Supervisor Mark Lovelace shared a story of just how large the marijuana industry has become in Humboldt County, after a fly-over of the Van Duzen, Mad River and Redwood Grove watersheds. ?In the course of two hours we counted 439 grows,? Lovelace said, ?and that was just what we could see from the plane.? In addition to the environmental destruction that comes from any unregulated industry using pesticides and other chemicals, the semi-legal grow operations drive out fully legal businesses, and the local tax base shrinks. At the same time that $1 million growing operations and massive greenhouses are carved into the hillsides, local school bus service has been reduced because there?s less and less tax money to pay for basic services. One local resident, who asked that her name not be used, said almost everyone knows friends or relatives who are involved with the industry. ?They tell me that I?m an idiot for working a nine-to-five job instead of growing,? she said. ?It was like, how smart are you?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1845trapped-van.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 52996 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1845trapped-signs.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 63528 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Nov 12 08:18:47 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 08:18:47 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune -OPINION: Klamath River Restoration Needs Tribal Unity Message-ID: <028E5AC6-516E-47F7-9C05-10177FE1259B@att.net> http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2012/10/opinion-klamath-river-restoration-needs-tribal-unity/ OPINION: Klamath River Restoration Needs Tribal Unity Dear Editor, Your report ? Tribes Object to Chemical Tests on the Klamath River in the October 9 edition ? quoted PacifiCorp spokespersons as stating that they are allowed to release algaecides into the Klamath River as one of the ?interim measures? included in the KHSA Dam Deal. The Dam Deal also includes a provision for dispute resolution. The Karuk and Yurok Tribes are parties to the KHSA Dam Deal. That means they could have invoked the Deal?s dispute resolution process as a means to block PacifiCorp?s algaecide use. The fact that these tribes did not invoke the process available to them to block use of the poison tells us a lot about current Klamath River politics. Instead of using the KHSA to block the algaecide tests, Craig Tucker, who helped lead the Karuk Tribe down the KHSA path, defended the company which he says is ?under a lot of pressure? from regulators. In light of these facts Tucker?s promise that the Karuk Tribe will fight algaecide treatments next time rings hollow. The claims ring especially hollow in light of the recent secret Klamath Water Quality Conference which your taxes helped fund. At that secret Sacramento Conference, the use of toxic chemicals in other reservoirs was promoted as the preferred solution to the Klamath River Basin?s agricultural pollution. Why was the public locked out of a conference funded with taxpayer money? And by the way, contrary to yet another false claim from Craig Tucker, the KHSA will not bring an end to toxic algae in our Klamath River. That?s because the KHSA would not decommission PacifiCorp?s Keno Dam (located below Klamath Falls). Instead it would transfer Keno to the US Bureau of Reclamation which would use it to serve the interests of irrigators. Keno is already more polluted than Iron Gate and Copco and it already contains toxic algae. If the KHSA is authorized by Congress, toxic algae will still flow down the Klamath River for the foreseeable future. In the old days (before the KHSA and KBRA) united tribes and environmental groups would have challenged PacifiCorp?s use of poison in court. Now these divided forces can only manage toothless complaints to the press while some tribal spokespersons deliver media spin to the people instead of defending them. That is the price of division. Because of the KHSA and KBRA, PacifiCorp and the US Bureau of Reclamation now call the shots on the Klamath River. These powers now also provide funding on which the Yurok, Karuk and Klamath Tribes are dependent to sustain tribal jobs. Under these circumstances, folks like Mr. Tucker have become little more than servants to the real powers and, in the words of Chairman Masten, this has ?led to an air of lawlessness.? Unless and until the unity of the Lower Klamath-Trinity Tribes is restored, this will continue to be the case. Felice Pace Klamath, CA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Nov 12 13:06:18 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 13:06:18 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou Daily News: BOS questions flow study Message-ID: http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20121109/NEWS/121109737/1001/NEWS By John Bowman November 09. 2012 12:06PM BOS questions flow study Stream flows in the Scott and Shasta rivers were the subject of discussion again at the Siskiyou Board of Supervisors meeting Tuesday. Summer and fall flows in the Scott River (above) and Shasta River have been the subject of scrutiny by state and federal fisheries agencies. On Tuesday, the board of supervisors discussed a flow study being developed by the California Department of Fish and Game. Stream flows in the Scott and Shasta rivers were the subject of discussion again at the Siskiyou Board of Supervisors meeting Tuesday. The board hosted representatives of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) who briefed them on the agency's progress in developing an in-stream flow study for the two rivers. Curtis Milliron, fisheries program manager for CDFG's northern region, and Mark Wheetley, CDFG flow study project spokesman, appeared before the board to give an update of the department's progress in developing the flow study that will be used to make recommendations to the state water board regarding the flow needs of salmonid species in the two rivers. Milliron told the board that a series of 10 public workshops will be held to seek landowner and stakeholder input that will be used to help define the scope of the study. A meeting will be held at the Fort Jones Community Center Nov. 13 from 6-8 p.m., followed by a second meeting on Nov. 14 from 6-8 p.m. at the Holiday Inn Express in Yreka. Milliron repeatedly expressed his belief that landowner input will be essential in utilizing local knowledge and local concerns when designing the study plan. But District 1 Supervisor Jim Cook told Milliron and Wheetley, "These meetings are not going to get you what you claim you want." Cook added, "This is not 25 years ago." He said that 25 years ago landowners in the Shasta River watershed offered to help with a water study. "We've been burned so badly by your agency since then," he said. Cook explained that he doesn't expect frustrated landowners to make the effort to attend a meeting. He told the CDFG scientists that public meetings may have worked before "your agency went rogue on us and went nuts and you lost all the support you had 20 years ago." Cook insisted that the agency representatives would have to go to the landowners now, rather than expecting the landowners to come to them. District 5 Supervisor Marcia Armstrong told Milliron and Wheetley that she doesn't see how CDFG has any authority on the matter of stream flows. She said the Scott and Shasta rivers' water rights adjudications were established under the authority of the Superior Court of the State of California. Therefore, she believes the state waterboard's influence is limited to their ability to make recommendations to the court. Armstrong also expressed her concern that the flow study appears to focus on the in-stream flow needs of fisheries only and does not address other beneficial uses such as agriculture and recreation. Milliron told Armstrong, "I think you have made some excellent comments and I think you represent the views of many stakeholders that we would like to incorporate into this process." He added, "I'm hopeful, and I am asking that you would join us next week and bring those comments forward in this process." He said that, as biologists, he and Wheetley were not equiped to answer many of the regulatory questions but added that they deserved answers. "It will benefit us all to get past those sticking points," he said, adding that there is a "legal constitutional analysis phase" in the process that will consider the legal and regulatory issues connected to the flow study. Supervisors Armstrong, Cook and Kobseff all took issue with Milliron's suggestion that supervisors bring their comments and questions to the public meetings. Cook said the suggestion "implies that you aren't going to listen to people except at these meetings." District 3 Supervisor Michael Kobseff told Milliron, "I take great offense for you to say to any one of these board members, 'come to the meeting and give those comments.' When we're giving you comments and asking questions here, it's as good as gold as being at the meeting and if it's not, don't show up here again. Because I'm giving you information that you should be hearing and writing down. This is the elected body of the county. You should be paying attention." Regarding the authority under which CDFG intends to carry out a flow study and make flow recommendations, the agency states, "Pursuant to Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 10000-10005, CDFG is required to develop stream flow recommendations for the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) for the Scott River and Shasta River." According to section 10000 of the code, "... fish and wildlife resources are important for the entire state and are inextricably linked to the continued economic viability of industries, such as the fishing industry, which are desirable and important components of the state's economy." Section 10001 states, "The Director of Fish and Game shall identify and list those streams and watercourses throughout the state for which minimum flow levels need to be established in order to assure the continued viability of stream-related fish and wildlife resources." Section 10002 states, "The Director of Fish and Game shall prepare proposed stream flow requirements, which shall be specified in terms of cubic feet of water per second, for each stream or watercourse identified pursuant to Section 10001," and "The State Water Resources Control Board shall consider these requirements within a stream as set forth in Section 1257.5 of the Water Code." The code, adopted by the state legislature, does clearly require the flow studies and subsequent recommendations, but does not specify the authority under which the recommendations would be enforceable. However, according to Section 4 of the PRC, "No action or proceeding commenced before this code takes effect, and no right accrued, is affected by the provisions of this code, but all procedure thereafter taken therein shall conform to the provisions of this code so far as possible." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AR-121109737.jpg&MaxH=225&MaxW=225 Type: image/jpeg Size: 8979 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Nov 13 07:07:54 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 07:07:54 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard: Council talks Klamath restoration extension; unless Congress acts, agreement will sunset Message-ID: <90DF4820-C604-4B23-95D3-126B1E46CC9D@att.net> http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_21985811/council-talks-klamath-restoration-extension-unless-congress-acts Council talks Klamath restoration extension; unless Congress acts, agreement will sunset The Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Created: Times-Standard.com The Klamath Basin Coordinating Council meets Wednesday to discuss amendments that would extend the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement. The agreement, which is intended to restore the Klamath River's ecosystem and improve its fisheries, is scheduled to sunset Dec. 31 unless Congress acts on the proposed legislation. According to a summary of the amendments, it is increasingly clear that Congress may not act on the legislation. The amendment process began in October, and would extend the agreement until December 2014. According to the council summary, the amendments would extend the time for passage of federal legislation, address tribal funding issues and clean up other provisions of the document. The amendments do not affect the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement, which lays out the steps for removal of dams on the Klamath River. Humboldt County is one of 38 stakeholders that signed the agreement in February 2010. The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors will discuss the proposed revisions to the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement at its meeting today. The amendments will become effective if they are approved by all the parties that signed the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement. Critics of the agreement have alleged that the Klamath Basin Coordinated Council are making decisions behind closed doors and that an amendment would delay restoration progress. If you go: What: Klamath Basin Coordinating Council meeting. When: Wednesday at 9 a.m. Where: Humboldt Bay Aquatic Center, 921 Waterfront Dr., Eureka. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Tue Nov 13 09:34:19 2012 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 09:34:19 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey update for the week of November 5-9 Message-ID: Hi all, Mainstem Chinook salmon spawning in the upper Trinity River reaches appears to be slowing down a bit. We could not survey Reach 4 (Steelbridge to Douglas City Campground) this week due to poor survey conditions. Our crews mapped the locations of 591 redds and 1,472 carcasses this week. The latest in-season update for our mainstem Trinity River spawning survey is available at our website http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/ The figure below is clipped from this week's report and shows how this year's running total from Lewiston Dam to Cedar Flat compares to years previous. Will update you again next week, Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 23132 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Nov 14 07:18:41 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 07:18:41 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard: Supes OK Klamath River agreement amendments Message-ID: <7F57C59C-AD53-4464-9B28-BD3688D101E1@att.net> http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_21993152/supes-ok-klamath-river-agreement-amendments-vote-advances Supes OK Klamath River agreement amendments; vote advances two-year extension; all 42 stakeholders must approve Megan Hansen/The Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Created: Times-Standard.com Passionate public comment was the order of the day at Tuesday's meeting of the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors, where people voiced their opinions about amendments to the Klamath River restoration agreement. After hearing comments from 29 people, 18 of whom opposed changes to the deal, the supervisors voted unanimously to approve the proposed amendments, which would extend the agreement's sunset date. Fifth District Supervisor Ryan Sundberg said the decision wasn't any easy one. ?It's tough because I've got friends on both sides of this issue,? Sundberg said. ?My decision to extend this for another two years comes down to giving this thing some more time.? More than two years ago, the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement was signed by 42 stakeholders in tandem with the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement, which is intended to remove four dams from the Klamath River. The two agreements were introduced as proposed legislation to Congress about one year ago, but no action has been taken. Amendments to the restoration agreement have emerged because of its looming Dec. 31 expiration date. Some stakeholders are now seeking to revise the agreement and extend its sunset date to Dec. 31, 2014. Klamath settlement facilitator Ed Sheets said the amended agreement was sent out to all the stakeholders, including Humboldt County, in October. He said each party has to sign the amended agreement for it to take effect. ?I have five signatures so far,? Sheets said to the board. He said the amendment is a package of changes that updates the process for any future drought plan amendments and clarifies the habitat conservation plan process. Under the amendment, tribes and the secretary of the interior must agree to changes in cost estimates that affect tribal claims. It also clarifies that eastside water supplies used by those not party to the agreement, such as in Clear Lake, won't be reallocated for use in the lower Klamath. Jill Duffy, a former 5th District county supervisor and former county senior environmental analyst, said the Klamath legislation is currently in the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. She said if the restoration agreement isn't revised and both agreements fail, dam owner PacifiCorp doesn't have to make any river improvements. ?PacifiCorp will return to FERC for the relicensing of its facilities,? Duffy said. Since 2010, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's relicensing process for the river's four dams has been placed on hold by the State Water Resources Control Board at PacifiCorp's request. The company doesn't want the relicensing process to move forward if the dams are coming out by 2020, as stated in the hydroelectric agreement. A majority of the people present for public comment said the restoration agreement should be allowed to expire. They said FERC won't relicense the dams and give the company Clean Water Act certification unless expensive upgrades are completed, forcing PacifiCorp to rip out the dams. Hoopa resident Dana Colegrove said she used to be in favor of the restoration agreement, but thinks the community should look to FERC. ?Let's fast-track this,? Colegrove said. ?FERC is the fastest way.? Arcata resident John Schaefer agreed. He said PacifiCorp can't afford to make upgrades that'll help migrating fish get around the dams. ?Let's insist in the courts that fish ladders be built or the dams come down,? Schaefer said. Yurok Tribe Senior Biologist Michael Belchik disagreed. He said if the community relies on FERC, all they'll get is a trap-and-haul system where fish are caught and transported around the dams. Craig Tucker, the Klamath coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, said FERC is made up of five commissioners who are appointed by the president and have backgrounds in law, energy policy and regulation. He said the restoration agreement is the best bet because FERC won't simply unlicense a dam. ?It's always been the product of a settlement agreement,? Tucker said. The supervisors didn't talk much after receiving public input, but 3rd District Supervisor Mark Lovelace thanked everyone for expressing their opinions and being passionate about wanting to un-dam the Klamath River. He said it's different in places upstream where they have bumper stickers that say ?save our dams.? ?You think you're on a different planet with what is expressed,? Lovelace said. At a glance: The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously Tuesday to approve amending and extending the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement. The agreement was set to sunset Dec. 31, but would be extended for two years if all 42 stakeholders to the deal sign off on the changes. Megan Hansen can be reached at 441-0511 or mhansen at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Nov 14 08:49:48 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 08:49:48 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou Daily News: Supervisors praise groundwater plan Message-ID: http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20121113/NEWS/121119935/1001/NEWShttp:/ By John Bowman November 13. 2012 2:12PM Supervisors praise groundwater plan The Scott Valley Groundwater Advisory Committee?s (SVGWAC) new Voluntary Groundwater Management and Enhancement Plan for Scott Valley was met with enthusiasm and praise by the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors on Nov. 6. PHOTO/ JOHN BOWMAN The Scott Valley Groundwater Advisory Committee has drafted a Scott Valley Groundwater Management and Enhancement Plan in an effort to understand and properly manage the effects of groundwater on Scott River stream flows. The Scott Valley Groundwater Advisory Committee?s (SVGWAC) new Voluntary Groundwater Management and Enhancement Plan for Scott Valley was met with enthusiasm and praise by the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors Nov. 6 as the board reviewed the plan ahead of its release for public comment. Scott Valley alfalfa producer and SVGWAC Chairman Tom Menne presented the plan to the board and answered questions from board members. He said the current version of the plan took ?a little over a year? to complete. ?There wasn?t a lot to go off of,? Menne told the board. ?It wasn?t like I could call up some other county and say ?hey what do you guys have??? He added that there were ?some other things? to look at but described them as ?tough to read,? saying he ?didn?t understand it at all.? Menne said the plan was the best the committee could come up with ?as water users.? Several board members were less reserved in their judgement of the plan. District 5 Supervisor Marcia Armstrong called the plan ?outstanding,? and District 4 Supervisor Grace Bennett called it a ?tremendous document? and said the input gathered to develop the document was ?really very special.? Craig Tucker, Klamath coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, said he was ?encouraged and enthusiastic? about the document but added some criticisms as well. ?What is presented as a plan, to me, looks more like a commitment to continue to do studies and analysis.? Tucker said he believed the plan lacked hard data and quantitative goals and objectives. He said he was also disappointed that the Karuk Tribe?s Scott Valley groundwater study was not cited in the SVGWAC?s document. ?I know there is distaste from some that we took the initiative to complete that report,? Tucker said, ?but it?s real data and it exists and it deserves to be evaluated and integrated.? Conrad Fisher from Klamath Riverkeeper suggested that the county might be ?giving away more water than exists? and should consider limiting or discontinuing well drilling permits in Scott Valley. Fisher also suggested that groups advocating for fisheries should be included in the groundwater advisory committee. Section 3 of the plan, titled ?Future Management and Enhancement Approaches,? outlines goals and objectives of the plan. Among the goals are efforts to identify and explore possible ways to increase groundwater supply and store groundwater, as well as plans to assess the effects of different methods of irrigation and altered irrigation schedules on groundwater levels. The plan also proposes studying the effect of upland forest management on groundwater levels and suggests working with landowners to increase the efficiency of irrigation methods. The plan does not propose any policies or regulations to govern groundwater usage or its impacts on stream flow. It is intended to guide a voluntary system of groundwater management. The board voted unanimously to accept the recommendations of the committee for the groundwater management and enhancement plan with an amendment to its definition of groundwater rights. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AR-121119935.jpg&MaxH=225&MaxW=225 Type: image/jpeg Size: 5257 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Nov 14 12:27:16 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 12:27:16 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard Op-Ed: Hayley Hutt- KBRA: It's about the water -- period Message-ID: http://www.times-standard.com/guest_opinion/ci_21993154/kbra-its-about-water-period KBRA: It's about the water -- period Hayley Hutt/for the Times-Standard Created: 11/14/2012 02:39:27 AM PST The Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement expires Dec. 31. Isn't now the time to let that happen and separate Klamath Basin water rights and dam removal issues? The KBRA does not offer thousands of acre-feet of additional non-winter river flows to the Klamath River, as some people claim. To the contrary, the KBRA's failure to provide the water fish need is at the heart of the Hoopa Tribe's opposition to the deal. Our Fishery Department's hydrologists have long been warning about insufficient water. Humboldt County has worked with us to protect Trinity River flows from the Delta Tunnels, and they joined with us in urging additional flows this summer to avert a fish kill. But Humboldt is strangely ignorant of how much less water KBRA promises to the river. Reclamation's studies on the unfinished dam Environmental Impact Statement, and posted on theKlamathRestoration.gov website, show that in most water years the KBRA will provide less water to the Klamath River, not more. In fact, KBRA promises even less than the current Endangered Species Act-required flows. (Please see ?Technical Report No. SRH-2011-02, Hydrology, Hydraulics, and Sediment Transport Studies for the Secretary's Determination on Klamath River Dam Removal and Basin Restoration.?) The KBRA delivers less water to the Klamath River than at present in hydrological conditions represented by 30 percent, 50 percent, 90 percent, and 95 percent exceedance water years. And take note: even now, Reclamation is seeking permission to cut the river back to KBRA flows -- even without dam removal. The KBRA limits tribal water and fishing rights. Under existing law, the United States must ensure that irrigation projects do not interfere with the tribes' senior water rights. The KBRA, if approved by Congress, would change this. In KBRA Section 15.3.9 the United States agrees that it will not assert tribal water or fishing rights in a manner that would interfere with the diversion of water for the Klamath Irrigation Project that is authorized by the KBRA. That is important because the Hoopa water rights have been the linchpin of success in protecting Trinity as well as Klamath River water. Termination of the government's trust responsibility would become lawful by enacting Section 106(f) of the proposed KBRA legislation. As stated in that section, the United States acts on behalf of all of the tribes of the Klamath Basin, not merely the tribes that signed the KBRA. Any attempt by a tribe to assert its own rights against the dewatering of the river by Reclamation, effectively would be trumped by the KBRA's termination of the federal government's existing trust responsibility to protect the tribes' rights. The $970.452 million cost of the Klamath Agreements ratification legislation has raised eyebrows in Congress. There has been no agreement on how to scale back KBRA costs and still give all parties the benefit of their bargain. Not one dollar of that price tag goes for dam removal; most of the money goes to taxpayer subsidies for irrigation operations. Why should the KBRA continue to delay dam removal? There is no magic fix to the Basin's environmental problems. Litigation is always a risk and nothing in the KBRA or the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement would avert it. Letting the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission address the dam licensing issues will not cause more litigation. The Klamath Agreements are themselves the reason FERC is not proceeding to issue a conditioned license, and they provide no guarantee of dam removal by 2020. Indeed, the KHSA requires $27 million in ?additional value? to be paid if dam removal actually begins by Jan. 1, 2020. (See KHSA, Page 48.) The failure of the interior secretary to make a finding on dam removal and the failure of Congress to enact the flawed KBRA legislation means that the parties must extend the KBRA or let it expire on Dec. 31, 2012. It is past time to revise the Klamath Agreements and address problems in a sequential, cost-effective fashion instead of defending the public-to-private transfer of wealth and the impediments to environmental restoration and protection that PacifiCorp, federal agencies, and others have created in the Klamath River Basin. Hayley Hutt is an elected member of the Hoopa Valley Tribal Council. Readers: ? Read our FAQ and let us know what you think of the new commenting system ? Experiencing any glitches or bugs with the commenting system? Are any of your comments disappearing? Report these instances and note the date, time and article your comment was made. Copyright ? 2012 - Times-Standard MediaNews Group - Northern California Network -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ara.azhderian at sldmwa.org Thu Nov 15 14:19:12 2012 From: ara.azhderian at sldmwa.org (Ara Azhderian) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 22:19:12 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?=91The_Fight_for_Water=3A_A_Farm_W?= =?windows-1252?q?orker_Struggle=92?= Message-ID: <971CECF3FE6CFF459F9CF15BE1026F8C03BD7922@SLDMWA-EX.DM.local> A documentary about the historic 2009 march of farmers and farm workers across the heart of the California Central Valley to demand that irrigation water restrictions be overturned and their water supply be turned back on is coming to Modesto?s State Theater Thursday, Nov. 29, 2012. ?The Fight for Water: A Farm Worker Struggle? highlights the human impact an environmental decision had on the farming community when its water supply was shut off, and the march farmers and farm workers staged in order to fight for their water. Admission is $6 at the State Theater located at 1307 J Street, Modesto. The film begins at 7 p.m. and will be followed by a panel discussion featuring several of the film?s participants. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Fight for water documentary to screen in Modesto Nov.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 17771 bytes Desc: Fight for water documentary to screen in Modesto Nov.docx URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Thu Nov 15 15:10:09 2012 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 18:10:09 -0500 (EST) Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Tribe bashes federal officials; claims they're... Message-ID: <40c31.32f5225f.3dd6d051@aol.com> In a message dated 11/2/2012 7:54:52 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tstokely at att.net writes: _http://www.redding.com/news/2012/nov/01/tribe-bashes-federal-officials-clai ms-theyre/_ (http://www.redding.com/news/2012/nov/01/tribe-bashes-federal-officials-claims-theyre/) Tribe bashes federal officials; claims they're endangering salmon Government says migrating fish in Klamath River are OK By Damon Arthur Thursday, November 1, 2012 Officials with the Hoopa Valley Tribe are claiming federal officials are illegally harming threatened coho salmon by reducing water flows in the Klamath River. Beginning Thursday, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation was supposed to increase water flowing from Irongate Dam to 1,300 cubic feet per second on the river near Yreka. But bureau officials decided to keep Irongate releases at 1,000 cfs to help fill Upper Klamath Lake, said Kevin Moore, a bureau spokesman. Hoopa Valley tribe officials claim the bureau's actions are illegal under the Endangered Species Act and the National Marine Fisheries Service was not doing its job to protect the salmon. "Now for the second year in a row, the BOR (bureau) and the National Marine Fisheries Service are violating Endangered Species Act flows for the coho salmon," said Hoopa Valley tribal Chairman Leonard Masten said. "If this is any indication of the bureau's future water planning, I do not see how the salmon can recover." Coho salmon, listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act, are in the early stages of their run up the Klamath River, officials said. Hoopa officials are worried the fish, a large part of their culture, won't have adequate habitat for spawning. "Salmon are the Hoopa people's most important resource," Masten said. But a National Marine Fisheries report on the flow releases said coho salmon can successfully migrate and spawn in the river when the water is running at 1,000 cfs in November and December. As of Thursday afternoon, the river was flowing at 1,200 cfs below Irongate, said Jim Simondet, national marine fisheries' Klamath Basin supervisor. He said during the next two months the flows may vary, but won't go below 1,000 cfs. Moore said Upper Klamath Lake in Southern Oregon is at an 18-year low and holding back water in the lake would help fill it. If there is more water in the lake come spring, that water can be used for higher flows in the Klamath next spring when juvenile coho are migrating to the Pacific Ocean. In addition to ensuring flows to protect the coho salmon, the bureau also has to keep the lake level up to meet legal requirements to protect the endangered Lost River sucker and short-nosed sucker, Moore said. Regina Chichizola, a spokeswoman for the Hoopa Tribe, said Upper Klamath Lake was low because the bureau provided "full agricultural deliveries" to farmers in the Klamath Basin. Moore disagreed, saying agricultural water users did not get 100 percent of their contracted amounts. Many farms in the region also pumped more groundwater for irrigation and many fields were left fallow to reduce water taken from the Klamath River system, he said. Craig Tucker, Klamath coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, said he was not happy with the way the bureau has managed water in the basin, but agreed that keeping river flows at 1,000 cfs would help the juvenile salmon migrating to the ocean next spring. "The most important time to have good flows in the river is in the spring," Tucker said. "Right now the Upper Klamath is really low, so if you don't fill up Upper Klamath Lake, you don't get good flows in the spring," Tucker said. = Dear Klamath Basin Colleagues..... We have to respectfully disagree with our Hoopa Tribe colleagues on their assertion that the federal agencies "are illegally harming threatened coho salmon by reducing water flows in the Klamath River." This story has also gotten picked up in other forums. Hence some clarification seems necessary. The Action Is Legal: The current Coho BiOp fully recognized that a "one-size-fits-all" numerically rigid in-river flow regime would occasionally have to be flexibly modified, depending upon year-by-year circumstances (such as drought or exceedingly low Upper Klamath Lake (UKL) storage levels -- both of which we might be facing next year), and in fact for the next two months such a modification was decided upon in order to offset dangerously low UKL levels and serious lack of October and (so far) November rainfall. In other words, it is a precautionary measure to make sure we do not have serious water shortfalls later in the year which would harm the fish much more. The Bureau thus followed the legal procedure set forth in the BiOp by formally proposing such modifications to NMFS, and NMFS fisheries scientists carefully considered -- and formally APPROVED -- these modifications for the next two months. That NMFS October 31st Concurrence Letter is actually posted on the BOR's Klamath Area Office web site for all to see, at: _http://www.usbr.gov/mp/kbao/docs/NMFS_proposal_acceptance.pdf_ (http://www.usbr.gov/mp/kbao/docs/NMFS_proposal_acceptance.pdf) This is the legal procedure required in the BiOp. The action was, therefore, completely legal. The next question to ask is, will it be beneficial? The Action Will Benefit, Rather than Harm, Salmon: One of the few measures that we can effectively take to better protect Klamath salmon in-stream is to provide more cold water in the early Spring in order to "flush" juvenile salmon out to sea faster -- and before the emergence later in the Spring and early Summer of massive numbers of highly infectious spores of the usually fatal fish disease Ceratomyxa shasta. Nearly every year, C. shasta infections kill off the adult equivalent of the 2002 adult fish kills, and is nearly 100% fatal to juvenile salmon that are exposed above certain levels. But C. shasta is a warm water spore that is inactive in cold water flows typical of springtime -- so if we have enough water early enough in the Spring within the storage-poor Klamath system (i.e., in Upper Klamath Lake) to flush these juveniles out to sea past the C. shasta "hot spots" in the Klamath mainstem before these spores emerge and become most infectious, then far more of these juveniles will grow up to return as adults. This includes both ESA-list coho and chinook juveniles, both of which are vulnerable to C. shasta infections. The NMFS biological analysis was that at least this year, under these currently alarmingly low UKL storage levels and with no assurance of much rainfall between now and December 31st, that holding back more water in UKL in order to have enough in the Spring for those "flushing flows" made excellent biological sense -- and would assure higher mainstem salmon survivals not only for ESA-list coho but for chinook as well. In short, emphasizing early UKL storage is an insurance policy, and represents a precautionary approach to preventing potentially much worse drought-related problems later, if this water year does in fact turn against us. And unfortunately we do not yet know whether it will or not. But each year there is always a 50% chance of a below average water year. Wisely, NMFS decided not to bet the entire future health of these already depressed salmon runs on what amounts to a crap-shoot. This is particularly important given the large spawner run for this year. Next year's hopefully correspondingly large juvenile population needs to survive in order to buy more time for other Klamath River restoration efforts to work. Again, read that NMFS Concurrence Letter for a thorough analysis of the impacts on coho salmon of this mitigation measure, and the rationale for approval of such a precautionary measure for the rest of this year. In our view, NOT taking such steps, particularly under the currently developing rainfall-deficient and low storage conditions we are now dealing with, would have been far more risky for the fish than doing so. We thus agree with the NMFS analysis and which this precautionary approach. In reality, it does not matter who "caused" the UKL shortfall, though poorer than expected upper basin rainfall levels last water-year and so far this water-year certainly played a large role. What most matters now is what we proactively do now to protect the salmon if this water year does go into drought. Unfortunately, if we spend all our water "savings account" in the fall, assuming a normal to wet year will follow, and we then have to face a drought, we would already have used up all our water flow options -- and the fish would suffer. ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) Email: fish1ifr at aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Thu Nov 15 16:28:10 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 16:28:10 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Update Message-ID: <50A517D1.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Hi All, Please see attachment for the Willow Creek weir trapping summary update for JWeek 45. The trapping summary for the hatchery will be updated asap. Crews are presently inundated with the collection and processing of Trinity River Hatchery data. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRP_trapping_summary JWeek 45.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 83968 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From andrew at wildcalifornia.org Fri Nov 16 08:24:38 2012 From: andrew at wildcalifornia.org (Andrew Orahoske) Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 08:24:38 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Tribe bashes federal officials; claims they're... In-Reply-To: <40c31.32f5225f.3dd6d051@aol.com> References: <40c31.32f5225f.3dd6d051@aol.com> Message-ID: <002501cdc416$e102e3c0$a308ab40$@org> Glen, that is the rationale portrayed by the agencies, and that storyline makes sense. To state it simply, less water released now means that there will likely more available later. Fair enough. However, what about irrigation deliveries? That is the one variable that has been left out. The real question and concern, is does less water released now mean more water available for irrigation? That answer is most certainly yes, as the irrigation allocation is not determined right now. It is great to be budgeting water, but the agency needs to be straight about all of the reasons why the flows are low right now. It would make common sense to say that it is for irrigation deliveries as well as for ESA compliance. Andrew Andrew J. Orahoske Conservation Director Environmental Protection Information Center 145 G Street, Suite A Arcata, CA 95521 Office: (707) 822-7711 Mobile: (707) 407-9020 www.wildcalifornia.org From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of FISH1IFR at aol.com Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 3:10 PM To: tstokely at att.net; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Tribe bashes federal officials; claims they're... In a message dated 11/2/2012 7:54:52 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tstokely at att.net writes: http://www.redding.com/news/2012/nov/01/tribe-bashes-federal-officials-claim s-theyre/ Tribe bashes federal officials; claims they're endangering salmon Government says migrating fish in Klamath River are OK By Damon Arthur Thursday, November 1, 2012 Officials with the Hoopa Valley Tribe are claiming federal officials are illegally harming threatened coho salmon by reducing water flows in the Klamath River. Beginning Thursday, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation was supposed to increase water flowing from Irongate Dam to 1,300 cubic feet per second on the river near Yreka. But bureau officials decided to keep Irongate releases at 1,000 cfs to help fill Upper Klamath Lake, said Kevin Moore, a bureau spokesman. Hoopa Valley tribe officials claim the bureau's actions are illegal under the Endangered Species Act and the National Marine Fisheries Service was not doing its job to protect the salmon. "Now for the second year in a row, the BOR (bureau) and the National Marine Fisheries Service are violating Endangered Species Act flows for the coho salmon," said Hoopa Valley tribal Chairman Leonard Masten said. "If this is any indication of the bureau's future water planning, I do not see how the salmon can recover." Coho salmon, listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act, are in the early stages of their run up the Klamath River, officials said. Hoopa officials are worried the fish, a large part of their culture, won't have adequate habitat for spawning. "Salmon are the Hoopa people's most important resource," Masten said. But a National Marine Fisheries report on the flow releases said coho salmon can successfully migrate and spawn in the river when the water is running at 1,000 cfs in November and December. As of Thursday afternoon, the river was flowing at 1,200 cfs below Irongate, said Jim Simondet, national marine fisheries' Klamath Basin supervisor. He said during the next two months the flows may vary, but won't go below 1,000 cfs. Moore said Upper Klamath Lake in Southern Oregon is at an 18-year low and holding back water in the lake would help fill it. If there is more water in the lake come spring, that water can be used for higher flows in the Klamath next spring when juvenile coho are migrating to the Pacific Ocean. In addition to ensuring flows to protect the coho salmon, the bureau also has to keep the lake level up to meet legal requirements to protect the endangered Lost River sucker and short-nosed sucker, Moore said. Regina Chichizola, a spokeswoman for the Hoopa Tribe, said Upper Klamath Lake was low because the bureau provided "full agricultural deliveries" to farmers in the Klamath Basin. Moore disagreed, saying agricultural water users did not get 100 percent of their contracted amounts. Many farms in the region also pumped more groundwater for irrigation and many fields were left fallow to reduce water taken from the Klamath River system, he said. Craig Tucker, Klamath coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, said he was not happy with the way the bureau has managed water in the basin, but agreed that keeping river flows at 1,000 cfs would help the juvenile salmon migrating to the ocean next spring. "The most important time to have good flows in the river is in the spring," Tucker said. "Right now the Upper Klamath is really low, so if you don't fill up Upper Klamath Lake, you don't get good flows in the spring," Tucker said. = Dear Klamath Basin Colleagues..... We have to respectfully disagree with our Hoopa Tribe colleagues on their assertion that the federal agencies "are illegally harming threatened coho salmon by reducing water flows in the Klamath River." This story has also gotten picked up in other forums. Hence some clarification seems necessary. The Action Is Legal: The current Coho BiOp fully recognized that a "one-size-fits-all" numerically rigid in-river flow regime would occasionally have to be flexibly modified, depending upon year-by-year circumstances (such as drought or exceedingly low Upper Klamath Lake (UKL) storage levels -- both of which we might be facing next year), and in fact for the next two months such a modification was decided upon in order to offset dangerously low UKL levels and serious lack of October and (so far) November rainfall. In other words, it is a precautionary measure to make sure we do not have serious water shortfalls later in the year which would harm the fish much more. The Bureau thus followed the legal procedure set forth in the BiOp by formally proposing such modifications to NMFS, and NMFS fisheries scientists carefully considered -- and formally APPROVED -- these modifications for the next two months. That NMFS October 31st Concurrence Letter is actually posted on the BOR's Klamath Area Office web site for all to see, at: http://www.usbr.gov/mp/kbao/docs/NMFS_proposal_acceptance.pdf This is the legal procedure required in the BiOp. The action was, therefore, completely legal. The next question to ask is, will it be beneficial? The Action Will Benefit, Rather than Harm, Salmon: One of the few measures that we can effectively take to better protect Klamath salmon in-stream is to provide more cold water in the early Spring in order to "flush" juvenile salmon out to sea faster -- and before the emergence later in the Spring and early Summer of massive numbers of highly infectious spores of the usually fatal fish disease Ceratomyxa shasta. Nearly every year, C. shasta infections kill off the adult equivalent of the 2002 adult fish kills, and is nearly 100% fatal to juvenile salmon that are exposed above certain levels. But C. shasta is a warm water spore that is inactive in cold water flows typical of springtime -- so if we have enough water early enough in the Spring within the storage-poor Klamath system (i.e., in Upper Klamath Lake) to flush these juveniles out to sea past the C. shasta "hot spots" in the Klamath mainstem before these spores emerge and become most infectious, then far more of these juveniles will grow up to return as adults. This includes both ESA-list coho and chinook juveniles, both of which are vulnerable to C. shasta infections. The NMFS biological analysis was that at least this year, under these currently alarmingly low UKL storage levels and with no assurance of much rainfall between now and December 31st, that holding back more water in UKL in order to have enough in the Spring for those "flushing flows" made excellent biological sense -- and would assure higher mainstem salmon survivals not only for ESA-list coho but for chinook as well. In short, emphasizing early UKL storage is an insurance policy, and represents a precautionary approach to preventing potentially much worse drought-related problems later, if this water year does in fact turn against us. And unfortunately we do not yet know whether it will or not. But each year there is always a 50% chance of a below average water year. Wisely, NMFS decided not to bet the entire future health of these already depressed salmon runs on what amounts to a crap-shoot. This is particularly important given the large spawner run for this year. Next year's hopefully correspondingly large juvenile population needs to survive in order to buy more time for other Klamath River restoration efforts to work. Again, read that NMFS Concurrence Letter for a thorough analysis of the impacts on coho salmon of this mitigation measure, and the rationale for approval of such a precautionary measure for the rest of this year. In our view, NOT taking such steps, particularly under the currently developing rainfall-deficient and low storage conditions we are now dealing with, would have been far more risky for the fish than doing so. We thus agree with the NMFS analysis and which this precautionary approach. In reality, it does not matter who "caused" the UKL shortfall, though poorer than expected upper basin rainfall levels last water-year and so far this water-year certainly played a large role. What most matters now is what we proactively do now to protect the salmon if this water year does go into drought. Unfortunately, if we spend all our water "savings account" in the fall, assuming a normal to wet year will follow, and we then have to face a drought, we would already have used up all our water flow options -- and the fish would suffer. ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: www.pcffa.org Email: fish1ifr at aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cknight at caltrout.org Fri Nov 16 10:37:23 2012 From: cknight at caltrout.org (Curtis Knight) Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:37:23 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Tribe bashes federal officials; claims they're... In-Reply-To: <002501cdc416$e102e3c0$a308ab40$@org> References: <40c31.32f5225f.3dd6d051@aol.com> <002501cdc416$e102e3c0$a308ab40$@org> Message-ID: <915DB4FF7374BF4C92980C1704EA99AF09770B@CALTROUT03.CALTROUT.LOCAL> Andrew and all, Just to add to the conversation below, the graph below helps explain agricultural water delivery maximums under the KBRA. The graph also compares deliveries of past years. As is shown, under the KBRA water users would get less in dry years adjusting up in wetter years. Of course this is what would happen when the KBRA implemented. One of the primary premises of water management of the KBRA, and you see it starting to happen to some extent per below, is to take a comprehensive basin wide and longer term approach to allocations instead of a single species approach. Curtis Curtis Knight Conservation Director [emailSig Fish]California Trout 701 S. Mt. Shasta Blvd. Mt. Shasta, CA 96067 w: (530)926-3755 c: (530)859-1872 cknight at caltrout.org www.caltrout.org [cid:image002.png at 01CDC3E6.5C92EE80] From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Andrew Orahoske Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 8:25 AM To: FISH1IFR at aol.com; tstokely at att.net; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Tribe bashes federal officials; claims they're... Glen, that is the rationale portrayed by the agencies, and that storyline makes sense. To state it simply, less water released now means that there will likely more available later. Fair enough. However, what about irrigation deliveries? That is the one variable that has been left out. The real question and concern, is does less water released now mean more water available for irrigation? That answer is most certainly yes, as the irrigation allocation is not determined right now. It is great to be budgeting water, but the agency needs to be straight about all of the reasons why the flows are low right now. It would make common sense to say that it is for irrigation deliveries as well as for ESA compliance. Andrew Andrew J. Orahoske Conservation Director Environmental Protection Information Center 145 G Street, Suite A Arcata, CA 95521 Office: (707) 822-7711 Mobile: (707) 407-9020 www.wildcalifornia.org From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of FISH1IFR at aol.com Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 3:10 PM To: tstokely at att.net; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Tribe bashes federal officials; claims they're... In a message dated 11/2/2012 7:54:52 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tstokely at att.net writes: http://www.redding.com/news/2012/nov/01/tribe-bashes-federal-officials-claims-theyre/ Tribe bashes federal officials; claims they're endangering salmon Government says migrating fish in Klamath River are OK By Damon Arthur Thursday, November 1, 2012 Officials with the Hoopa Valley Tribe are claiming federal officials are illegally harming threatened coho salmon by reducing water flows in the Klamath River. Beginning Thursday, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation was supposed to increase water flowing from Irongate Dam to 1,300 cubic feet per second on the river near Yreka. But bureau officials decided to keep Irongate releases at 1,000 cfs to help fill Upper Klamath Lake, said Kevin Moore, a bureau spokesman. Hoopa Valley tribe officials claim the bureau's actions are illegal under the Endangered Species Act and the National Marine Fisheries Service was not doing its job to protect the salmon. "Now for the second year in a row, the BOR (bureau) and the National Marine Fisheries Service are violating Endangered Species Act flows for the coho salmon," said Hoopa Valley tribal Chairman Leonard Masten said. "If this is any indication of the bureau's future water planning, I do not see how the salmon can recover." Coho salmon, listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act, are in the early stages of their run up the Klamath River, officials said. Hoopa officials are worried the fish, a large part of their culture, won't have adequate habitat for spawning. "Salmon are the Hoopa people's most important resource," Masten said. But a National Marine Fisheries report on the flow releases said coho salmon can successfully migrate and spawn in the river when the water is running at 1,000 cfs in November and December. As of Thursday afternoon, the river was flowing at 1,200 cfs below Irongate, said Jim Simondet, national marine fisheries' Klamath Basin supervisor. He said during the next two months the flows may vary, but won't go below 1,000 cfs. Moore said Upper Klamath Lake in Southern Oregon is at an 18-year low and holding back water in the lake would help fill it. If there is more water in the lake come spring, that water can be used for higher flows in the Klamath next spring when juvenile coho are migrating to the Pacific Ocean. In addition to ensuring flows to protect the coho salmon, the bureau also has to keep the lake level up to meet legal requirements to protect the endangered Lost River sucker and short-nosed sucker, Moore said. Regina Chichizola, a spokeswoman for the Hoopa Tribe, said Upper Klamath Lake was low because the bureau provided "full agricultural deliveries" to farmers in the Klamath Basin. Moore disagreed, saying agricultural water users did not get 100 percent of their contracted amounts. Many farms in the region also pumped more groundwater for irrigation and many fields were left fallow to reduce water taken from the Klamath River system, he said. Craig Tucker, Klamath coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, said he was not happy with the way the bureau has managed water in the basin, but agreed that keeping river flows at 1,000 cfs would help the juvenile salmon migrating to the ocean next spring. "The most important time to have good flows in the river is in the spring," Tucker said. "Right now the Upper Klamath is really low, so if you don't fill up Upper Klamath Lake, you don't get good flows in the spring," Tucker said. = Dear Klamath Basin Colleagues..... We have to respectfully disagree with our Hoopa Tribe colleagues on their assertion that the federal agencies "are illegally harming threatened coho salmon by reducing water flows in the Klamath River." This story has also gotten picked up in other forums. Hence some clarification seems necessary. The Action Is Legal: The current Coho BiOp fully recognized that a "one-size-fits-all" numerically rigid in-river flow regime would occasionally have to be flexibly modified, depending upon year-by-year circumstances (such as drought or exceedingly low Upper Klamath Lake (UKL) storage levels -- both of which we might be facing next year), and in fact for the next two months such a modification was decided upon in order to offset dangerously low UKL levels and serious lack of October and (so far) November rainfall. In other words, it is a precautionary measure to make sure we do not have serious water shortfalls later in the year which would harm the fish much more. The Bureau thus followed the legal procedure set forth in the BiOp by formally proposing such modifications to NMFS, and NMFS fisheries scientists carefully considered -- and formally APPROVED -- these modifications for the next two months. That NMFS October 31st Concurrence Letter is actually posted on the BOR's Klamath Area Office web site for all to see, at: http://www.usbr.gov/mp/kbao/docs/NMFS_proposal_acceptance.pdf This is the legal procedure required in the BiOp. The action was, therefore, completely legal. The next question to ask is, will it be beneficial? The Action Will Benefit, Rather than Harm, Salmon: One of the few measures that we can effectively take to better protect Klamath salmon in-stream is to provide more cold water in the early Spring in order to "flush" juvenile salmon out to sea faster -- and before the emergence later in the Spring and early Summer of massive numbers of highly infectious spores of the usually fatal fish disease Ceratomyxa shasta. Nearly every year, C. shasta infections kill off the adult equivalent of the 2002 adult fish kills, and is nearly 100% fatal to juvenile salmon that are exposed above certain levels. But C. shasta is a warm water spore that is inactive in cold water flows typical of springtime -- so if we have enough water early enough in the Spring within the storage-poor Klamath system (i.e., in Upper Klamath Lake) to flush these juveniles out to sea past the C. shasta "hot spots" in the Klamath mainstem before these spores emerge and become most infectious, then far more of these juveniles will grow up to return as adults. This includes both ESA-list coho and chinook juveniles, both of which are vulnerable to C. shasta infections. The NMFS biological analysis was that at least this year, under these currently alarmingly low UKL storage levels and with no assurance of much rainfall between now and December 31st, that holding back more water in UKL in order to have enough in the Spring for those "flushing flows" made excellent biological sense -- and would assure higher mainstem salmon survivals not only for ESA-list coho but for chinook as well. In short, emphasizing early UKL storage is an insurance policy, and represents a precautionary approach to preventing potentially much worse drought-related problems later, if this water year does in fact turn against us. And unfortunately we do not yet know whether it will or not. But each year there is always a 50% chance of a below average water year. Wisely, NMFS decided not to bet the entire future health of these already depressed salmon runs on what amounts to a crap-shoot. This is particularly important given the large spawner run for this year. Next year's hopefully correspondingly large juvenile population needs to survive in order to buy more time for other Klamath River restoration efforts to work. Again, read that NMFS Concurrence Letter for a thorough analysis of the impacts on coho salmon of this mitigation measure, and the rationale for approval of such a precautionary measure for the rest of this year. In our view, NOT taking such steps, particularly under the currently developing rainfall-deficient and low storage conditions we are now dealing with, would have been far more risky for the fish than doing so. We thus agree with the NMFS analysis and which this precautionary approach. In reality, it does not matter who "caused" the UKL shortfall, though poorer than expected upper basin rainfall levels last water-year and so far this water-year certainly played a large role. What most matters now is what we proactively do now to protect the salmon if this water year does go into drought. Unfortunately, if we spend all our water "savings account" in the fall, assuming a normal to wet year will follow, and we then have to face a drought, we would already have used up all our water flow options -- and the fish would suffer. ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: www.pcffa.org Email: fish1ifr at aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1604 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 11255 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: From unofelice at gmail.com Fri Nov 16 12:23:49 2012 From: unofelice at gmail.com (Felice Pace) Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 12:23:49 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: env-trinity Digest, Vol 106, Issue 15 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Curtis and Glen are either being disingenuous or they are uninformed. Two ommitted facts: The dangerously low condition of UKL is due to the fact that BOR delivered too much water to irrigators - including water to make potato harvest easier. They probably did this on purpose so as to justify the request to NMFS for lower winter flows. in any case they could have retained more water in the lake; allowing it to go so low is a discretionary action, not an act of nature as Glen and Curtis imply. The "pay off" for these lower winter flows is supposed to be - as Glen asserts - higher spring flows. That is what the KBRA promised and the KBRA is being implemented. However, last year we were promised higher spring flows when winter flows were lowered but then spring came and BOR said: "Oh, we're sorry but that water is actually not available." Will the same thing occur this year? Curtis/Cal Trout and Glen/PCFFA could have used their seat at the KBRA table to challenge this "irrigation first" management - invoking the KBRA's '"dispute resolution process" but they chose not to do that. instead they act as apologists for the BOR. Furthermore, according to the USGS Drought Monitor (http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/) the Upper Basin is "extremely dry" but is not in drought...nor has it been. In the Brave New World of the KBRA, the BOR manufactures drought and folks like Curtis and Glen defend the agency. BOR can and does manipulate lake levels, flow releases and deliveries to maximize irrigation deliveries. Curtis and Glen - and their organizations - are the "enablers" giving cover to BOR for a return to Irrigation Firtst management. When those who claim to be working for the fish provide cover for excessive irrigation and for corrupt "wink and nod" ESA consultation, the fish are in trouble. In the Brave New World of the KBRA claims of more water for salmon actually mean less water for salmon. Felice Pace/KlamBlog ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: env-trinity-request at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 10:49:16 -0800 Subject: env-trinity Digest, Vol 106, Issue 15 To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Send env-trinity mailing list submissions to env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to env-trinity-request at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us You can reach the person managing the list at env-trinity-owner at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of env-trinity digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Redding.com: Tribe bashes federal officials; claims they're... (Curtis Knight) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:37:23 +0000 From: Curtis Knight Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Tribe bashes federal officials; claims they're... To: Andrew Orahoske , "FISH1IFR at aol.com" , "tstokely at att.net" , "env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us" Message-ID: <915DB4FF7374BF4C92980C1704EA99AF09770B at CALTROUT03.CALTROUT.LOCAL> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Andrew and all, Just to add to the conversation below, the graph below helps explain agricultural water delivery maximums under the KBRA. The graph also compares deliveries of past years. As is shown, under the KBRA water users would get less in dry years adjusting up in wetter years. Of course this is what would happen when the KBRA implemented. One of the primary premises of water management of the KBRA, and you see it starting to happen to some extent per below, is to take a comprehensive basin wide and longer term approach to allocations instead of a single species approach. Curtis Curtis Knight Conservation Director [emailSig Fish]California Trout 701 S. Mt. Shasta Blvd. Mt. Shasta, CA 96067 w: (530)926-3755 c: (530)859-1872 cknight at caltrout.org www.caltrout.org [cid:image002.png at 01CDC3E6.5C92EE80] From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Andrew Orahoske Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 8:25 AM To: FISH1IFR at aol.com; tstokely at att.net; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Tribe bashes federal officials; claims they're... Glen, that is the rationale portrayed by the agencies, and that storyline makes sense. To state it simply, less water released now means that there will likely more available later. Fair enough. However, what about irrigation deliveries? That is the one variable that has been left out. The real question and concern, is does less water released now mean more water available for irrigation? That answer is most certainly yes, as the irrigation allocation is not determined right now. It is great to be budgeting water, but the agency needs to be straight about all of the reasons why the flows are low right now. It would make common sense to say that it is for irrigation deliveries as well as for ESA compliance. Andrew Andrew J. Orahoske Conservation Director Environmental Protection Information Center 145 G Street, Suite A Arcata, CA 95521 Office: (707) 822-7711 Mobile: (707) 407-9020 www.wildcalifornia.org From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of FISH1IFR at aol.com Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 3:10 PM To: tstokely at att.net; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Tribe bashes federal officials; claims they're... In a message dated 11/2/2012 7:54:52 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tstokely at att.net writes: http://www.redding.com/news/2012/nov/01/tribe-bashes-federal-officials-claims-theyre/ Tribe bashes federal officials; claims they're endangering salmon Government says migrating fish in Klamath River are OK By Damon Arthur Thursday, November 1, 2012 Officials with the Hoopa Valley Tribe are claiming federal officials are illegally harming threatened coho salmon by reducing water flows in the Klamath River. Beginning Thursday, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation was supposed to increase water flowing from Irongate Dam to 1,300 cubic feet per second on the river near Yreka. But bureau officials decided to keep Irongate releases at 1,000 cfs to help fill Upper Klamath Lake, said Kevin Moore, a bureau spokesman. Hoopa Valley tribe officials claim the bureau's actions are illegal under the Endangered Species Act and the National Marine Fisheries Service was not doing its job to protect the salmon. "Now for the second year in a row, the BOR (bureau) and the National Marine Fisheries Service are violating Endangered Species Act flows for the coho salmon," said Hoopa Valley tribal Chairman Leonard Masten said. "If this is any indication of the bureau's future water planning, I do not see how the salmon can recover." Coho salmon, listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act, are in the early stages of their run up the Klamath River, officials said. Hoopa officials are worried the fish, a large part of their culture, won't have adequate habitat for spawning. "Salmon are the Hoopa people's most important resource," Masten said. But a National Marine Fisheries report on the flow releases said coho salmon can successfully migrate and spawn in the river when the water is running at 1,000 cfs in November and December. As of Thursday afternoon, the river was flowing at 1,200 cfs below Irongate, said Jim Simondet, national marine fisheries' Klamath Basin supervisor. He said during the next two months the flows may vary, but won't go below 1,000 cfs. Moore said Upper Klamath Lake in Southern Oregon is at an 18-year low and holding back water in the lake would help fill it. If there is more water in the lake come spring, that water can be used for higher flows in the Klamath next spring when juvenile coho are migrating to the Pacific Ocean. In addition to ensuring flows to protect the coho salmon, the bureau also has to keep the lake level up to meet legal requirements to protect the endangered Lost River sucker and short-nosed sucker, Moore said. Regina Chichizola, a spokeswoman for the Hoopa Tribe, said Upper Klamath Lake was low because the bureau provided "full agricultural deliveries" to farmers in the Klamath Basin. Moore disagreed, saying agricultural water users did not get 100 percent of their contracted amounts. Many farms in the region also pumped more groundwater for irrigation and many fields were left fallow to reduce water taken from the Klamath River system, he said. Craig Tucker, Klamath coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, said he was not happy with the way the bureau has managed water in the basin, but agreed that keeping river flows at 1,000 cfs would help the juvenile salmon migrating to the ocean next spring. "The most important time to have good flows in the river is in the spring," Tucker said. "Right now the Upper Klamath is really low, so if you don't fill up Upper Klamath Lake, you don't get good flows in the spring," Tucker said. = Dear Klamath Basin Colleagues..... We have to respectfully disagree with our Hoopa Tribe colleagues on their assertion that the federal agencies "are illegally harming threatened coho salmon by reducing water flows in the Klamath River." This story has also gotten picked up in other forums. Hence some clarification seems necessary. The Action Is Legal: The current Coho BiOp fully recognized that a "one-size-fits-all" numerically rigid in-river flow regime would occasionally have to be flexibly modified, depending upon year-by-year circumstances (such as drought or exceedingly low Upper Klamath Lake (UKL) storage levels -- both of which we might be facing next year), and in fact for the next two months such a modification was decided upon in order to offset dangerously low UKL levels and serious lack of October and (so far) November rainfall. In other words, it is a precautionary measure to make sure we do not have serious water shortfalls later in the year which would harm the fish much more. The Bureau thus followed the legal procedure set forth in the BiOp by formally proposing such modifications to NMFS, and NMFS fisheries scientists carefully considered -- and formally APPROVED -- these modifications for the next two months. That NMFS October 31st Concurrence Letter is actually posted on the BOR's Klamath Area Office web site for all to see, at: http://www.usbr.gov/mp/kbao/docs/NMFS_proposal_acceptance.pdf This is the legal procedure required in the BiOp. The action was, therefore, completely legal. The next question to ask is, will it be beneficial? The Action Will Benefit, Rather than Harm, Salmon: One of the few measures that we can effectively take to better protect Klamath salmon in-stream is to provide more cold water in the early Spring in order to "flush" juvenile salmon out to sea faster -- and before the emergence later in the Spring and early Summer of massive numbers of highly infectious spores of the usually fatal fish disease Ceratomyxa shasta. Nearly every year, C. shasta infections kill off the adult equivalent of the 2002 adult fish kills, and is nearly 100% fatal to juvenile salmon that are exposed above certain levels. But C. shasta is a warm water spore that is inactive in cold water flows typical of springtime -- so if we have enough water early enough in the Spring within the storage-poor Klamath system (i.e., in Upper Klamath Lake) to flush these juveniles out to sea past the C. shasta "hot spots" in the Klamath mainstem before these spores emerge and become most infectious, then far more of these juveniles will grow up to return as adults. This includes both ESA-list coho and chinook juveniles, both of which are vulnerable to C. shasta infections. The NMFS biological analysis was that at least this year, under these currently alarmingly low UKL storage levels and with no assurance of much rainfall between now and December 31st, that holding back more water in UKL in order to have enough in the Spring for those "flushing flows" made excellent biological sense -- and would assure higher mainstem salmon survivals not only for ESA-list coho but for chinook as well. In short, emphasizing early UKL storage is an insurance policy, and represents a precautionary approach to preventing potentially much worse drought-related problems later, if this water year does in fact turn against us. And unfortunately we do not yet know whether it will or not. But each year there is always a 50% chance of a below average water year. Wisely, NMFS decided not to bet the entire future health of these already depressed salmon runs on what amounts to a crap-shoot. This is particularly important given the large spawner run for this year. Next year's hopefully correspondingly large juvenile population needs to survive in order to buy more time for other Klamath River restoration efforts to work. Again, read that NMFS Concurrence Letter for a thorough analysis of the impacts on coho salmon of this mitigation measure, and the rationale for approval of such a precautionary measure for the rest of this year. In our view, NOT taking such steps, particularly under the currently developing rainfall-deficient and low storage conditions we are now dealing with, would have been far more risky for the fish than doing so. We thus agree with the NMFS analysis and which this precautionary approach. In reality, it does not matter who "caused" the UKL shortfall, though poorer than expected upper basin rainfall levels last water-year and so far this water-year certainly played a large role. What most matters now is what we proactively do now to protect the salmon if this water year does go into drought. Unfortunately, if we spend all our water "savings account" in the fall, assuming a normal to wet year will follow, and we then have to face a drought, we would already have used up all our water flow options -- and the fish would suffer. ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: www.pcffa.org Email: fish1ifr at aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20121116/9c917a15/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1604 bytes Desc: image001.jpg Url : http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20121116/9c917a15/image001.jpg -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 11255 bytes Desc: image002.png Url : http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20121116/9c917a15/image002.png ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity End of env-trinity Digest, Vol 106, Issue 15 ******************************************** -- Felice Pace Klamath, CA 95548 707-954-6588 "we must always seek the truth in our opponents' error and the error in our own truth." - Reinhold Niebuhr From tstokely at att.net Sun Nov 18 14:43:00 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 14:43:00 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard:Klamath restoration agreement deadline looms; opponents call for end to settlement Message-ID: <40BB49ED-E8C6-4942-B0EE-9F6890AE7A1D@att.net> http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_22021402/klamath-restoration-agreement-deadline-looms-opponents-call-end?source=rss Klamath restoration agreement deadline looms; opponents call for end to settlement Grant Scott-Goforth/The Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Created: Times-Standard.com A deadline is looming for an agreement that could see dams removed from the Klamath River, while opponents call for the end of the settlement. The Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement -- a series of proposals for water quality, flows and restoration contingent on the removal of four Klamath River Dams -- is set to expire Dec. 31 unless 42 stakeholders extend the agreement until 2014. Stakeholders approved the agreement in 2010, and included the self-imposed deadline in hopes that Congress would legislate the proposal by the end of this year. That has not happened, and while stakeholders appear to be largely in favor of extending the agreement, there are vocal opponents who are calling for the end of the KBRA. The fight over the Klamath Basin goes back more than a decade, with the control of water flowing through four dams operated by PacifiCorp at the center of an intense debate. The issue is largely split along the lines of fish advocates and tribes on the lower Klamath versus irrigators and farmers in the upper basin, each insisting that their livelihoods depended on more water. After years of negotiation, the KBRA was agreed upon by government agencies, tribes and other interest groups, but did not preclude a host of detractors. Opponents at several meetings last week included members and representatives of the Hoopa Valley Tribe and several river consultants, who insisted that there are better ways to oversee the removal of dams, ensure the rights of tribes and protect fish and other wildlife in the basin. The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors approved the amendment to extend the KBRA on Tuesday. As of press time, the board was one of six stakeholders who approved the extension. On Wednesday, the Klamath Basin Coordinating Council -- the group of stakeholders that formed the KBRA and has the authority to amend it -- met at the Humboldt Bay Aquatic Center, where members heard a similar refrain of opposition to the KBRA. Many opposed to the KBRA say that it's unnecessary because a process already stands in place for dam removal. Since 2010, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's relicensing process for the river's four dams has been placed on hold by the state Water Resources Control Board -- at PacifiCorp's request. Opponents to the KBRA argued that the stakeholders should let FERC force PacifiCorp to remove the dams. American Rivers California Regional Director Steve Rothert said that expectation is unrealistic. ?FERC has never required a dam removal agreement against the wishes of the dam owners,? he said. American Rivers specializes in relicensing processes, and Rothert said the organization is responsible for more dam removals than any other group in the country. ?I have very little confidence that FERC would assert the authority it says it has regarding decommissioning,? he said. Yurok Tribe Executive Director Troy Fletcher also stated that FERC would never order the removal of the Klamath dams without the agreement. ?We think there's a good chance of that if our opponents get their way,? he said, adding that even if that decision was reached, the process would take decades of legal battles. ?It's a waste of those resources,? Fletcher said. ?We have a settlement the company agreed to that leads to dam removal.? Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation District Commissioner Pat Higgins said the KBRA threatens fish species by giving preference to upper basin farmers, and expressed outrage at the agreement. ?I can't understand how the county signed onto it,? he said during public comment. Klamath River advocate Felice Pace echoed the concern, saying that water delivery guarantees favored irrigators upstream and that fish downstream would suffer. Rothert said that even if the FERC process achieved dam removal, the KBRA contains restoration, water reliability and water quality plans that would help the basin more than anything in place now. He said opponents of the settlement overlook the fact that many scientists believe fish stand a worse chance of recovery if they swim back up the Klamath into conditions as they exist today. Karuk Tribe Klamath Coordinator Craig Tucker described the KBRA as a ?bold initiative.? ?A handful of detractors on the coast act like we're somehow surrendering,? he said. Tucker said in Siskiyou County it's the farmers and irrigators who feel like the tribes are getting all the benefits of the agreement. ?That gives me confidence that the reality is in the middle,? Tucker said. Hoopa Tribal Councilwoman Hayley Hutt, in addition to expressing concerns about water flows to lower support lower Klamath fish, said that the KBRA would infringe on the rights of the Hoopa Valley Tribe. Hutt said that the United States agrees that it will not assert tribal water or fishing rights in a manner that would interfere with the diversion of water for the irrigators authorized by the KBRA. She called Hoopa water rights the ?linchpin of success? in protecting Trinity and Klamath water, and called for the group to let the KBRA expire and renegotiate a settlement. Tucker said the Karuk Tribe sees the KBRA as an expansion of tribal rights. With the KBRA in place, the Karuk Tribe would have a larger role in flow control, restoration of the basin and the jobs associated with those efforts, Tucker said. He said the federal government has an obligation to act in the interest of tribes. Hoopa has the right to a fishery on the Trinity River, and if something happens to put that fishery in peril, Hoopa can call on the government to step in on its behalf. When tribes disagree on something, the government is forced to choose a side, Tucker said. In the case of the KBRA, it picked the side of the stakeholder tribes. He said that doesn't take away the Hoopa Valley Tribe's right to claim the government isn't acting on its behalf. Others at Wednesday's meeting called for more transparency during the KBRA process. ?I don't think we want to disband this collaborative process,? Environmental Protection Information Center Conservation Director Andrew Orahoske said. ?We do need to have a more open process. Rather than close doors when important decisions are made, I ask that you open the door.? Pace agreed and asked for the agreement to be renegotiated. ?It's a big reason for my opposition to this,? he said. ?We don't have democratic process.? Fifth District Supervisor Ryan Sundberg, who voted in favor of extending the agreement on Tuesday, asked KBCC groups to return at a future meeting with the research that led them to believe that the KBRA is the best solution for the basin. ?More meetings and more information is better for the public,? Sundberg said, with the consent of other stakeholders. Sundberg said he remained fairly confident that the agreement would be extended. ?I haven't heard anyone who doesn't want to give it more time and feel out the new Congress,? he said. Fletcher said collaboration and compromise were key to a divided Klamath Basin. ?Nobody -- nobody -- can stand far to the left or far to the right and expect progress here,? he said. Tucker said that most of the people in the lower Klamath Basin have the same goal: dam removal. ?It's a real shame because I know that the Hoopa tribal members want the river fixed,? Tucker said. ?It's really a debate over strategy. We sit here fighting with each other. Who wins when we do that? PacifiCorp.? Grant Scott-Goforth can be reached at 441-0514 or gscott-goforth at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Nov 19 08:25:13 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 08:25:13 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard: Hoopa raises concerns over low Klamath flows; Other agencies, tribe disagree Message-ID: <21DE1007-D0D1-4962-83CD-A0D8219201C9@att.net> http://www.times-standard.com/ci_22025422/hoopa-raises-concerns-over-low-klamath-flows-other?source=most_viewed Hoopa raises concerns over low Klamath flows; Other agencies, tribe disagree Luke Ramseth/The Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Created: Times-Standard.com After a record salmon year on the Klamath River, the Hoopa Valley Tribe is voicing concerns that low water flows this winter will harm the fish, especially the endangered coho salmon. Other Klamath agencies disagree, saying there was no choice, and proper study and precaution has been taken. ?If this is any indication of the (Bureau of Reclamation's) future water planning, I do not see how the salmon can recover,? said Hoopa Valley Tribal Chairman Leonard Masten in a statement. Upper Klamath Lake in Oregon, which feeds the Klamath River, is at an 18-year low. The lake provides water to Klamath basin farmers, wetlands, downstream reservoirs like Iron Gate, all while maintaining flows in the river itself. The Bureau of Reclamation manages flows coming out of Upper Klamath Lake, and said it has no choice but to hold back on water releases this winter. Bureau spokesman Kevin Moore said his agency consulted closely with the National Marine Fisheries Service to ensure salmon go unaffected. Both Hoopa and Karuk tribe representatives showed recent concern over how reduced flows will affect the record-breaking salmon season, mostly made up of chinook, and the river ecosystem on the whole. In a press release, the Hoopa tribe said the low levels violate Endangered Species Act flows for coho salmon. The two tribes also have conflicting opinions on how best to proceed this winter, given the less-than-optimal circumstances with a record-low lake. At issue is a 2010 ?biological opinion? by the National Marine Fisheries Service that stipulates a minimum flow level in the river to protect the coho. The opinion says flows for the next two months should not go below 1,300 cubic feet per second below Iron Gate Dam. The Bureau of Reclamation plans to run the flows at 1,000 CFS through December, which does not include added wintertime rain and runoff. One CFS equals 7.48 gallons per second. Irma Lagomarsino, the National Marine Fisheries Service Northern California Office supervisor, said the 2010 biological opinion also has a term and condition allowing the Bureau of Reclamation and NMFS to drop flows below Iron Gate Dam to under 1,300 CFS, if certain conditions are met. She said both her agency and the BOR analyzed whether lowering flows would harm coho, and they determined it would not. ?We felt there are some situations where the flows could be lower,? she said. Regina Chichizola, a spokeswoman for the Hoopa Tribe, said the tribe is especially concerned lower winter flows would have an acute effect so soon after such a prosperous salmon season. She highlighted the coho salmon as the largest potential victim. ?We have argued ecological collapse affects coho, specifically,? said Robert Franklin, a Hoopa senior hydrologist. ?Baby coho are quite active this time of year. They need to be able to swim in and out of tributaries and up and down the river.? The young coho leave the river in spring for the ocean. There, they spend one to three years before returning to spawn. Coho are about two feet long on average, and usually weigh seven to 11 pounds. They go from silver and dark blue hues while in the ocean, but turn bright red when they return to fresh water. Chichizola said this is the second time flow agreements have been violated in the last two years. She said those actions give the river, ?a continual air of lawlessness.? 'Rock-bottom levels' A massive 2002 fish kill on the Klamath -- resulting in the death of more than 60,000 migrating Chinook salmon -- is mentioned in the Hoopa press release, and remains on some salmon advocates' minds. Chichizola and Franklin said the tribe is more concerned about dangerous, long-term effects on the fish and river, not a repeat of 2002. ?We're looking at trying to get above those rock-bottom levels,? Franklin said. He cited a late Thanksgiving-time run of Chinook that could also be affected by low flows. The Bureau of Reclamation began releasing additional water on Aug. 15 from the Trinity River reservoir to supplement flows in the lower Klamath River. In an August Times-Standard story, Sarah Borok, and environmental scientist with Department of Fish and Game said the release has the water flowing at about 3,200 cubic feet per second. In 2002, when the fish kill occurred, the water was flowing at 1,800 cubic feet per second. Borok said fast water flows give the fish more room to avoid what she calls, ?Kindergarten Syndrome.? ?When the water is running too slow, the fish will bunch in close together,? she said. ?That is bad because if one of them is sick it increases the odds of them all getting sick.? The Hoopa Tribe made their case in a recent letters to the National Marine Fisheries Service in Arcata and the Bureau of Reclamation, saying reduced flows would be ?ecologically unsound,? and even illegal. The Hoopa letter to the NMFS called the August Trinity release a ?substantial investment in protecting this run against possible fish disease.? ?It seems illogical that this substantial federal investment would now be abandoned, leaving salmon to fend for themselves against unreasonably low winter flows that are scientifically known to be ecologically unacceptable.? The letter continues, ?Of all years, this is the worst possible year for reducing winter flows in the Klamath River ...? Demanding winter flows a mistake? Craig Tucker, a Klamath campaign coordinator for the Karuk tribe, said he has similar concerns as the Hoopa about the impacts of low-flow levels on salmon. He said the Hoopa Valley Tribe might be making a mistake in demanding more winter water. ?We're more concerned about low flows in spring,? he said. Strong spring flows are crucial, he said, especially in getting salmon juveniles flushed out of the system. Tucker said he would rather temper flows now and fill up Upper Klamath Lake with plenty of water as an insurance policy for spring, in case of a dry winter. ?The problem is, you don't know whether you're going to have a wet winter or a dry winter,? he said. If flows are held back now, and it turns out to be a wetter than usual winter, Tucker said that's OK too. When the Upper Klamath Lake floods, that's healthy for downstream ecosystems. Moore agreed. He said big releases mid-winter due to storms mimic a natural, undammed river, and are healthy for salmon. Moore questioned whether people would even notice a difference of 300 CFS down the river. Tucker said it seems Upper Klamath Lake was mismanaged and overdrafted this year. Too much water went to other major interest groups like Klamath basin farmers, wetlands, and wildlife refuges. Moore had two explanations for the record-low lake levels. He said his department bases water deliveries to various groups off of a Natural Resources Conservation Service forecast, and that forecast was inaccurate this year. Last year's winter was particularly dry, he said, resulting in lake inflow being 76 percent of average. He explained with a low lake, his department comes up against two competing environmental standards. On one side, they must keep flows high enough in the Klamath River to not place coho and other species in danger. Moore said the bureau also must keep enough water in the lake to mitigate any risk to two other fish species that live there -- the endangered shortnose and Lost River suckers. ?That's the whole struggle here,? Tucker said. ?How you balance it all so everyone gets their needs met is unclear to me. But given the position we're in, I want to fill up that lake. We want to go along with that. If Hoopa got what they wanted, and we got a drought spring, everybody is going to be mad at Hoopa.? Franklin, the Hoopa hydrologist, calls low spring flows an ?unknown risk.? What he said he does know is that flows are too low right now, which needs to be addressed. After an analysis, the National Marine Fisheries Service thought lower flows would both help refill Upper Klamath Lake, and help increase spring flows for coho, Lagomarsino said. She said her department also ensured lower flows would not affect coho in the short term this winter. ?I don't see it as a tradeoff,? between flows in winter or flows in spring, Lagomarsino said. ?I don't see coho as even effected by this November-December period.? She said 1,000 CFS is enough to provide ?a lot of spawning habitat? for coho. Whether decreased flows are eventually deemed ecologically harmful, a record salmon season has brought heightened awareness of flows and conditions on the Klamath. ?We've had this amazingly strong run of fish this year,? Tucker said. ?I think we're trying to figure out what this means.? Luke Ramseth can be reached at 441-0509 or lramseth at times-standard.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Mon Nov 19 14:09:20 2012 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 17:09:20 -0500 (EST) Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Standard: Hoopa raises concerns over low Klamath flow... Message-ID: <34511.385d848c.3ddc0810@aol.com> Colleagues... For anyone who would actually like to see the NMFS 10/31st Concurrence Letter on these emergency measures, to the effect that this action would likely BENEFIT, rather than harm, Klamath salmonids including coho, that letter is posted at: _http://www.usbr.gov/mp/kbao/docs/NMFS_proposal_acceptance.pdf_ (http://www.usbr.gov/mp/kbao/docs/NMFS_proposal_acceptance.pdf) And while people may legitimately disagree with NMFS on the science, the assertion that this emergency measures is "illegal" is clearly not the case. The BiOp contains a well specified process for making such mid-course corrections and modifications to flows, when conditions warrant and NMFS believes they are better for fish, and that legal procedure was followed in this case to the letter. There is still significant risk, from a very dry October and first half of November, that we are sliding into a serious drought. If this is the case, it would be foolish in the extreme to put all the water downriver this winter when the fish need it the least, and thus cause shortages of water when fish next need it the most, which will be in the Spring. This was clearly the thinking behind this NMFS concurrence. And it is thinking with which we at PCFFA agree, at least in this instance. ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) Email: fish1ifr at aol.com ======================================================= In a message dated 11/19/2012 8:26:24 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, tstokely at att.net writes: _http://www.times-standard.com/ci_22025422/hoopa-raises-concerns-over-low-kl amath-flows-other?source=most_viewed_ (http://www.times-standard.com/ci_22025422/hoopa-raises-concerns-over-low-klamath-flows-other?source=most_viewed) Hoopa raises concerns over low Klamath flows; Other agencies, tribe disagree Luke Ramseth/The Times-Standard Eureka Times Standard Created: _Times-Standard.com_ (http://times-standard.com/) After a record salmon year on the Klamath River, the Hoopa Valley Tribe is voicing concerns that low water flows this winter will harm the fish, especially the endangered coho salmon. Other Klamath agencies disagree, saying there was no choice, and proper study and precaution has been taken. ?If this is any indication of the (Bureau of Reclamation's) future water planning, I do not see how the salmon can recover,? said Hoopa Valley Tribal Chairman Leonard Masten in a statement. Upper Klamath Lake in Oregon, which feeds the Klamath River, is at an 18-year low. The lake provides water to Klamath basin farmers, wetlands, downstream reservoirs like Iron Gate, all while maintaining flows in the river itself. The Bureau of Reclamation manages flows coming out of Upper Klamath Lake, and said it has no choice but to hold back on water releases this winter. Bureau spokesman Kevin Moore said his agency consulted closely with the National Marine Fisheries Service to ensure salmon go unaffected. Both Hoopa and Karuk tribe representatives showed recent concern over how reduced flows will affect the record-breaking salmon season, mostly made up of chinook, and the river ecosystem on the whole. In a press release, the Hoopa tribe said the low levels violate Endangered Species Act flows for coho salmon. The two tribes also have conflicting opinions on how best to proceed this winter, given the less-than-optimal circumstances with a record-low lake. At issue is a 2010 ?biological opinion? by the National Marine Fisheries Service that stipulates a minimum flow level in the river to protect the coho. The opinion says flows for the next two months should not go below 1,300 cubic feet per second below Iron Gate Dam. The Bureau of Reclamation plans to run the flows at 1,000 CFS through December, which does not include added wintertime rain and runoff. One CFS equals 7.48 gallons per second. Irma Lagomarsino, the National Marine Fisheries Service Northern California Office supervisor, said the 2010 biological opinion also has a term and condition allowing the Bureau of Reclamation and NMFS to drop flows below Iron Gate Dam to under 1,300 CFS, if certain conditions are met. She said both her agency and the BOR analyzed whether lowering flows would harm coho, and they determined it would not. ?We felt there are some situations where the flows could be lower,? she said. Regina Chichizola, a spokeswoman for the Hoopa Tribe, said the tribe is especially concerned lower winter flows would have an acute effect so soon after such a prosperous salmon season. She highlighted the coho salmon as the largest potential victim. ?We have argued ecological collapse affects coho, specifically,? said Robert Franklin, a Hoopa senior hydrologist. ?Baby coho are quite active this time of year. They need to be able to swim in and out of tributaries and up and down the river.? The young coho leave the river in spring for the ocean. There, they spend one to three years before returning to spawn. Coho are about two feet long on average, and usually weigh seven to 11 pounds. They go from silver and dark blue hues while in the ocean, but turn bright red when they return to fresh water. Chichizola said this is the second time flow agreements have been violated in the last two years. She said those actions give the river, ?a continual air of lawlessness.? 'Rock-bottom levels' A massive 2002 fish kill on the Klamath -- resulting in the death of more than 60,000 migrating Chinook salmon -- is mentioned in the Hoopa press release, and remains on some salmon advocates' minds. Chichizola and Franklin said the tribe is more concerned about dangerous, long-term effects on the fish and river, not a repeat of 2002. ?We're looking at trying to get above those rock-bottom levels,? Franklin said. He cited a late Thanksgiving-time run of Chinook that could also be affected by low flows. The Bureau of Reclamation began releasing additional water on Aug. 15 from the Trinity River reservoir to supplement flows in the lower Klamath River. In an August Times-Standard story, Sarah Borok, and environmental scientist with Department of Fish and Game said the release has the water flowing at about 3,200 cubic feet per second. In 2002, when the fish kill occurred, the water was flowing at 1,800 cubic feet per second. Borok said fast water flows give the fish more room to avoid what she calls, ?Kindergarten Syndrome.? ?When the water is running too slow, the fish will bunch in close together, ? she said. ?That is bad because if one of them is sick it increases the odds of them all getting sick.? The Hoopa Tribe made their case in a recent letters to the National Marine Fisheries Service in Arcata and the Bureau of Reclamation, saying reduced flows would be ?ecologically unsound,? and even illegal. The Hoopa letter to the NMFS called the August Trinity release a ? substantial investment in protecting this run against possible fish disease.? ?It seems illogical that this substantial federal investment would now be abandoned, leaving salmon to fend for themselves against unreasonably low winter flows that are scientifically known to be ecologically unacceptable.? The letter continues, ?Of all years, this is the worst possible year for reducing winter flows in the Klamath River ...? Demanding winter flows a mistake? Craig Tucker, a Klamath campaign coordinator for the Karuk tribe, said he has similar concerns as the Hoopa about the impacts of low-flow levels on salmon. He said the Hoopa Valley Tribe might be making a mistake in demanding more winter water. ?We're more concerned about low flows in spring,? he said. Strong spring flows are crucial, he said, especially in getting salmon juveniles flushed out of the system. Tucker said he would rather temper flows now and fill up Upper Klamath Lake with plenty of water as an insurance policy for spring, in case of a dry winter. ?The problem is, you don't know whether you're going to have a wet winter or a dry winter,? he said. If flows are held back now, and it turns out to be a wetter than usual winter, Tucker said that's OK too. When the Upper Klamath Lake floods, that's healthy for downstream ecosystems. Moore agreed. He said big releases mid-winter due to storms mimic a natural, undammed river, and are healthy for salmon. Moore questioned whether people would even notice a difference of 300 CFS down the river. Tucker said it seems Upper Klamath Lake was mismanaged and overdrafted this year. Too much water went to other major interest groups like Klamath basin farmers, wetlands, and wildlife refuges. Moore had two explanations for the record-low lake levels. He said his department bases water deliveries to various groups off of a Natural Resources Conservation Service forecast, and that forecast was inaccurate this year. Last year's winter was particularly dry, he said, resulting in lake inflow being 76 percent of average. He explained with a low lake, his department comes up against two competing environmental standards. On one side, they must keep flows high enough in the Klamath River to not place coho and other species in danger. Moore said the bureau also must keep enough water in the lake to mitigate any risk to two other fish species that live there -- the endangered shortnose and Lost River suckers. ?That's the whole struggle here,? Tucker said. ?How you balance it all so everyone gets their needs met is unclear to me. But given the position we're in, I want to fill up that lake. We want to go along with that. If Hoopa got what they wanted, and we got a drought spring, everybody is going to be mad at Hoopa.? Franklin, the Hoopa hydrologist, calls low spring flows an ?unknown risk.? What he said he does know is that flows are too low right now, which needs to be addressed. After an analysis, the National Marine Fisheries Service thought lower flows would both help refill Upper Klamath Lake, and help increase spring flows for coho, Lagomarsino said. She said her department also ensured lower flows would not affect coho in the short term this winter. ?I don't see it as a tradeoff,? between flows in winter or flows in spring, Lagomarsino said. ?I don't see coho as even effected by this November-December period.? She said 1,000 CFS is enough to provide ?a lot of spawning habitat? for coho. Whether decreased flows are eventually deemed ecologically harmful, a record salmon season has brought heightened awareness of flows and conditions on the Klamath. ?We've had this amazingly strong run of fish this year,? Tucker said. ?I think we're trying to figure out what this means.? Luke Ramseth can be reached at 441-0509 or _lramseth at times-standard.com_ (mailto:lramseth at times-standard.com) . = -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Mon Nov 19 15:53:27 2012 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 15:53:27 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey update for the week of November 12-16 Message-ID: Hi all, See the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office's Fisheries page for the latest in-season update for our mainstem Trinity River spawning survey. http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/ Due to the short work week (Veterans Day holiday) reach 5 (Douglas City Campground) and reach 7 (Junction City Campground to Pigeon Point) were not surveyed. Our crews mapped the locations of 1,069 redds and 1,666 carcasses this week. The figure below is clipped from this week's report and shows how this year's running total from Lewiston Dam to Cedar Flat compares to years previous. Things are getting wet! Action is really starting to ramp up in the lower river (Hawkins Bar to Weitchpec). Last week may have been our last visit down there for a while as survey conditions downstream of South Fork can deteriorate for a long time after significant storms. Will update you again next week, Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 23374 bytes Desc: not available URL: From FISH1IFR at aol.com Mon Nov 19 18:25:16 2012 From: FISH1IFR at aol.com (FISH1IFR at aol.com) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2012 21:25:16 -0500 (EST) Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Tribe bashes federal officials.... Message-ID: <97f9.e64bc49.3ddc440c@aol.com> In a message dated 11/16/2012 8:24:36 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, andrew at wildcalifornia.org writes: Fair enough. However, what about irrigation deliveries? That is the one variable that has been left out. The real question and concern, is does less water released now mean more water available for irrigation? That answer is most certainly yes, as the irrigation allocation is not determined right now. It is great to be budgeting water, but the agency needs to be straight about all of the reasons why the flows are low right now. It would make common sense to say that it is for irrigation deliveries as well as for ESA compliance. Andrew J. Orahoske Conservation Director Environmental Protection Information Center Andrew.... One serious problem with the current water management system in the Upper Klamath Basin is that irrigation deliveries ARE a major and largely uncontrolled variable, EVERY YEAR. The BOR has no other choice -- after meeting ESA legal obligations -- but to fight over every bit of the remaining water. This type of annual conflict is the situation we will continue to see indefinitely -- constant annual struggles over water, ad hoc decision-making and a complete lack of predictive stability overshadowing the entire Klamath Basin water management system -- until the KBRA is finally and fully implemented. One primary purpose of the KBRA, as you know, is to -- for the first time ever -- actually CAP BOR irrigation deliveries each year as known in advance levels in order to bring more CERTAINTY to the levels of water the irrigation system would get in future years (as noted on the Chart previously sent out by Curtis Knight to this list), but always based on actual rainfall (instead of political power in the annual struggle). There is at present -- i.e., without the KBRA -- no effective upper limit on upper Klamath basin BOR irrigation demand, except whatever it can use for the beneficial uses of irrigation. The BOR's Oregon State water right in fact is "whatever amounts of water are available and not yet appropriated" as of its effective date (1906 I believe). This could theoretically mean the whole river! The only effective constraint then become how effective salmon advocates are (and can remain) in federal Court to enforce the ESA -- and that provides only survival flows, not true recovery. It is only the KBRA "caps" on BOR Project future irrigation demands that promise to: (1) bring permanent predictive stability to annual BOR Klamath Irrigation Project irrigation demand; (2) align that demand with the actual annual rainfall supply. This is one of the best arguments for its full implementation. Otherwise, you will likely see only more of the same annual dog fights -- which can only get worse as total average flows diminish with accelerating climate change, as is being predicted. In short, the kinds of serious water management problems and conflicts we are seeing this year and likely next in the Klamath Basin are because the KBRA has NOT yet been implemented, not because of it. ====================================== Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA) PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370 Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500 Web Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) Email: fish1ifr at aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t.schlosser at msaj.com Tue Nov 20 08:21:31 2012 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Tom Schlosser) Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 08:21:31 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Tribe bashes federal officials.... In-Reply-To: <97f9.e64bc49.3ddc440c@aol.com> References: <97f9.e64bc49.3ddc440c@aol.com> Message-ID: <50ABAE0B.8050101@msaj.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Nov 20 09:55:46 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 09:55:46 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou Daily News: Doubt and distrust Message-ID: <6E664F09-A759-4EEC-9921-EE502AE5F02D@att.net> http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20121116/NEWS/121119855/1001/NEWS By John Bowman November 16. 2012 12:03PM Doubt and distrust Representatives of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) faced tough crowds at two meetings on Nov. 13 and 14 where they introduced the first phase of a process that will ultimately yield minimum in-stream flow recommendations for the Scott and Shasta rivers. PHOTO/ JOHN BOWMAN At meetings in Fort Jones and Yreka, Curtis Thalken of Normandeau Environmental Consultants explained the first phase of CDFG?s efforts to develop a minimum in-stream flow recommendation for the Scott and Shasta rivers. Representatives of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) faced tough crowds at two meetings on Nov. 13 and 14 where they introduced the first phase of a process that will ultimately yield minimum in-stream flow recommendations for the Scott and Shasta rivers. The agency says they are required by the California Public Resources Code to make the recommendations to the California Water Resources Control Board for a list of streams across the state. They told audiences in Fort Jones and Yreka that the first phase of the process will gather input and recruit participation from landowners and interest groups in order to form a study plan that considers as many perspectives as possible. Judging by questions and comments from the audiences, strong doubts and distrust in CDFG will make landowner participation in the process a hard sell. The ?orientation? meeting opened with an introduction by Curtis Thalken, a hydrologic engineer from Normandeau Environmental Consultants and a former commander for the Army Corp of Engineers. Normandeau was awarded a CDFG contract to perform the initial study planning phase of the flow studies. ?We like to pride ourselves on the fact that what we do is just solid science,? Thalken told the audience of about 100 at the Holiday Inn Express in Yreka on Wednesday night. ?It?s not shaded one way or the other.? Thalken said he grew up in Nebraska and his grandparents, on both sides of his family, were farmers. He assured the audience that his upbringing made him familiar with issues of farming and irrigation. Curtis Milliron, CDFG?s northern region fisheries program manager acknowledged the agency?s local trust deficit. He said his agency?s effort to work through the difficulties of resource management in Siskiyou County ?have been going on for a long time.? In October of 2009 a CDFG attempt to develop an Incidental Take Permit (ITP) program in the Scott and Shasta rivers was halted by lawsuits by environmental and tribal groups. Milliron said Wednesday night he understands ?... that failure resulted in a lot of people getting burned. And a lot of trust was lost.? He said that situation left ?... a large hole to dig ourselves out of. And yet, we are here and we?re going to try again,? he added. Milliron?s statement in Yreka was no exaggeration. He, Thalken and other agency representatives spent the rest of the meeting listening to criticisms and charges of deceit and hypocrisy by state and federal officials. County supervisor Michael Kobseff told Thalken several times that the process would be flawed from the outset. He said that the study?s baseline information and assumptions were biased because they were supplied by what he alleges are biased government studies. Several audience members questioned the authority by which the state intends to make and implement the flow recommendations. Retired rangeland ecologist and Scott Valley rancher John Menke said he questions one of the underlying assumptions of the process ? the assertion by CDFG and environmentalists that fish numbers have been declining in the Scott and Shasta rivers over the past few decades. ?We?ve got a hell of an accounting problem,? Menke said, refering to the way fish populations and harvest quotas are monitored. He also accused the agencies of trying to displace agricultural producers. He pointed to the CDFG biologists saying, ?These guys right up here, they want us out of here,? to which the audience offered loud applause. Later in the meeting, Menke also charged that the demise of coho salmon in coastal rivers was the fault of ?drug junkies diverting water to grow marijuana.? Another audience member said he was tired of seeing his friends and neighbors leaving the county because of environmental regulations. He added, ?God made us in his likeness and we have been given dominion over [nature]. Fish are not the most important thing. The people and our way of life should be way, way above all that stuff.? While some audience comments drifted into theology and philosophy, others focused on scientific factors that would influence the outcome of the flow study, such as upland forest management, domestic groundwater use and the effects of suction dredge mining on habitat and stream flows. Shasta Valley rancher Don Meamber said he fears if the ultimate flow recommendations are moderate enough to be acceptable to the agricultural community they will likely be challenged in court by environmentalists. He cited the failed ITP process as an example. Lake Shastina Community Services District President Tom Wetter agreed with Meamber?s concerns over the potential for lawsuits. Summing up the fears of many in the audience, he said, ?It?s very difficult to be forthcoming and forthright and come up with ideas because, you know, you?re putting bullets in somebody else?s gun.? Throughout the meeting, Thalken responded to most questions and comments by saying that the issues raised need to be included in the next round of meetings. Those meetings will be guided by a participatory model known as a Legal Institutional Analysis Model (LIAM) designed to integrate a wide variety of perspectives in decision making processes. The LIAM workshops will be used to choose 60 representatives and form a technical advisory group to gather the input of interest groups, including landowners. The first round of LIAM workshops will be held on Dec. 4 in Fort Jones and Dec. 11 in Yreka. Those interested in being part of the LIAM process may complete an interest form at normandeau.com/scottshasta. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AR-121119855.jpg&MaxH=225&MaxW=225 Type: image/jpeg Size: 4705 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Mon Nov 26 12:47:02 2012 From: Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov (Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov) Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:47:02 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey update for the week of November 19-23 Message-ID: Hi all, See the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office's Fisheries page for the latest in-season update for our mainstem Trinity River spawning survey. http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/ Poor survey conditions and turkey time with familly kept us off the river for most of the week. Reach 1 (Lewiston Dam to Old Bridge) was the ONLY reach surveyed. Our crews there mapped the locations of 270 redds and 1,151 carcasses. That's a lot of carcasses for one reach! The figure below is clipped from this week's report and shows how this year's running total from Lewiston Dam to Cedar Flat compares to years previous. Will update you again next week, Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 23391 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Nov 27 11:48:21 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 11:48:21 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Two Rivers Tribune Movie Review: Over Troubled Waters Message-ID: <825F1E8D-A69C-4786-9491-2035D92075CA@att.net> http://www.tworiverstribune.com/2012/11/trt-movie-review-over-troubled-waters/ TRT Movie Review: Over Troubled Waters The Fate of California is in Your Hands By KAYLA CARPENTER, TRT Contributing Writer Directed By Russ Fisher, Narrated By Ed Begley. Produced by Media Creations, Restore the Delta, and Open Ocean. Over Troubled Waters is a documentary released this summer, and it?s about two things: the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, and planned multibillion-dollar water transfer project that threatens the Delta. With it making its rounds in film festivals and premieres throughout the state, I was able to make a packed premiere in Stockton. The film starts with a scenic mountain river, and narrator?s voice booming: ?In the golden state, water has always been the greatest treasure, the resource most worth fighting for and controlling.? Cutting to a dry lakebed where Owen?s Lake once was, and then wetlands, we learn about the closed Kesterson National Wildlife Refuge. There, toxins from corporate agribusiness cause deformities in local wildlife. The message: that the powerful water interests that have changed these areas still control state water resources and politics. For 45 minutes the film is information packed. You meet sports fisherman and Delta family farmers who are up against corporate agriculture, and plans for new $12 billion water export tunnels. Each is the size of the Panama Canal, and will divert water south from the Sacramento River, bypassing most of the Delta in the Bay Area. The impacts to the Delta region are projected to be devastating. Without freshwater coming in, saltwater takes over. In 1982, voters overturned a similar Peripheral Canal project. The plan is back, this time as underground tunnels. After watching, my question was, with a bigger, faster, conveyance system and pumps, where will the water come from? The water storage that feeds the Sacramento is the Shasta Dam, and the second biggest storage is the Trinity dam on the Trinity River. Caleen Sisk of the Winnemem Wintu, a tribe displaced by the Shasta dam, is one tribal interest represented in the film. She talks about the tribe?s loss of a salmon fishery and homeland. Tom Birmingham of Westlands Water District also makes an appearance to say water diversion is not the main reason for decline in salmon. Cutting water exports, he says, is cutting jobs. Economic experts later say otherwise, with studies of the communities home to Westlands, as well as the state. With water use actually in decline in SoCal cities, despite a rises in population, the idea that tunnels are needed for drinking water is also debunked. I give Over Troubled Waters three acorns, for talking about an issue that seems to be flying under the radar, and water troubles that may be on the horizon. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 1847troubledwatersdelta.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 40727 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Nov 28 11:15:37 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 11:15:37 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- County formally opposes peripheral tunnels plan Message-ID: <1397709E-7593-44E7-9E53-9E76E47C64F9@att.net> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_4f970806-3907-11e2-86fe-001a4bcf6878.html County formally opposes peripheral tunnels plan By Sally Morris The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 6:15 am Arguing the process is flawed and fails to protect any of Trinity County?s water and power interests, the county Board of Supervisors has gone on record in formal opposition to the proposed Bay-Delta Conservation Plan?s construction of two peripheral tunnels designed to deliver more water from the Sacramento River to Southern California. In a four-page resolution drafted by a board-appointed ad hoc committee of volunteers and adopted in November, the county opposes the proposed plan that includes construction of the tunnels and requests that all of the county?s elected state and federal representatives actively do the same. The county?s letter to Gov. Edmund G. Brown Jr., Interior Department Secretary Ken Salazar and California Natural Resources Secretary John Laird also demands status as a coordinating agency with regard to further revision and adoption of the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan. The board?s resolution details many reasons for its position, calling the current process of revising the Bay Delta Conservation Plan governmentally, economically and scientifically flawed, saying that with no regard for Trinity County, it would allow water users to sell, transfer and convey so-called surplus Public Trust water for private profit. The board claims county of origin rights as well as in-stream flow guarantees for fisheries set forth in the Trinity River Main Stem Fishery Restoration Record of Decision of 2000. It advocates for a minimum pool in Trinity Lake of 1.25 million acre-feet of water to meet state and federal flow requirements and water quality objectives in the Trinity River during a multi-year drought. The county?s resolution also defends the county?s first preference rights to power generated by the Trinity River Division of the Central Valley Project, arguing that the draft EIR/EIS will increase total CVP energy use and result in a dramatic increase in the Trinity Public Utilities District?s cost of power. It notes that the proposed plan would deliver full contract amounts for CVP and state water project to contractors that would necessitate increased imports from the Trinity River watershed. It argues that diverting additional water from the Trinity River would lower reservoir levels and make less water available for beneficial uses within Trinity County including development of community water systems, individual water systems, agriculture and biomass facilities; cold water storage for fishery survival during multiple drought years; and recreation, the county?s largest industry sector for employment. The resolution indicates that because Trinity Lake only has a 15 percent chance of refilling each year, additional diversions would result in an increased frequency of ?dead pool? occurrences. It notes that prolonged reductions in reservoir storage will result ?in adverse conditions that could persist for decades, resulting in loss of salmon and steelhead fisheries; loss of critical recreation businesses; loss of hydropower generation; loss of local water supplies; decline in property values; loss of jobs; loss of county population.? The letter concludes that the proposed revisions and draft EIS/EIR being considered by the governor, state and federal agencies ?all fail to protect the interests of Trinity County as an area and county of origin within the Trinity-Klamath watershed. Until such time as adequate assurances and protections for the public trust, riparian and county of origin rights, as well as protections for Trinity Lake, Trinity River fisheries, temperature compliance, Trinity County First Preference power rights and Trinity County communities are provided to Trinity County, the Board of Supervisors opposes the plan and construction of the peripheral tunnels.? Members of the ad hoc committee included Supervisors Debra Chapman and Judy Pflueger; former county supervisor Arnold Whitridge and former natural resources planner Tom Stokely; Weaverville attorney Elizabeth Johnson; TPUD General Manager Paul Hauser; and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler. Tyler noted the group?s initial draft resolution was nine pages long and the committee vetted many additional issues, ?but then we chose to keep it simple to convey it to the Legislature and give the public several talking points if they also want to contact their representatives.? She said the committee will present more detailed, scientific arguments in December when it is time for the county to provide that input on the draft EIR/EIS, ?but this gets us a seat at the table and I am very grateful for the expertise that was provided to us by volunteers. The process was cordial, but there are a lot of interests and opinions that generated a lot of discussion.? Board Chairman Roger Jaegel said he believes it will come down to a legal battle for the county to assert its county of origin water rights over water permit requirements that are an estimated six times greater than what is actually available. He said the impact of the proposed tunnels ?is the transmission of water in a quantity that was never possible before. Once the tunnels are constructed, the ability is going to be there to transfer much more water south than they?ve had capacity to do before, but every drop that falls in Trinity County is considered our county of origin water right.? Sup. Judy Morris commented that water ?is a multi-layered, complex issue. We are a county of origin, but there are a lot of other counties opposing these tunnels on other grounds and some have contracts that they consider to be rights when they aren?t.? Trinity County Agriculture Commissioner Mark Lockhart commended the board?s enthusiasm, but noted ?there is no more complex body of law than California water law. I just want to get on the record that protecting the county?s rights will be no easy task. If you dive in head first, you may hit cement, but I wish you luck.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From moira at onramp113.com Wed Nov 28 11:32:21 2012 From: moira at onramp113.com (Moira Burke) Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 11:32:21 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal- County formally opposes peripheral tunnels plan In-Reply-To: <1397709E-7593-44E7-9E53-9E76E47C64F9@att.net> References: <1397709E-7593-44E7-9E53-9E76E47C64F9@att.net> Message-ID: <593121B2-EC9B-4E6B-A2BF-0896E4D29769@onramp113.com> Hooray, Trinity County! I'm glad someone has some sense about this issue. M o i r a B u r k e On Nov 28, 2012, at 11:15 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_4f970806-3907-11e2-86fe-001a4bcf6878.html > County formally opposes peripheral tunnels plan > By Sally Morris The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 6:15 am > Arguing the process is flawed and fails to protect any of Trinity County?s water and power interests, the county Board of Supervisors has gone on record in formal opposition to the proposed Bay-Delta Conservation Plan?s construction of two peripheral tunnels designed to deliver more water from the Sacramento River to Southern California. > In a four-page resolution drafted by a board-appointed ad hoc committee of volunteers and adopted in November, the county opposes the proposed plan that includes construction of the tunnels and requests that all of the county?s elected state and federal representatives actively do the same. > The county?s letter to Gov. Edmund G. Brown Jr., Interior Department Secretary Ken Salazar and California Natural Resources Secretary John Laird also demands status as a coordinating agency with regard to further revision and adoption of the Bay-Delta Conservation Plan. > The board?s resolution details many reasons for its position, calling the current process of revising the Bay Delta Conservation Plan governmentally, economically and scientifically flawed, saying that with no regard for Trinity County, it would allow water users to sell, transfer and convey so-called surplus Public Trust water for private profit. > The board claims county of origin rights as well as in-stream flow guarantees for fisheries set forth in the Trinity River Main Stem Fishery Restoration Record of Decision of 2000. It advocates for a minimum pool in Trinity Lake of 1.25 million acre-feet of water to meet state and federal flow requirements and water quality objectives in the Trinity River during a multi-year drought. > The county?s resolution also defends the county?s first preference rights to power generated by the Trinity River Division of the Central Valley Project, arguing that the draft EIR/EIS will increase total CVP energy use and result in a dramatic increase in the Trinity Public Utilities District?s cost of power. > It notes that the proposed plan would deliver full contract amounts for CVP and state water project to contractors that would necessitate increased imports from the Trinity River watershed. It argues that diverting additional water from the Trinity River would lower reservoir levels and make less water available for beneficial uses within Trinity County including development of community water systems, individual water systems, agriculture and biomass facilities; cold water storage for fishery survival during multiple drought years; and recreation, the county?s largest industry sector for employment. > The resolution indicates that because Trinity Lake only has a 15 percent chance of refilling each year, additional diversions would result in an increased frequency of ?dead pool? occurrences. > It notes that prolonged reductions in reservoir storage will result ?in adverse conditions that could persist for decades, resulting in loss of salmon and steelhead fisheries; loss of critical recreation businesses; loss of hydropower generation; loss of local water supplies; decline in property values; loss of jobs; loss of county population.? > The letter concludes that the proposed revisions and draft EIS/EIR being considered by the governor, state and federal agencies ?all fail to protect the interests of Trinity County as an area and county of origin within the Trinity-Klamath watershed. Until such time as adequate assurances and protections for the public trust, riparian and county of origin rights, as well as protections for Trinity Lake, Trinity River fisheries, temperature compliance, Trinity County First Preference power rights and Trinity County communities are provided to Trinity County, the Board of Supervisors opposes the plan and construction of the peripheral tunnels.? > Members of the ad hoc committee included Supervisors Debra Chapman and Judy Pflueger; former county supervisor Arnold Whitridge and former natural resources planner Tom Stokely; Weaverville attorney Elizabeth Johnson; TPUD General Manager Paul Hauser; and County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler. > Tyler noted the group?s initial draft resolution was nine pages long and the committee vetted many additional issues, ?but then we chose to keep it simple to convey it to the Legislature and give the public several talking points if they also want to contact their representatives.? > She said the committee will present more detailed, scientific arguments in December when it is time for the county to provide that input on the draft EIR/EIS, ?but this gets us a seat at the table and I am very grateful for the expertise that was provided to us by volunteers. The process was cordial, but there are a lot of interests and opinions that generated a lot of discussion.? > Board Chairman Roger Jaegel said he believes it will come down to a legal battle for the county to assert its county of origin water rights over water permit requirements that are an estimated six times greater than what is actually available. > He said the impact of the proposed tunnels ?is the transmission of water in a quantity that was never possible before. Once the tunnels are constructed, the ability is going to be there to transfer much more water south than they?ve had capacity to do before, but every drop that falls in Trinity County is considered our county of origin water right.? > Sup. Judy Morris commented that water ?is a multi-layered, complex issue. We are a county of origin, but there are a lot of other counties opposing these tunnels on other grounds and some have contracts that they consider to be rights when they aren?t.? > Trinity County Agriculture Commissioner Mark Lockhart commended the board?s enthusiasm, but noted ?there is no more complex body of law than California water law. I just want to get on the record that protecting the county?s rights will be no easy task. If you dive in head first, you may hit cement, but I wish you luck.? > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Wed Nov 28 18:34:51 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 18:34:51 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Update Message-ID: <50B65909.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Hi All, The 2012 trapping season at the Willow Creek Weir has come to an end. The weir was pulled from the river on November 16, just before a peak flow of over 5,000 cfs arrived to the site. Such a flow could have damaged or caused complete loss of the weir. Please see the attachment for the final Willow Creek Weir trapping update for the 2012 season and a summary that updates the Trinity River Hatchery (TRH) up to Jweek 44 (Oct. 29- Nov. 4). We will provide further updates for the TRH as they become available. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRP_trapping_summary JWeek 46.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 83968 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Dec 1 14:31:33 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 14:31:33 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Record Searchlight Editorial: Steal north state's water? There are subtler methods Message-ID: http://www.redding.com/news/2012/dec/01/editorial-steal-north-states-water-there-are/ Editorial: Steal north state's water? There are subtler methods Posted December 1, 2012 at midnight Steal the north state's water? Thirsty Southern Californians might just purchase it. Unfortunately, the result might not be so different. In a fascinating report released Thursday on how to promote markets to help solve California's perennial and growing water scarcity, the Public Policy Institute of California encouraged a number of measures to streamline the purchase and sale of water among users. The basic concept behind "California's Water Market, By the Numbers" is sensible. Just as prices help balance supply and demand of other goods ? from garden tools to golden rings ? buying and selling water on a more open market would help ensure that the most valuable uses will meet their needs. Markets would favor high-value crops, cities and industry while phasing out marginal crops or land that doesn't justify the cost of the water. It is Economics 101, and some water trading already happens in California, especially in drought years. Why isn't there more? Well, here's the PPIC report's top suggestion: "Address infrastructure weaknesses in the Delta, which have already limited the market's ability to furnish dry-year water supplies, and which have begun to limit the availability of wet-year water supplies to replenish groundwater banks." "Address infrastructure weaknesses in the Delta" ? that is what Gov. Jerry Brown is doing with his push to build a pair of giant tunnels to divert Sacramento River water around the Delta, with its collapsing fisheries and crumbling levees, and send that water to points south. The peripheral tunnels are, rightly, feared as a southern play for northern water. But if they're built, the pressure on northern supplies might not come from court orders or political squeezes. The right price can coax water rights from willing sellers ? from landowners who might net a better income selling water than from the hard and risky work of raising crops. And while it'd be hard to criticize them individually, the results ? if repeated at a large scale ? could be the widespread fallowing of land and erosion of the north state's farm economy. It's conceivable that, even as our rivers flow full, their water could be tied up elsewhere, leaving us effectively as dry as the desert cities that face building moratoriums for lack of water hookups. Water markets are a promising tool, but they deserve skepticism. Los Angeles, after all, paid cash money for the Owens Valley's water. We all know how that ended. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Dec 2 11:32:51 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2012 11:32:51 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Scientific American: Megastorms Could Drown Massive Portions of California Message-ID: <10451F1F-7213-4819-999F-5EE5124634A7@att.net> Quite an interesting story. It puts a new light on what might be a 200 year storm event. Megastorms Could Drown Massive Portions of California http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=megastorms-could-down-massive-portions-of-california -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From truman at jeffnet.org Sun Dec 2 14:42:37 2012 From: truman at jeffnet.org (Patrick Truman) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2012 14:42:37 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Scientific American: Megastorms Could Drown Massive Portions of California In-Reply-To: <10451F1F-7213-4819-999F-5EE5124634A7@att.net> References: <10451F1F-7213-4819-999F-5EE5124634A7@att.net> Message-ID: those in denial with tin-foil hats and members of the flat-earth society are just not going to believe this one... From: Tom Stokely Sent: Sunday, December 02, 2012 11:32 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Scientific American: Megastorms Could Drown MassivePortions of California Quite an interesting story. It puts a new light on what might be a 200 year storm event. Megastorms Could Drown Massive Portions of California http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=megastorms-could-down-massive-portions-of-california -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2793 / Virus Database: 2634/5932 - Release Date: 12/02/12 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ema.berol at yahoo.com Sun Dec 2 21:22:15 2012 From: ema.berol at yahoo.com (Emilia Berol) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2012 21:22:15 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: logs in river References: <51352E2C-495E-416B-BEBE-15D910703192@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5A0282E9-7A7C-49AA-BC1C-EAC10DE730C7@yahoo.com> Watching the Trinity from our spot between Camp Kimtu and the mouth of Willow Creek, I am amazed not only by the volume and velocity of the river today, but by the amount of logs and debris coming down the river ... I haven't seen this many logs in the river since the 70's.... maybe not even then. It has been a constant stream of all sizes of debris, all day. They look like schools of sharks and sea serpents floating down the currents. Neighbors sitting out on benches today say it's been like watching a parade. Since there isn't much logging going on in the basin below the dam these days, as far as I know, I can't help but wonder where its all coming from? Could some of this be from blowouts from TRRP projects? a fair amount of the larger logs have straight cuts on at least one side, sometimes both sides. And I am wondering if some of it is coming from the South Fork? Emelia Berol TAMWG member 120 Patterson Dr. Willow Creek, Ca. 95573 707-407-6814 Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: > From: Emelia Berol > Date: December 2, 2012, 5:22:38 PM PST > To: ema.berol at yahoo.com > Subject: logs in river > > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: photo.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 229188 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Dec 2 22:35:11 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2012 22:35:11 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Stockton Record: DELTA PLAN TO GET COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS Message-ID: <55F741A3-7EDD-4347-A149-79E04B983DC0@att.net> http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20121201/A_NEWS/212010329 News DELTA PLAN TO GET COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS By Scott Smith December 01, 2012 Record Staff Writer State water officials announced this week that they intend to undertake a cost-benefit study of a controversial, multibillion-dollar plan to transport water from Sierra Nevada snowmelt around the Delta and send it south. This appears to be an about-face for state officials, who have long opposed the study. A spokesman for California's Natural Resources Agency on Friday downplayed the shifting position as an effort to be responsive to the project's critics. "I wish I could say this is a huge step," agency spokesman Richard Stapler said. "This is a step in the process." In January, the state expects to lay out the scope of the analysis, which might be completed at the earliest in the spring. Gov. Jerry Brown backs the proposed $14 billion project - called the Bay Delta Conservation Plan - which would siphon water past the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and down to farmers in the San Joaquin Valley and Southern California residents. Communities that abut the Delta, such as Stockton, have staunchly opposed the project, fearing that less water coming into the estuary would cause a backwash of ocean saltwater, destroying rich farmland. These Delta advocates have pushed - so far with no success - for a full analysis of the social, environmental and financial costs of the project. Rep. John Garamendi, D-Walnut Grove, in October proposed a bill in Congress to force the study after a similar bill by state Assemblyman Bill Berryhill, R-Stockton, failed to pass earlier this year. Jerry Meral, deputy secretary for the state's Natural Resources Agency, announced the cost-benefit analysis in a finance committee meeting Thursday. David Sunding, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, will lead the study. University of the Pacific economist Jeff Michael said he was cautiously optimistic that the state would properly execute it. A cost-benefit analysis such as this often produces the result the authors desire, he said. "They gave an indication that they were very open and interested in feedback to make sure they covered everything," Michael said of state officials. "It's a reversal for an agency denying they need to do this for a long time." The Delta estuary supports dozens of species inland, and the ecosystem extends to fisheries in the Pacific Ocean, said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Stockton-based Restore the Delta and an outspoke critic of the proposed water conveyances. Responding to comments from the Natural Resources Agency spokesman Stapler, Barrigan-Parrilla said she feared that officials were not committed to a thorough analysis. "That indicates they are not planning on doing it fully and adequately," she said. "They're not committed to do an analysis with the deep thinking and science it deserves." Contact reporter Scott Smith at (209) 546-8296 or ssmith at recordnet.com. Visit his blog at recordnet.com/smithblog. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Dec 3 11:44:52 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 11:44:52 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Chico Enterprise-Record: Fish lost and found among talks at AquAlliance conference References: <50BCCBC1.6040109@aqualliance.net> Message-ID: <0CF5D314-7A31-4988-AF8A-B36C53A3EB57@att.net> Here is my comment on this article: Good article on a wonderful conference. I must not have been clear in my remarks. I had meant to say that the "paper water" in Central Valley Project (CVP) water contracts and Trinity River water permits held by the Bureau of Reclamation should be eliminated. There is much more water promised than can possibly be delivered. The Bureau's permits for the Trinity River contain a minimum instream flow of 120,500 acre-feet per year, but the fishery flows required under the 2000 Trinity River Record of Decision are 594,500 AF. The difference of 474,000 AF of water that is promised to both fish and CVP water contractors is the "paper water" that should be eliminated in Reclamation's water rights and contracts. There is still some water surplus to the needs of the Trinity River that could be delivered to water contractors. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org http://www.chicoer.com/news/ci_22113587/fish-lost-and-found-among-talks-at-aqualliance Fish lost and found among talks at AquAlliance conference By HEATHER HACKING-Staff Writer Posted: 12/03/2012 12:03:35 AM PST CHICO ? While much of the discussion at AquAlliance's water conference Thursday and Friday was about major waterways and big-picture fish concerns, it was the lesser-known places for fish and critters that Paul Maslin was asked to explore. In recent year Maslin has worked with the Big Chico Creek Ecological Reserve, but in the 1990s he was a professor at Chico State University and studied seasonal streams. It was 1994 when the winter-run salmon was listed as endangered, and salmon suspected to be winter-run were spotted in Mud Creek. Maslin reported the findings to the Department of Fish and Game and began a research project with help from four students. The conclusion was that wildlife happens, even in a place thought to be just a ditch. The group looked at creeks, many which seasonally ran dry, in 33 tributaries leading to the Sacramento River. Many were considered drainage canals by local property owners. Over four years, the study found fish in such waterways as far as 12 kilometers (about 71?2 miles) from the river. The numbers were "trivial" compared to the number of fish on the river, but the results also indicated the fish were fatter when compared to fish in other waterways, Maslin said. DNA samples also confirmed they were winter-run fish. Maslin said his group documented about two dozen fish species, and more than 90 percent of them were native. What was also fascinating were the species of chorus frogs, Western toads and spadefoot toads that reproduced in these areas. Insects were also found to be "specialists" of perennial streams, creatures that have a short lifecycles and can snap back after dry waterways are refilled. "Organisms find a way of using available habitat by having a lifecycle with resting eggs or being migratory," he explained. Looking back Other very timely topics were explored at the conference, which had about 75 attendees Thursday at Sierra Nevada Brewing Co.'s Big Room. Some of the speakers talked about historic bad decisions along waterways that contributed to problems with fish and the environment today. Felix Smith had a career of 35 years as a Fish and Wildlife biologist and was involved with public trust issues long before major decisions on Mono Lake. The public trust doctrine is the source of many lawsuits, and includes litigation to protect species and resources for the public. Smith also talked about decisions made in the 1950s to divert water from the San Joaquin River. "We got a memo that Fish and Wildlife Service could not protest for the needs of salmon on the San Joaquin River because all of the water was necessary for ag," Smith said. Half a century later, billions of dollars are proposed to reintroduce salmon and habitat along that waterway. Smith went on to describe what he considers other public trust violations he witnessed during this career, and said there are no "statute of limitations" for filing suits for past violations. He now advocates corrections to past damage to wildlife, proof that corrections are working, and continued monitoring. Tom Stokely, of California Water Impact Network, talked about a "trail of broken promises" on the Trinity River. In the 1960s water from the Trinity River was diverted to the Sacramento River, and at that time local county leaders were promised that local demands would be met and fish would not be harmed, Stokely said. The Whiskeytown Lake dedication included a visit by President John F. Kennedy. The dam was lauded for preventing the waste of water by letting water run to the sea, Stokely said. Almost immediately after dams on the Trinity River were built, sediment filled pools, and temperatures became harmful to fish, he continued. Work began in the early 1970s to talk about increased water flows, but then the state experienced severe drought and the topic was stalled, he said. Lawsuits and laws followed for decades, and in 2000, with a lot of effort by the Hoopa Valley Tribe, it looked like things were on the road for improvement, he said. But currently biological opinions have been going back and forth. What needs to happen, Stokely said, is for water deliveries that include water from the Trinity to be eliminated. Also, storage in the Trinity system needs to be set at a point that can withstand a drought, or fish will die, he said. The topics were part of a discussion on how to move forward on these issues in the future. Staff writer Heather Hacking can be reached at 896-7758, hhacking at chicoer.com and followed on Twitter @HeatherHacking. http://www.chicoer.com/news/ci_22113587/fish-lost-and-found-among-talks-at-aqualliance -- Barbara Vlamis Executive Director AquAlliance P.O. Box 4024 Chico, CA 95927 (530) 895-9420 www.aqualliance.net PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law as confidential communications. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication or other use of a transmission received in error is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, immediately notify us at (530) 895-9420. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From charles_chamberlain at fws.gov Mon Dec 3 13:12:24 2012 From: charles_chamberlain at fws.gov (Chamberlain, Charles) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 13:12:24 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey update for the week of November 26-30 Message-ID: Hi all, See the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office's Fisheries page for the latest in-season update for our mainstem Trinity River spawning survey. http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/ That was a whopper of a storm! We were unable to survey reach 3 (Bucktail River Access to Steelbridge), reach 4 (Steelbridge to Douglas City Campground), or any of the lower river Hawkins Bar to Weitchpec due to high turbid water. Our crews mapped the locations of 292 redds and 3,179 carcasses in the reaches they were able to survey. The figure below is clipped from this week's report and shows how this year's running total from Lewiston Dam to Cedar Flat compares to years previous. [image: Inline image 1] Look for another update next week, Charlie -- Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image.png Type: image/png Size: 68451 bytes Desc: not available URL: From fishonshaw at att.net Mon Dec 3 15:22:50 2012 From: fishonshaw at att.net (Thomas Shaw) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 15:22:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: logs in river In-Reply-To: <5A0282E9-7A7C-49AA-BC1C-EAC10DE730C7@yahoo.com> References: <51352E2C-495E-416B-BEBE-15D910703192@yahoo.com> <5A0282E9-7A7C-49AA-BC1C-EAC10DE730C7@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1354576970.87942.YahooMailRC@web181001.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Nice Emelia!!, During my years working on New River, I saw a freight train of?large woody debris (LWD) blasting down the thalweg, during a particular peak flow event (spring 1992?). One year, the flows and accompanying LWD left only dangling ropes and cables where a 8' rotary screw trap was once stationed.? Huge trees were blasting through every few minutes.? Those trap's pontoons almost rode out the?New River?gorge, but?settled?up-rite, on top of some house sized boulders.? What a ride that must of been.? The screw portion of the trap was totally "screwed."? We had?the parts flown out when the flows subsided.? I remember?LWD?naturally being stored in the New River bank full and floodplain, all the way up?the drainage, and?mobilized during these kind of peak flow events. Many?had chainsawed ends. ?I assume they must settle out somewhere in the plains or ocean below.? Unlike below the dam, the LWD, sediment, etc.?are naturally replaced from the many?plains above.? I would expect that?the SF, New,?NF,?and other large tribs, along with the mainstem Trinity above,?were pumping out the?large amounts LWD that you all?saw.? I seriously doubt any?LWD was being transported below?Lewiston.? Flows remained?flat-lined at 300 cfs.? So, no LWD recruitment from?above or below there, but at least them fish eggs are somewhat safe. BTW, I wish?I could watch?trees going down the river?from my spot, as long as the river stayed below. :) Tom Shaw? Eureka, CA ________________________________ From: Emilia Berol To: Trinity List Sent: Sun, December 2, 2012 10:33:40 PM Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: logs in river Watching the Trinity from our spot between Camp Kimtu and the mouth of Willow Creek, I am amazed not only by the volume and velocity of the river today, but by the amount of logs and debris coming down the river ... ?I haven't seen this many logs in the river since the 70's.... maybe not even then.??It has been a constant stream of all sizes of debris, all day.?They look like schools of sharks and sea serpents floating down the currents. Neighbors sitting out on benches today say it's been?like watching a parade.? Since there isn't much logging going on in the basin below the dam these days, as far as I know,? I can't help but wonder where its all coming from? ?Could some of this be from blowouts from TRRP projects? a?fair amount of the larger logs have straight cuts on at least one side, sometimes both sides.? And I am wondering if some of it is coming from the South Fork?? Emelia Berol TAMWG member 120 Patterson Dr. Willow Creek, Ca. 95573 707-407-6814 Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: From: Emelia Berol >Date: December 2, 2012, 5:22:38 PM PST >To: ema.berol at yahoo.com >Subject: logs in river > > > > > > >Sent from my iPhone -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: photo.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 229188 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Dec 3 15:49:19 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 15:49:19 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Press release for Sec. Vilsack visit to Trinity County References: <50BD29C1.3080207@tcrcd.net> Message-ID: <71F6593D-1654-4D66-B5F0-340189852C16@att.net> > From: "Szuch, Nicholas E -FS" > Date: December 3, 2012 1:50:07 PM PST > To: "jimf at tcoek12.org" > Subject: Press release for Sec. Vilsack visit to Trinity County -PLEASE DISTRIBUTE AS WIDELY AS POSSIBLE > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 18721 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 18721 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Press Release .docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 34044 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bob.morris at wildblue.net Tue Dec 4 08:45:15 2012 From: bob.morris at wildblue.net (Bob Morris) Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 08:45:15 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: logs in river In-Reply-To: <5A0282E9-7A7C-49AA-BC1C-EAC10DE730C7@yahoo.com> References: <51352E2C-495E-416B-BEBE-15D910703192@yahoo.com> <5A0282E9-7A7C-49AA-BC1C-EAC10DE730C7@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <50BE289B.8010709@wildblue.net> I couldn't help but respond to Emelia's comment below, "Since there isn't much logging going on in the basin below the dam these days, as far as I know".........While it's true the Feds are relatively inactive, Sierra Pacific Industries is relentlessly clear cutting in the Rush Creek, Big Browns Creek, Little Browns Creek, Indian Creek, Readings Creek, Weaver Creek, etc., drainages (as well as the upper South Fork). An over-flight of the area is truly an eye opener. Bob Morris On 12/2/2012 9:22 PM, Emilia Berol wrote: > Watching the Trinity from our spot between Camp Kimtu and the mouth of > Willow Creek, I am amazed not only by the volume and velocity of the > river today, but by the amount of logs and debris coming down the > river ... I haven't seen this many logs in the river since the > 70's.... maybe not even then. It has been a constant stream of all > sizes of debris, all day. They look like schools of sharks and sea > serpents floating down the currents. Neighbors sitting out on benches > today say it's been like watching a parade. > > Since there isn't much logging going on in the basin below the dam > these days, as far as I know, > I can't help but wonder where its all coming from? Could some of this > be from blowouts from TRRP projects? a fair amount of the larger logs > have straight cuts on at least one side, sometimes both sides. > And I am wondering if some of it is coming from the South Fork? > > Emelia Berol > TAMWG member > 120 Patterson Dr. > Willow Creek, Ca. > 95573 > 707-407-6814 > > Sent from my iPad > > Begin forwarded message: > >> *From:* Emelia Berol > >> *Date:* December 2, 2012, 5:22:38 PM PST >> *To:* ema.berol at yahoo.com >> *Subject:* *logs in river* >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone > > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 229188 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ema.berol at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 09:47:55 2012 From: ema.berol at yahoo.com (Emilia Berol) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 09:47:55 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: logs in river In-Reply-To: <50BE289B.8010709@wildblue.net> References: <51352E2C-495E-416B-BEBE-15D910703192@yahoo.com> <5A0282E9-7A7C-49AA-BC1C-EAC10DE730C7@yahoo.com> <50BE289B.8010709@wildblue.net> Message-ID: Thank you for this response, Bob. I wish that if the folks at SPI are to continue with their relentless assaults on our watersheds, that they would be open to learning a new approach, & not be as heavy handed as they generally are. Are any of the agencies involved with the restoration of the Trinity River --TRRP, RCD, others-- having serious conversation with SPI about what they doing? What kind of impacts are being shown ? who is monitoring ? I appreciate the responses I received from numerous people on my comment. Let's keep talking, there is much to be learned from current weather events. Emelia Sent from my iPad On Dec 4, 2012, at 8:45 AM, Bob Morris wrote: > I couldn't help but respond to Emelia's comment below, "Since there isn't much logging going on in the basin below the dam these days, as far as I know".........While it's true the Feds are relatively inactive, Sierra Pacific Industries is relentlessly clear cutting in the Rush Creek, Big Browns Creek, Little Browns Creek, Indian Creek, Readings Creek, Weaver Creek, etc., drainages (as well as the upper South Fork). An over-flight of the area is truly an eye opener. Bob Morris On 12/2/2012 9:22 PM, Emilia Berol wrote: >> Watching the Trinity from our spot between Camp Kimtu and the mouth of Willow Creek, I am amazed not only by the volume and velocity of the river today, but by the amount of logs and debris coming down the river ... I haven't seen this many logs in the river since the 70's.... maybe not even then. It has been a constant stream of all sizes of debris, all day. They look like schools of sharks and sea serpents floating down the currents. Neighbors sitting out on benches today say it's been like watching a parade. >> >> Since there isn't much logging going on in the basin below the dam these days, as far as I know, >> I can't help but wonder where its all coming from? Could some of this be from blowouts from TRRP projects? a fair amount of the larger logs have straight cuts on at least one side, sometimes both sides. >> And I am wondering if some of it is coming from the South Fork? >> >> Emelia Berol >> TAMWG member >> 120 Patterson Dr. >> Willow Creek, Ca. >> 95573 >> 707-407-6814 >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >>> From: Emelia Berol >>> Date: December 2, 2012, 5:22:38 PM PST >>> To: ema.berol at yahoo.com >>> Subject: logs in river >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> env-trinity mailing list >> env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us >> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Dec 4 10:02:30 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 10:02:30 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] note to subscribers on river log discussion Message-ID: <83C7AA42-00C4-4334-B46F-9DABDE3DD210@att.net> Env-Trinity subscribers, If you wish to continue the dialog about logs in the river, please do so without including the original photo sent by Emelia Berol. If you submit a response with the photo, it comes to me as list manager for approval because it is an oversized file. In order to minimize excessively large messages, I will reject your message if it includes the photo. Tom Stokely Env-trinity list manager Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org From ema.berol at yahoo.com Tue Dec 4 10:37:52 2012 From: ema.berol at yahoo.com (Emilia Berol) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 10:37:52 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] fish eggs In-Reply-To: <1354576970.87942.YahooMailRC@web181001.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <51352E2C-495E-416B-BEBE-15D910703192@yahoo.com> <5A0282E9-7A7C-49AA-BC1C-EAC10DE730C7@yahoo.com> <1354576970.87942.YahooMailRC@web181001.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5E03CD47-7D05-4A6B-86EB-AD3985A8ADD6@yahoo.com> Thomas, Thanks for this informative response. Makes sense there is much less LWD recruitment from upper reaches of the watershed, and hopefully the fresh eggs from the big run this fall have survived the wild flows. We were surprised to find numerous redds along our stretch of river near Willow Creek, and observed a dipper one afternoon before the main storm moved in, munching what we are pretty sure were fish eggs. Turns out that is a favored diet with dippers. Emelia Sent from my iPad On Dec 3, 2012, at 3:22 PM, Thomas Shaw wrote: > Nice Emelia!!, > > During my years working on New River, I saw a freight train of large woody debris (LWD) blasting down the thalweg, during a particular peak flow event (spring 1992?). One year, the flows and accompanying LWD left only dangling ropes and cables where a 8' rotary screw trap was once stationed. Huge trees were blasting through every few minutes. Those trap's pontoons almost rode out the New River gorge, but settled up-rite, on top of some house sized boulders. What a ride that must of been. The screw portion of the trap was totally "screwed." We had the parts flown out when the flows subsided. > > I remember LWD naturally being stored in the New River bank full and floodplain, all the way up the drainage, and mobilized during these kind of peak flow events. Many had chainsawed ends. I assume they must settle out somewhere in the plains or ocean below. Unlike below the dam, the LWD, sediment, etc. are naturally replaced from the many plains above. I would expect that the SF, New, NF, and other large tribs, along with the mainstem Trinity above, were pumping out the large amounts LWD that you all saw. > > I seriously doubt any LWD was being transported below Lewiston. Flows remained flat-lined at 300 cfs. So, no LWD recruitment from above or below there, but at least them fish eggs are somewhat safe. > > BTW, I wish I could watch trees going down the river from my spot, as long as the river stayed below. :) > > Tom Shaw > Eureka, CA > From: Emilia Berol > To: Trinity List > Sent: Sun, December 2, 2012 10:33:40 PM > Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: logs in river > > Watching the Trinity from our spot between Camp Kimtu and the mouth of Willow Creek, I am amazed not only by the volume and velocity of the river today, but by the amount of logs and debris coming down the river ... I haven't seen this many logs in the river since the 70's.... maybe not even then. It has been a constant stream of all sizes of debris, all day. They look like schools of sharks and sea serpents floating down the currents. Neighbors sitting out on benches today say it's been like watching a parade. > > Since there isn't much logging going on in the basin below the dam these days, as far as I know, > I can't help but wonder where its all coming from? Could some of this be from blowouts from TRRP projects? a fair amount of the larger logs have straight cuts on at least one side, sometimes both sides. > And I am wondering if some of it is coming from the South Fork? > > Emelia Berol > TAMWG member > 120 Patterson Dr. > Willow Creek, Ca. > 95573 > 707-407-6814 > > Sent from my iPad > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: Emelia Berol >> Date: December 2, 2012, 5:22:38 PM PST >> To: ema.berol at yahoo.com >> Subject: logs in river >> >> >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Dec 4 10:55:45 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 10:55:45 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Chico ER- Be skeptical of water promises Message-ID: http://www.chicoer.com/editorials/ci_22119363/editorial-be-skeptical-water-promises Editorial: Be skeptical of water promises Chico Enterprise-Record Chico Enterprise-Record Posted: Chicoer.com Our view: A conference last week in Chico served as a reminder that if an area loses its water rights, it loses much more than that. If history has taught us anything about water in California, it's that everybody should be extremely skeptical when somebody who wants to take your water says, "Don't worry." That point was driven home again last week in Chico at a two-day water conference hosted by AquAlliance. Water managers and biologists spoke about promises made and promises broken. Despite assurances that fisheries and river ecosystems would not be harmed, stories about the health of the Trinity River, Mono Lake, San Joaquin River and more prove otherwise. Those examples are important for us in the north state to remember. After all, we have water. Most of the state does not. People on the outside see water flowing down the river and see dollar signs. They hear about our massive underground aquifer and think of it as water going to waste. State and federal water managers trying to craft a delta conservation plan or trying to compensate for water lost through court cases would like to tap into our water. They say, of course, that the north state would not be harmed, that fish and soils would not suffer in the least. That is, of course, what they said about the Owens Valley and other more recent examples, such as the Trinity River. We should be careful about not falling for the same promises. Imagine a north state with significantly less water. It would cut into agriculture production, which is a driving force in our economy. Green rice fields and almond orchards could become fallow dirt. Less water also would mean fewer visitors ? and ecotourism is a growing force in our economy, whether it's canoeing and kayaking, salmon fishing, birdwatching or people visiting farms and wineries. The natural beauty of the north state is what draws many people to settle here. Shipping more water south could detract from the unique natural setting. And don't try to convince us that could never happen. We've seen it too often ? and people spend years trying to pick up the pieces. Tom Stokely, for example, has fought for the Trinity River watershed for decades. He spoke at last week's conference about his long fight. The federal government decided in the 1960s that it would ship a good portion of the Trinity River's flow east, over mountains and into the Sacramento Valley through a series of tunnels and reservoirs rather than let all of that water flow into the ocean north of Eureka. That brought more water to "our" river (so more could be sent to San Joaquin Valley farmers) but nearly killed "their" river. Because of the efforts of North Coast Indian tribes and people like Stokely, some water has been restored to the Trinity. The river's legendary salmon and steelhead runs have made a comeback. There is, however, a long way to go. They would like to see all water stay in the Trinity River watershed. It's a lifelong fight. It's worth remembering that people in Trinity County, or Mono County or along the San Joaquin River corridor didn't have much say in the matter. The government just said, "This is what we're doing." We all need to be vigilant if we hear something similar about our water. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Dec 5 07:57:24 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 07:57:24 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal: Agriculture Secretary Vilsack to visit, discuss Trinity forests Message-ID: <7D9647D9-B068-4013-BB8A-2D682CE0BE3F@att.net> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_5ccdb20c-3e95-11e2-8c56-001a4bcf6878.html Agriculture Secretary Vilsack to visit, discuss Trinity forests Story Comments ShareShare Print Create a hardcopy of this page Font Size: Default font size Larger font size Tom Vilsack Posted: Wednesday, December 5, 2012 6:15 am Trinity Journal staff | 0 comments U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, whose job includes oversight of the U.S. Forest Service, will hold a Town Hall meeting to discuss forestry and U.S. Forest Service policies and procedures on Monday, Dec. 10, at the Veterans Memorial Hall, 101 Memorial Drive, Weaverville. The meeting will start at 5:30 p.m., attendees are asked to arrive by 5 p.m. Because space is limited the USDA is asking attendees to RSVP by close of business Thursday, Dec. 6, by e-mailing neszuch at fs.fed.us or calling Nick Szuch at the Forest Service, 623-1794. Vilsack, a former two-term governor of Iowa, state senator and city mayor, was appointed in 2008 by then President-elect Obama to serve in the president?s cabinet as leader of the Department of Agriculture. As chair of the first-ever White House Rural Council, Vilsack has visited dozens of communities throughout the nation to engage residents in a dialogue aimed at building more vibrant rural economies. He was invited to Trinity County by close friend and former Weaverville resident Walter Robb who is now co-CEO of Whole Foods Market, but has maintained ties to this area where he began his career in 1977 with the opening of Mountain Marketplace. ?He?s a good friend and I asked him to come because there is no stronger advocate for rural America in the president?s cabinet. He is close to the president and he oversees the Forest Service which is arguably the most important economic force in Trinity County,? Robb said, citing the federal agency?s responsibility for managing over three-quarters of the land in the county. Of the upcoming town hall meeting in Weaverville, Robb said the goal is to have a constructive, energetic community discussion with give and take dialogue on important issues affecting the county?s economic future. During Vilsack?s tenure as Secretary of Agriculture, the USDA has focused on promoting job growth and higher incomes in rural communities through expanded production of renewable energy, outdoor recreational opportunities and development of local and regional food supplies. The agency has also invested in rural housing, rural infrastructure like fire and police stations, libraries, health clinics and rural access to broadband. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 50bed004267b0.preview-300.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 27310 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Dec 6 10:06:20 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 10:06:20 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] McClatchy News: If feds flood your land, Supreme Court says, they may owe you Message-ID: <06088BE8-A14E-452F-90D2-32A99430C3B2@att.net> This decision may also have ramifications for landowners along the Trinity River. Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org ***************************************************************************** http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/12/04/176321/if-feds-flood-your-land-supreme.html Posted on Tue, Dec. 04, 2012 If feds flood your land, Supreme Court says, they may owe you By Michael Doyle | McClatchy Newspapers last updated: December 04, 2012 04:28:04 PM WASHINGTON -- ] Private property owners might deserve payment when public agencies temporarily flood their land, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday in a case closely watched by farmers around the country, and in California in particular. Pleasing property-rights advocates, the court emphatically declared in an 8-0 decision that even temporary flooding can amount to a ?taking? for which the Constitution requires compensation. The ruling in a case that arose from Arkansas will reach everywhere that government actions affect waterways. ?Because government-induced flooding can constitute a taking of property, and because a taking need not be permanent to be compensable . . . government-induced flooding of limited duration may be compensable,? Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote. A stalwart of the court?s liberal wing, Ginsburg nonetheless led conservatives as well in rejecting the Obama administration?s insistence that temporary floods should be exempt from the Fifth Amendment?s requirement that private property won?t ?be taken for public use, without just compensation.? The 19-page ruling means that the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission might get paid eventually for the Black River flooding damage that resulted when the Army Corps of Engineers released water from the Clearwater Dam in neighboring Missouri. From 1993 to 2000, the flooding wiped out more than 18 million board feet of timber in a wildlife management area about 115 miles from the dam. The ruling also empowers more distant property owners such as the Wolfsen Land and Cattle Co., located along the San Joaquin River in California. Wolfsen joined other California farmers in filing a friend-of-the-court brief supporting the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission. ?Hooray,? Wolfsen?s Washington-based attorney Roger Marzulla declared after the court?s decision. ?I think it?s directly on point for anyone who owns riparian property, whether it?s along the San Joaquin River or along the river in Arkansas.? Like their Arkansas counterparts, the California farmers say their land faces inundation because of government actions. Under a 2009 federal law, state and federal officials are trying to restore water flows and a viable salmon population to the San Joaquin River. Last week, the first salmon were put back in the river. In a lawsuit, Wolfsen and other farming companies seek compensation for the flooding of nearly 13,000 acres in western Fresno and Merced counties. The farmers and the Justice Department are now in confidential settlement talks, Marzulla said. ?It certainly gives us some reassurance,? Marzulla said of the potential impact of the new court ruling. The Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative advocacy group based in Sacramento, Calif., that filed its own amicus brief supporting Arkansas, praised the court?s decision as ?an important victory for the rights of all property owners.? The Arkansas dispute arose after farmers persuaded the Army Corps of Engineers to slow the usual water releases from the Clearwater Dam in order to lengthen their fall harvest season. As a result, more water accumulated behind the dam. Longer-term flooding resulted when this accumulated water was let loose the next spring and summer. Roots weakened, trees died and unwanted plant species invaded. One federal court previously had calculated that the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission was owed $5.7 million for the flooding damage and associated costs. A lower court now will revisit the case, taking into account questions such as the property owners? expectations and past experiences with flooding ?Today?s modest decision augurs no deluge of takings liability,? Ginsburg predicted. The decision issued Tuesday was only the second full ruling from the high court since the 2012 term began in October. More politically volatile cases, including a challenge to the University of Texas affirmative action program, might take several months to resolve. On Friday, the justices will meet again in private to consider gay marriage cases, including a challenge to the federal Defense of Marriage Act and an appeal of a lower court?s decision striking down California?s Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriages. The court might announce its decision on whether it will hear the gay marriage cases as early as Friday, or it might wait until Monday. Email: mdoyle at mcclatchydc.com; Twitter: @MichaelDoyle10 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Dec 6 15:03:46 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 15:03:46 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] High Country News- Leonard Masten: Salmon must have water in the Klamath and Trinity rivers Message-ID: <557FB018-A8DC-4660-8C66-A0924A977A01@att.net> See http://www.hcn.org/wotr/salmon-must-have-water-in-the-klamath-and-trinity-rivers From tstokely at att.net Thu Dec 6 22:05:32 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 22:05:32 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Maven's notes on recent BDCP meeting Message-ID: <255BDA21-0B34-4EC3-ACB6-B26EC34612D2@att.net> If you are interested in the details of what's going on with the Peripheral Tunnels Project (BDCP), check out these notes from Maven at: http://www.mavensmanor.com/blog/2012/12/05/mavens-minutes-a-glimpse-of-the-bdcps-operating-criteria-a-cost-benefit-analysis-and-stakeholder-participation/ Maven did a great job taking notes and posting them on her "Maven's Manor" website. There are also links to the webcast, the PowerPoint and various blogs and news articles on BDCP. There appear to be some disagreements about trust in regard to the Peripheral Tunnels. Below is a graphic showing Bureau of Reclamation and Department of Water Resources compliance (lack thereof) with Delta agricultural salinity water quality objectives. This is trust? Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PastedGraphic-1.tiff Type: image/tiff Size: 925644 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- Source: Stroshane/C-WIN August 2012 From truman at jeffnet.org Fri Dec 7 09:23:33 2012 From: truman at jeffnet.org (Patrick Truman) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 09:23:33 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Maven's notes on recent BDCP meeting In-Reply-To: <255BDA21-0B34-4EC3-ACB6-B26EC34612D2@att.net> References: <255BDA21-0B34-4EC3-ACB6-B26EC34612D2@att.net> Message-ID: thanks Tom and Maven, for everything that you do. we are not falling for the "not one bucket" crap that snookered those in the mid 1950's our grandparents went west to grow up with the country, saw the Pacific Ocean, and said "ah, this is the place" and we then built this culture from Seattle to San Diego... -----Original Message----- From: Tom Stokely Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 10:05 PM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Maven's notes on recent BDCP meeting If you are interested in the details of what's going on with the Peripheral Tunnels Project (BDCP), check out these notes from Maven at: http://www.mavensmanor.com/blog/2012/12/05/mavens-minutes-a-glimpse-of-the-bdcps-operating-criteria-a-cost-benefit-analysis-and-stakeholder-participation/ Maven did a great job taking notes and posting them on her "Maven's Manor" website. There are also links to the webcast, the PowerPoint and various blogs and news articles on BDCP. There appear to be some disagreements about trust in regard to the Peripheral Tunnels. Below is a graphic showing Bureau of Reclamation and Department of Water Resources compliance (lack thereof) with Delta agricultural salinity water quality objectives. This is trust? Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org Source: Stroshane/C-WIN August 2012 _______________________________________________ env-trinity mailing list env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2793 / Virus Database: 2634/5943 - Release Date: 12/07/12 From truman at jeffnet.org Fri Dec 7 12:15:31 2012 From: truman at jeffnet.org (Patrick Truman) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 12:15:31 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: Tribal Water Rights in California: Live Seminar Message-ID: LSI Seminar Email Template From: Law Seminars International Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 11:49 AM To: truman at jeffnet.org Subject: Tribal Water Rights in California: Live Seminar Live Seminar: "Sometimes you just have to be in the same room." Tribal Water Rights in California March 4 & 5, 2013 Cabazon, CA (Morongo Casino Resort & Spa) View the agenda here. Register now! Mr. Truman: Colin Cloud Hampson (Sonosky, Chambers, Sachse, Endreson & Perry, LLP, San Diego) and Stephen V. Quesenberry (Hobbs, Straus, Dean & Walker LLP, Berkeley) co-chair the conference and will join discussions on two important environmental regulatory issues: minimizing impacts on Tribal fishing under the California Marine Life Protection Act and dealing with minimum instream flow requirements for water conservation and fish habitat. Tribal water rights, jurisdiction and cooperation among key state, federal and local government agencies will be essential to the development of effective policies that work for all parties in California. We hope you can be a part of that discussion. Register today to join tribal representatives, government officials, technical experts and experienced practitioners including: a.. Reid Peyton Chambers, partner, Sonosky, Chambers, Sachse, Endreson & Perry, LLP, Wahsington, DC b.. Alex Cleghorn, Attorney at Law, Oakland, CA c.. Joe Ely, Project Coordinator, Director - Indian Project Development, Stetson Engineers Inc., Mesa, AZ d.. Doug Garcia, Water Rights Specialist - Pacific Region, Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Department of the Interior e.. Paul Hamai, Vice President - Water Resources, Natural Resources Consulting Engineers, Inc., Oakland, CA f.. Karl E. Johnson, partner, Luebben Johnson & Barnhouse LLP, Los Ranchos, NM g.. Mason D. Morisset, Director, Morrisset, Schlosser, Jozwiak & Somerville, Seattle, WA h.. Robert S. Pelcyger, Attorney at Law, Boulder, CO i.. Thomas P. Schlosser, Director, Morisset, Schlosser, Jozwiak & Somerville, Seattle, WA j.. Gerald D. Shoaf, managing partner, Redwine & Sherill, Riverside, CA k.. Stuart L. Somach, shareholder, Somach Simmons & Dunn, Sacramento, CA l.. Mark St. Angelo, Tribal Attorney, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Banning, CA m.. L. William Staudenmaier, partner, Snell & Wilmer L.L.P., Phoenix, AZ n.. Ruth M. Thayer, Program Manager, Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Department of the Interior, Boulder City, NV o.. Jeanne S. Whiteing, Attorney at Law, Boulder, CO p.. William Wood, Greenberg Law Review Fellow, UCLA School of Law, Los Angeles, CA Registration Register here or call us at (206) 567-4490. Intended Audience Attorneys, Tribal, local, state and federal governmental representatives, enviromental professionals, business executives, water users and their representatives Program Chairs Colin Cloud Hampson, Esq. of Sonosky, Chambers, Sachse, Endreson & Perry, LLP, and Stephen V. Quesenberry, Esq. of Hobbs, Straus, Dean & Walker, LLP Available Credits Live credits: Law Seminars International is a State Bar of California approved MCLE provider. This program qualifies for 11.75 California MCLE credits. Upon request, we will apply for, or help you apply for, CLE credits in other states and other types of credits. No longer interested in receiving email announcements? Is this topic not of interest? Or, is just one announcement per program enough? You can safely tell us by replying to this email. You also can give us a quick call at (206) 567-4490 or click here: unsubscribe. For a complete list of future programs, visit our seminar calendar. Thank you for reading this electronic invitation. As part of our Green Conferences Initiative, we are moving away from paper invitations. Please consider the environment before printing. No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2013.0.2793 / Virus Database: 2634/5943 - Release Date: 12/07/12 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Dec 7 15:26:46 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 15:26:46 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Agenda for January 10-11 TAMWG meeting References: Message-ID: From: "Hadley, Elizabeth" Date: December 6, 2012 8:29:21 AM PST To: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Cc: "Schrock, Robin M" , , , , Subject: Agenda for January 10-11 TAMWG meeting TAMWG ? Attached please find the agenda for our January 10-11, 2013 meeting at the Shasta College Trinity Campus in Weaverville. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! Elizabeth W. Hadley Legislative & Regulatory Program Supervisor Redding Electric Utility City of Redding Office (530) 339-7327 Cell (530) 722-7518 ehadley at reupower.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TAMWG Agenda for 1-10-13 Mtg.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 21936 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Dec 7 15:58:51 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2012 15:58:51 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: forwarding 4 appendices from the SAB received today References: Message-ID: <0471B99A-36AC-4B09-91E1-B942635B4165@att.net> In order to avoid overloading all of you with a couple of mb of reports, all 4 appendices have been put on the C-WIN website for viewing/downloading at: http://www.c-win.org/webfm_send/274 Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org Begin forwarded message: From: "Schrock, Robin M" Date: December 7, 2012 3:22:46 PM PST To: Carrie Nichols , David Steinhauser , "Denn, Sandy " , "Ed Duggan" , Elizebeth Hadley , Emelia Berol , Gilbert Saliba , Jeffrey Sutton , 'Joseph McCarthy' , Kelli Gant , Kim Mattson , Liam Gogan , "Finley, Nancy" , Paul Hauser , Richard Lorenz , Tom Stokely , Travis Michel , "Frye, Vina" Subject: forwarding 4 appendices from the SAB received today Dear TAMWG members, The SAB has provided the 4 attached appendices to us in preparation for the Science Symposium, January 7, 2013. Other appendices will follow as we receive them from the SAB. Robin M. Schrock Executive Director Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street Weaverville, CA 96093 TEL: (530) 623-1800 FAX: (530) 623-5944 CELL: (530) 945-7489 www.trrp.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Dec 8 11:30:36 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2012 11:30:36 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Reservoir conditions Message-ID: http://www.aquafornia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/rescond.pdf From charles_chamberlain at fws.gov Mon Dec 10 10:28:24 2012 From: charles_chamberlain at fws.gov (Chamberlain, Charles) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:28:24 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey update for the week of December 3-7 Message-ID: Hi all, See the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office's Fisheries page for the latest in-season update for our mainstem Trinity River spawning survey. http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/ Only reaches 1-4 (Lewiston Dam to Douglas City Campground) were surveyed this week due to high turbid water in the other reaches. Our crews there mapped the locations of 128 redds. The figure below is clipped from this week's report and shows how this year's running total from Lewiston Dam to Cedar Flat compares to years previous. [image: Inline image 1] Tune in again next week, Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image.png Type: image/png Size: 68922 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Dec 10 17:36:52 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 17:36:52 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Extension of Public Comment Period on Draft Feasibility Report for Shasta Lake Water Resources Inves References: <40f8b1b07cc5406ea92b42c72a4a73bb@usbr.gov> Message-ID: <7D00C763-5FA7-48BB-997F-A33A453767F2@att.net> From: "Louis Moore" Date: December 7, 2012 1:29:33 PM PST To: tstokely at att.net Subject: Extension of Public Comment Period on Draft Feasibility Report for Shasta Lake Water Resources Inves Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, Calif. MP-12-206 Media Contact: Pete Lucero, 916-978-5100, plucero at usbr.gov Release On: December 07, 2012 Extension of Public Comment Period on Draft Feasibility Report for Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation SACRAMENTO, Calif. ? The Bureau of Reclamation announced today an extension of the comment period for the Draft Feasibility Report on the Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation to Monday, January 28. The public comment period was originally scheduled to end on Friday, December 28. Reclamation initially released the Draft Feasibility Report in February 2012. Any additional comments from interested individuals, agencies and organizations will be accepted through January 28. All comments received will be considered as we complete the remaining engineering, environmental, economic, and financial studies and related reports. The Draft Feasibility Report is available on Reclamation?s website at www.usbr.gov/mp/slwri/index.html. Written comments can be submitted via email to BOR-MPR-SLWRI at usbr.gov or by mail to the address below: Katrina Chow, Project Manager Bureau of Reclamation 2800 Cottage Way, MP-720 Sacramento, CA 95825-1893 For questions, please contact Katrina Chow at 916-978-5067 or fax your request to 916-978-5094. Please direct all media calls to the Public Affairs Office at 916-978-5100. To request an electronic copy of the draft documents, contact Louis Moore at 916-978-5106 (TTY 916-978-5608) or by email at wmoore at usbr.gov. Copies of the documents may also be viewed at Reclamation?s Regional Library, 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, by calling 916-978-5593. For additional information about the Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation, please visit http://www.usbr.gov/mp/slwri/index.html. # # # Reclamation is the largest wholesale water supplier and the second largest producer of hydroelectric power in the United States, with operations and facilities in the 17 Western States. Its facilities also provide substantial flood control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. Visit our website at http://www.usbr.gov. If you would rather not receive future communications from Bureau of Reclamation, let us know by clicking here. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver Federal Center, Alameda & Kipling Street PO Box 25007, Denver, CO 80225 United States -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Mon Dec 10 17:52:30 2012 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 17:52:30 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Bureau extends public comment period for Shasta Dam raise proposal In-Reply-To: <7D00C763-5FA7-48BB-997F-A33A453767F2@att.net> References: <40f8b1b07cc5406ea92b42c72a4a73bb@usbr.gov> <7D00C763-5FA7-48BB-997F-A33A453767F2@att.net> Message-ID: <9D2028BE-10EB-400F-9B31-C3A06C309283@fishsniffer.com> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/09/1168576/-Bureau-extends- public-comment-period-for-Shasta-Dam-raise-proposal "An 18.5 foot dam raise would damage or flood about 40 of our sacred sites, and permanently submerge our Coming of Age ceremony site," said Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe. "Help our efforts to protecting sacred sites, clean rivers and healthy salmon runs! Tell them you support the protection of Winnemem sacred sites and our freedom of religion!" Photo of Shasta Dam courtesy of Bureau of Reclamation. ? 800_c214-200-10007.jpg original image ( 1280x1600) Bureau extends public comment period for Shasta Dam raise proposal by Dan Bacher The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation announced Friday an extension of the comment period for the Draft Feasibility Report on the "Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation," the controversial plan to raise Shasta Dam to increase the reservoir's capacity, to Monday, January 28. The public comment period was originally scheduled to end on Friday, December 28. "Reclamation initially released the Draft Feasibility Report in February 2012," according to Pete Lucero, Bureau spokesman. "Any additional comments from interested individuals, agencies and organizations will be accepted through January 28. All comments received will be considered as we complete the remaining engineering, environmental, economic, and financial studies and related reports." The raising of Shasta Dam is opposed by the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, fishing organizations, conservation groups and environmental justice advocates for a multitude of reasons. It would flood many of the Tribe's remaining sacred ceremonial sites on the McCloud River that weren't already flooded by Shasta Dam. The dam expansion project, in tandem with the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build to build the peripheral tunnels, would also hasten the extinction of Central Valley salmon, steelhead, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other fish species. The announcement took place just one day after it was revealed that the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) of Southern California will vote December 11 on a proposal including the raising of Shasta Dam as a "state legislative action priority." (http://www.dailykos.com/story/ 2012/12/05/1167557/--MWD-to-vote-on-support-for-legislative-action-to- raise-Shasta-Dam) The MWD staff recommends support for "administrative/legislative actions to remove existing prohibition for state funding to raise Shasta Dam." See page 3 of the MWD document at: http://mwdh2o.granicus.com/ MetaViewer.php?view_id=12&event_id=208&meta_id=66253 "An 18.5 foot dam raise would damage or flood about 40 of our sacred sites, and permanently submerge our Coming of Age ceremony site," said Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe. "Help our efforts to protecting sacred sites, clean rivers and healthy salmon runs! Tell them you support the protection of Winnemem sacred sites and our freedom of religion!" What can you do? First, contact MWD Executive Officer Jeff Kightlinger, (213) 217-6139 and OfficeoftheGeneralManager2 [at] mwdh2o.com, indicating your opposition to the Shasta Dam expansion. Second, send your written comments regarding the Bureau's proposal to raise Shasta Dam via email to BOR-MPR-SLWRI [at] usbr.gov or by mail to the address below. The Draft Feasibility Report is available on Reclamation?s website at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/slwri/index.html. Katrina Chow, Project Manager Bureau of Reclamation 2800 Cottage Way, MP-720 Sacramento, CA 95825-1893 For questions, contact Katrina Chow at 916-978-5067 or fax your request to 916-978-5094. To request an electronic copy of the draft documents, contact Louis Moore at 916-978-5106 (TTY 916-978-5608) or by email at wmoore [at] usbr.gov. Copies of the documents may also be viewed at Reclamation?s Regional Library, 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, by calling 916-978-5593. For additional information about the "Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation," please visit http://www.usbr.gov/mp/slwri/index.html. For more information about the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, go to: http:// www.winnememwintu.us -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_c214-200-10007.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 475857 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Dec 11 12:12:28 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 12:12:28 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Douglas City Public Meeting tonight, 12/11 Message-ID: <6BA08A8B-1169-4105-AD94-DC587941D9AD@att.net> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: DisplayAd TRRP DC_LRZMtg11Dec2012.docx.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 95792 bytes Desc: not available URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Tue Dec 11 14:24:31 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 14:24:31 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Update Message-ID: <50C741FD.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Seasons Greetings, Please see the attachment for the Trinity River Hatchery (TRH) trapping update for Jweek 45 ( Nov. 5 - Nov. 11). We will provide further updates for the TRH as they become available. Trapping at the Willow Creek weir for the 2012 season ended on Nov. 16. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRP_Hatchery trapping_summary update.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 84480 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From vina_frye at fws.gov Thu Dec 13 13:04:29 2012 From: vina_frye at fws.gov (Frye, Vina) Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 13:04:29 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group Meeting Message-ID: Hi Folks, The working group is scheduled to meet on January 10-11, 2013. The meeting discussion topics are listed below. Best regards, Vina [Federal Register Volume 77, Number 240 (Thursday, December 13, 2012)] [Notices] [Page 74203] >From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [http://www.gpo.gov/] [FR Doc No: 2012-30077] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R8-FHC-2012-N266; FXFR1334088TWG0W4-123-FF08EACT00] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of meeting. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) affords stakeholders the opportunity to give policy, management, and technical input concerning Trinity River (California) restoration efforts to the Trinity Management Council (TMC). The TMC interprets and recommends policy, coordinates and reviews management actions, and provides organizational budget oversight. This notice announces a TAMWG meeting, which is open to the public. DATES: TAMWG will meet from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Thursday, January 10, 2013, and from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. on Friday, January 11, 2013. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Shasta College Trinity Campus, 30 Arbuckle Court, Weaverville, CA 96093. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meeting Information: Nancy J. Finley, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1655 Heindon Road, Arcata, CA 95521; telephone: (707) 822-7201. Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) Information: Robin Schrock, Executive Director, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street, Weaverville, CA 96093; telephone: (530) 623-1800; email: rschrock at usbr.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), this notice announces a meeting of the TAMWG. The meeting will include discussion of the following topics: Designated Federal Officer (DFO) updates, TMC Chair report, Executive Director's report, TMC Chair report, Budget update, Update from TRRP Workgroups, Phase 1 Review, 2013 Design update, Watershed update, 2012 Temperature Workgroup Products, Gravel presentation study and discussion on 2013 recommendation, and TAMWG's mission statement. Completion of the agenda is dependent on the amount of time each item takes. The meeting could end early if the agenda has been completed. Dated: December 6, 2012. Nancy Finley, Field Supervisor, Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office, Arcata, CA. [FR Doc. 2012-30077 Filed 12-12-12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-55-P Vina Frye U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata FWO 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Telephone: (707) 822-7201 Fax: (707) 822-8411 vina_frye at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jeffconnection at gmail.com Thu Dec 13 14:22:38 2012 From: jeffconnection at gmail.com (Jeff Morris) Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 14:22:38 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Science_Advisory_Board_Presents_Ri?= =?windows-1252?q?ver_Restoration_Findings=3A_January_07_=96_08=2C_?= =?windows-1252?q?2013?= Message-ID: On Monday evening, January 7, the independent Science Advisory Board (SAB) will present seminars about the science behind the review of the Trinity River Restoration Program projects completed through 2011. The review is commonly known as the Phase 1 Review. Starting at 6:00 pm in the conference room at Johnson?s Steakhouse (Trinity Alps Golf Course), the SAB and TRRP invite all members of the public to the presentation of the science behind the much anticipated findings. A facilitated question and answer session will immediately follow the public presentation. The evening session is scheduled to wrap up around 8:00 pm. The following day, Tuesday, January 8, the SAB will present a series of science- based, technical seminars that will delve into a number of specific sectors that relate to the ongoing restoration approaches and efforts. Scientific analysis and processes are the focus on Tuesday. The public is welcome to attend any or all of the presentations, however Tuesday?s topics will be highly focused, and science-based seminars. It is recommended that any member of the public seeking more broad-based dialogue and discussion participate in the event on Monday evening. The seminars on Tuesday will begin at 9:00am. For additional information or questions, please contact TRRP Science Coordinator Ernie Clarke at (530) 623 ? 1800, ernest_clarke at fws.gov. info bulletin from the Trinity County Resource Conservation District www.tcrcd.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From truman at jeffnet.org Fri Dec 14 12:52:59 2012 From: truman at jeffnet.org (Patrick Truman) Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 12:52:59 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?NACD_comments_on_EPA_Section_=C2=A7_319_N?= =?utf-8?q?onpoint_Source_Program_and_Grant_Guidelines_for_States_a?= =?utf-8?q?nd_Territories?= Message-ID: <3A1F4E68D95F4CC1904BBC06BDBDB622@Bertha> Greetings, In comments to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today, President Gene Schmidt stressed that the federal role in water resources management should be one of cooperation. The attached comments are in response to EPA?s most recent draft guidance to states and territories on awarding ? 319 grants under the Clean Water Act (CWA) for implementing Nonpoint Source (NPS) management programs. Thank you, Laura Laura Wood Peterson Director of Government Affairs NACD | 509 Capitol Court, NE, Washington, DC 20002 | P: 202.547.6223 | F: 202.547.6450 | www.nacdnet.org Register today! NACD 2013 Annual Meeting January 27-30 ? San Antonio, TX www.nacdnet.org/events/annualmeeting -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: NACD Comments for Section ? 319 Nonpoint Source Program and Grant Guidelines for States and Territories.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 348170 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Dec 14 14:01:12 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 14:01:12 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Lake as sacrificial workhorse to solve Delta problems Message-ID: <7B87DD84-359D-43B6-81C6-BE4713E3FCC3@att.net> This Restore the Delta blog mentions Trinity Lake in the modeling and development of alternatives to protect Delta species at http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?llr=xp76ilcab&v=001zcvTRfzfKBG2ao4eXoLOZKed9DXNlrx7Sb-reEfJ3wcwcETd42_7dhkU65zTq1Zu8e-8tqI_y05qt4sk4NQCOwwxoPUwEKbZbnhw4XTj3P4%3D You can also view the PowerPoint presentations that mention impacts to Trinity Lake storage at: http://www.essexpartnership.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/BDCP_CS5_Update_NGO-Meeting_11_14_12v3.pdf http://www.essexpartnership.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Summary-of-Fish-Agency-Scenario-Modeling_11_14_12.pdf Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov Fri Dec 14 15:51:26 2012 From: SCANNATA at dfg.ca.gov (Steve Cannata) Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 15:51:26 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Update Message-ID: <50CB4ACF.79A7.00F7.1@dfg.ca.gov> Seasons Greetings, Please see the attachment for the Trinity River Hatchery (TRH) trapping update for Jweek 46 (Nov. 12 - Nov. 18). We will provide further updates for the TRH as they become available. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Game 707-822-4230 scannata at dfg.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRP_Hatchery trapping_summary update JWeek46.xls Type: application/vnd.ms-excel Size: 84992 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: Steve Cannata.vcf URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Dec 17 08:06:51 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 08:06:51 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Siskiyou_Daily_News=3ASupervisors_?= =?windows-1252?q?refer_CDFG_to_DA=92s_office?= Message-ID: <21FA3748-519C-405D-9D98-73A8D45E22DB@att.net> http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20121214/NEWS/121219857/1001/NEWS# By John Bowman Daily News staff writer December 14. 2012 9:35AM Supervisors refer CDFG to DA?s office YREKA ? While representatives of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) were across town Tuesday carrying out the early stages of planning for their flow studies on the Shasta and Scott rivers, the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors were passing a motion to refer the agency to the district attorney?s office for criminal review. Newly appointed County Counsel Brian Morris said the board had received a request from the public to consider treating CDFG?s intention to develop minimum flow recommendations for the two rivers as a criminal act and a potential violation of federal law as ?a conspiracy against rights.? ?The board does not have authority to initiate a criminal prosecution. That is within the discretion of the District Attorney and the United States Attorney for purposes of federal law,? Morris told the board. Outgoing Dist. 1 Supervisor Jim Cook said, ?I?m a biologist ... I just didn?t spend enough time in law school to know whether this is valid or not. But what I would like to do is ask my fellow board members to refer this item to the district attorney for criminal review and let him make those decisions.? Cook said if CDFG is found to be in violation of state or federal law, the board should support criminal prosecution of the agency. Cook made the motion to refer the matter to the district attorney?s office. Dist. 3 Supervisor Michael Kobseff offered a second and the vote passed unanimously. Several county residents offered comments in opposition to the CDFG flow study, repeating the allegations of scientific misconduct they had voiced early in the day at the agency?s workshop at the Holiday Inn Express. Richard Marshall, president of the Siskiyou County Water Users Association, in his comments, suggested the board demand that CDFG and other natural resource agencies engage in formal coordination proceedings for activities that influence local property rights. ?Perhaps an ordinance would be one way to do it,? Marshall said, suggesting that ?Those agencies that have not met with and gotten approval from the board of supervisors should be escorted out of town, so to speak, by the sheriff?s office for this activity.? Dist. 5 Supervisor Marcia Armstrong told CDFG?s Mark Wheetley ? who attended the meeting to provide an update on the flow study planning process ? that she believes the county has superior jurisdiction over local water resources. She explained that when the county asks for ?coordination? with CDFG, that means a formal government-to-government meeting where the county and state agencies make decisions jointly. Armstrong also alleged that the agency?s approach of involving non-landowner stakeholders in a decision process that affects private property rights does not satisfy legal due process requirements. ?This isn?t the forest service where you are dealing with public lands. This is people?s property so due-process has to be very carefully protected here and I don?t see that coming forward in the process that you?ve been going through,? said Armstrong. She made a motion to send a letter to CDFG formally requesting coordination between the two entities on the flow study. Kobseff offered a second to the motion, which passed by a unanimous vote. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From charles_chamberlain at fws.gov Mon Dec 17 08:53:47 2012 From: charles_chamberlain at fws.gov (Chamberlain, Charles) Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 08:53:47 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey update for week December 10-14 Message-ID: Hi all, See the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office's Fisheries page for the latest in-season update for our mainstem Trinity River spawning survey. http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/ Reaches 1-4 (Lewiston Dam to Douglas City Campground) and 6-7 (Round House to Pigeon Point) were surveyed this week. Only 35 redds were mapped as spawning activity in the upper river appears to be wrapping up. The figure below is clipped from this week's report and shows how this year's running total from Lewiston Dam to Cedar Flat compares to years previous. One thing to note: We did not survey reach 8 (Pigeon Point run) this year in an effort to reduce risk to personnel and equipment. I'll work on re-creating the graph below to that it shows previous years minus the Pigeon Point redds for a fairer comparison to our 2012 data. [image: Inline image 1] Crews this week will survey reach 1 and maybe reach 2. Next week's update will likely be our last for this season. Until then, Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WeeklyGraphic_compressed.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 19700 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Dec 19 09:10:13 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 09:10:13 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] BBC News and Environment: Reservoirs can make local flooding worse, says study Message-ID: <52E14333-122F-4320-9247-3889171BF0AD@att.net> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20663875 Reservoirs can make local flooding worse, says study By Matt McGrath Environment correspondent, BBC News Researchers used measurements from several reservoirs, including this one at Puclaro, northern Chile Researchers say that large man-made reservoirs can increase the intensity of rainfall and could affect flood defences. The scientists found that rain patterns around bodies of water in Chile were much higher than in similar areas without them. This "lake effect" could overwhelm flood defences which are often built without taking it into account. The study has been accepted for publication in the journal Hydrology. Stormy edge Previous research in this field has focused on the impact of dams on local climates. There is evidence that standing bodies like reservoirs and lakes can alter rain patterns by increasing the amount of water that evaporates. Continue reading the main story ? Start Quote "The bigger the water body, the greater the effect? Dr Pablo Garcia-Chevesich University of Arizona Some experts believe that you also get circulating air patterns in the atmosphere above the boundary between the water and the land and this can initiate thunderstorms and showers. The impact can be significant. One study showed that extreme precipitation increased by 4% per year after dams were built. In this latest work, researchers from the University of Talca, Chile, examined data from 50 rain gauges near reservoirs in different parts of the country. Chile has a large variety of climates ranging from areas that get 0mm of annual rainfall to places that get more that 4,500mm. The scientists found that the most intense rainfall was measured at weather stations located near water bodies, especially in drier climates. One of the authors, Dr Pablo Garcia-Chevesich from the University of Arizona told BBC News that the work had important implications for flood defences. "If you install a water reservoir that will change things totally and that will lead to flooding," he said. "Engineers get fired when there's flooding because they didn't do a good design, but in reality they did good work but someone else installed a water reservoir and the climate changed." "The bigger the water body, the greater the effect." Dr Garcia-Chevesich said this area of research was controversial because changing the design of flood defences was very expensive. Dam boosters Other scientists took a more measured view of the study. The huge Three Gorges dam in China is believed to affect weather patterns up to 100km away Dr Faisal Hossain, from Tennessee Technological University, said the Chilean study was purely observational and that while the lake effect changed rainfall patterns, the jury was still out on whether it increased or decreased the amounts. However, he said that he was hoping to bring the research to the attention of dam builders around the world. "We have modified the weather patterns in such a way that we didn't anticipate before building these reservoirs, and yes in the global context it might have serious ramifications," he said. Prof Richard Harding from the UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH) said several studies had now pointed to the impact of reservoirs particularly in dry areas. "The physics says that it will happen, but I'm struggling a little to know how big an impact it is, and quite whether it is strong enough to change the design of flood defences," he said. Dr Harding suggested that the new study might provide ammunition for those who oppose the building of large-scale new reservoirs. The authors argue that they want engineers and designers to take this new work into account in planning new flood barriers. "In the US, they are very rigorous about taking climate change into account when talking about storm water management design," said Dr Garcia-Chevesich, "but this is new and should be taken into account too." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: _64370744_matt2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 2044 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: _64720508_puclaro.renzo.stanley.cotrozo.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 33603 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: _64720512_149204072.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14667 bytes Desc: not available URL: From charles_chamberlain at fws.gov Fri Dec 21 11:33:47 2012 From: charles_chamberlain at fws.gov (Chamberlain, Charles) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 11:33:47 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River spawning survey update for week December 17-21 Message-ID: Hi all, This last update for our 2012 Trinity River salmon spawning survey has been posted at the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Service website. http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/default.htm Only reaches 1-3 (Lewiston Dam to Steelbridge River Access) were surveyed this week, and only 7 new redds were identified and mapped - all in reach 1 (Lewiston Dam to Old Bridge). The figure below is clipped from this week's report and shows how this year's running total from Lewiston Dam to Cedar Flat compares to years previous. We did not survey reach 8 (Pigeon Point run) this year in an effort to reduce risk to personnel and equipment. Reach 8 data have been removed from the figure below to reflect a fairer comparison to our 2012 data. [image: Inline image 1] Our next steps in the coming weeks will be to use collected carcass data to estimate contributions by Chinook salmon vs coho salmon and by hatchery vs. wild fish. Will announce when those results are available. Thanks for tuning in this season! Merry Christmas/happy holidays, and I wish you all a great 2013! Charlie Charles Chamberlain Supervisory Fish Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish & Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 Charles_Chamberlain at fws.gov Phone: (707) 825-5110 Fax: (707) 822-8411 www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image.jpeg Type: image/jpeg Size: 19804 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Bill.Mendenhall at water.ca.gov Mon Dec 24 11:46:55 2012 From: Bill.Mendenhall at water.ca.gov (Mendenhall, Bill@DWR) Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2012 19:46:55 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Bill Mendenhall, DWR Retiring on December 30, 2012 Message-ID: <06FECF527D3EAD4B87311DB0B7EB9FAA0394FF@057-SN2MPN1-033.057d.mgd.msft.net> Thanks to all of you who are still around for all the years of working together on the Trinity River. For all the newbies, good luck as you continue the restoration efforts in the basin. (1974-2012) Bill M. Bill Mendenhall Personal Cell: 530.200.5245 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Dec 27 07:19:07 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 07:19:07 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou Daily News:Siskiyou farmers win court battle over water; Message-ID: http://www.redding.com/news/2012/dec/26/siskiyou-farmers-win-court-battle-over-water/ Siskiyou farmers win court battle over water; judge says DFG oversteps authority in requiring permits By Damon Arthur Wednesday, December 26, 2012 In a decision that farmers say could have statewide implications, a judge has ruled that the state Department of Fish and Game cannot require ranchers in Siskiyou County to obtain permits to take water from the Shasta and Scott rivers. Siskiyou County Superior Court Judge Karen L. Dixon ruled the DFG overstepped its authority in requiring the permits, according to the Siskiyou County Farm Bureau. "This ruling establishes an important statewide precedent," farm bureau President Jeff Fowle said. "There is no doubt that if the DFG had been able to expand its authority here, it would have tried to regulate water rights elsewhere in the state." There are 400-600 property owners with rights to water from the Shasta and Scott rivers, Fowle said. Jordan Traverso, a spokeswoman for the department, said she could not comment on the decision, but said the DFG was trying to establish a larger-scale program for permits, rather than requiring individual permits from each property owner taking water from a stream. Traverso also said she couldn't comment on whether the department would appeal the judge's decision. The permitting plan has been controversial since the DFG began implementing it in 2010. Many Siskiyou County ranchers and farmers said the DFG was overstepping its authority, while environmental groups and area Indian tribes said the DFG and other state and federal agencies weren't doing enough to protect endangered coho salmon living in those rivers. Environmental groups say Shasta and Scott river water users have been taking too much water from the streams and not leaving enough for the salmon. Fowle said the DFG was asking farmers and ranchers to obtain "streambed alteration agreements" just to open irrigation valves to release water from streams to irrigate fields. Previously, those permits had been required only when someone planned to block a stream or do other work, such as with a backhoe or bulldozer, he said. Fowle said the DFG was trying to regulate water in the streams using the wrong law. Water rights holders in the Shasta and Scott river watersheds are already regulated by another state agency and by court rulings on how much water they can take from streams. "This decision reaffirms that water rights are administered by the courts and the State Water Resources Control Board," Fowle said. "Now, we can turn our attention to finding collaborative ways to improve conditions for fish, while maintaining the sustainability of our farms and ranches." But Craig Tucker, Klamath coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, said the judge's decision hurts fish. The DFG permits are needed because on the Scott River there is no water master to prevent people from taking more than their allotment. "I see it as an important tool to ensure that the public trust is protected," Tucker said of the permitting program. He said he wasn't surprised by the judge's ruling and said he wants the DFG to file an appeal and get a more fair hearing. "Meanwhile, the coho are going extinct," Tucker said. He said all parties in the debate need to come up with better ways to protect the fish. "I think we need to find a way for land owners and fish advocates to figure out what the future looks like; otherwise, there's going to be more litigation," Tucker said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Dec 29 06:57:31 2012 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 06:57:31 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle-Toxic Rats, Mice Spur Rodenticide Battle Message-ID: <9CBFB636-BD80-41C9-B86C-6A9F5F59D979@att.net> Http://Www.sfgate.com/Science/Article/Toxic-Rats-Mice-Spur-Rodenticide-Battle-4153464.Php Toxic Rats, Mice Spur Rodenticide Battle -- Poisoned rats and mice are spreading toxic chemicals into the ecosystem despite widespread pressure from federal regulators, wildlife officials and environmentalists to remove the most harmful rodenticides from store shelves. PETER FIMRITE in the San Francisco Chronicle -- 12/29/12 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: