[env-trinity] Trinity Journal- Restoration Clash

[Tom Stokely]

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: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20120111/2545be4c/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 1p1.preview.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 8081 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20120111/2545be4c/attachment.jpg>