From tstokely at att.net Thu Jan 1 10:30:05 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2015 10:30:05 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] "DWR and BuRec officials systematically drained Trinity Reservoir on the Trinity River..." In-Reply-To: <0d4f01d025d6$6a53f2e0$3efbd8a0$@erols.com> References: <0d4f01d025d6$6a53f2e0$3efbd8a0$@erols.com> Message-ID: <1420137005.63622.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2014/12/31/18766224.php California | Central Valley | Environment & Forest Defense | Government & Elections Steelhead numbers alarmingly low at American River's Nimbus Fish Hatchery by Dan Bacher Wednesday Dec 31st, 2014 7:24 PM As one who has spent thousands of hours fishing on the river, going to meetings and rallies fighting for the restoration of the river and its fish, and writing about this unique river, the shockingly low return of steelhead to date is very disenheartening. 800_american.jpg Steelhead numbers alarmingly low at American River's Nimbus Fish Hatchery by Dan Bacher Only 10 adult steelhead were reported at the Nimbus Fish Hatchery on the American as of Monday, December 29, an alarmingly low number for this time of year. By contrast, the hatchery had trapped 335 adults to date last year, according to Gary Novak, hatchery manager. Normally there are hundreds and sometimes thousands of steelhead showing at the facility at this time of year. Hopefully, the steelhead are late in their migration, just as the fall run Chinook salmon were. The main body of the fall Chinook salmon run arrived over a month late this fall on the American River. Releases to the lower American below Nimbus Dam continue to be 900 cfs, very low for this time of year. As one who has spent thousands of hours fishing on the river, going to meetings and rallies fighting for the restoration of the river and its fish, and writing about this unique river, the shockingly low return of steelhead to date is very disenheartening. I was part of a dedicated group of anglers who worked to restore the steelhead on the river through a series of measures, including upgrading the hatchery facilities, protecting wild spawning steelhead from poaching, pressuring the hatchery managers to take eggs throughout the run to preserve genetic integrity and battling the Bureau of Reclamation for higher minimum flows and water temperature standards. We were very successful in restoring and enhancing the steelhead to where numbers at the hatchery reached 3,000 to 4,000 fish in some years and where wild steelhead returned in good numbers to the river many years. In 2011 and early 2013, anglers experienced excellent fishing on this unique urban river. All wild steelhead on the American River must be released, since naturally-spawning Central Valley steelhead are listed as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act. However, anglers may keep two hatchery steelhead, as indicated by clipped adipose fins. Unfortunately, I fear that the abysmal management of the American, Sacramento, Feather and other Central Valley rivers over the past few years has spurred this apparent decline in the steelhead population. Department of Water Resources and Bureau of Reclamation officials systematically drained Trinity Reservoir on the Trinity River, Lake Shasta on the Sacramento River, Lake Oroville on the Feather River and Folsom Lake on the American River in 2013, during a record drought, to export water through the State Water Project and federal Central Valley Project. This water was shipped to fill the Kern Water Bank and Southern California reservoirs, as well as to supply water to corporate agribusiness interests in the Westlands Water District and oil companies conducting fracking and steam injection operations in Kern County. Little carryover storage in the reservoirs, particularly in Folsom, was left in 2014 as the drought continued. Folsom Reservoir reached a record low of 17 percent of capacity in January 2014, due to mismanagement by the state and federal governments. You can read my investigative news piece on this at: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/02/07/1275862/-The-Emptying-of-Northern-California-Reservoirs Meanwhile, the Brown administration is rushing the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the peripheral tunnels, a corporate water grab disguised as a "habitat restoration" and "conservation" plan. If constructed, the tunnels would hasten the extinction of Sacramento River Chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, Delta and longfin smelt and green sturgeon, as well as imperil the salmon and steelhead populations on the Trinity and Klamath rivers. I will update the count of steelhead at the fish hatchery and on the river as the steelhead season proceeds. But it sure doesn't look very good. ? 2000?2015 San Francisco Bay Area Independent Media Center. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by the SF Bay Area IMC. Disclaimer | Privacy | Contact -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 327492 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Jan 3 08:25:42 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2015 08:25:42 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Times_Standard=3A_Interior_opinion_uphold?= =?utf-8?q?s_Humboldt=E2=80=99s_right_to_promised_Trinity_water?= Message-ID: <1420302342.72339.YahooMailNeo@web120302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.times-standard.com/general-news/20150102/interior-opinion-upholds-humboldts-right-to-promised-trinity-water . Interior opinion upholds Humboldt?s right to promised Trinity water TIMES-STANDARD FILE PHOTO A U.S. Department of the Interior legal opinion released Friday calls for Humboldt County and downstream water users to receive the annual 50,000 acre-feet of Trinity Reservoir water promised to the area under a law and a contract approved nearly 60 years ago. * By Will Houston, Eureka Times-Standard Elected and tribal officials applauded a U.S. Department of the Interior legal opinion released on Friday, which calls for Humboldt County and downstream water users to receive the annual 50,000 acre-feet of Trinity Reservoir water promised to the area under a law and a contract approved nearly 60 years ago. ?Humboldt County?s annual right to 50,000 acre-feet of water from Trinity Lake is not a close call ? it was explicitly guaranteed by statute and in a federal contract six decades ago, but these commitments have been ignored by the federal government,? California?s 2nd District Congressman Jared Huffman said in a statement. ?I?m gratified that the solicitor thoroughly examined this issue and that the Interior Department heeded my requests to publicly release the solicitor?s findings. The disclosure of the solicitor?s legal opinion confirms the position I have argued for the past two years and is an important step toward honoring the promise Congress made 60 years ago.? The Dec. 23 opinion was drafted in response to a request from the department?s Bureau of Reclamation, which acts as a water management agency overseeing several hundred dams across the country, to address the two provisions ? one in the 1955 law passed by Congress that established the Trinity River Division and the other in a subsequent contract between Humboldt County and the bureau in 1959. The two provisions have caused numerous legal confrontations with Central Valley water users. The first provision states that only Trinity River Division water ? other than that needed to protect Trinity River fish ? can be exported into the Central Valley, and the second provision provide that there be at least 50,000 acre-feet of water released annually for the benefit of Humboldt County and downstream water users. Since the passage of the 1955 law, the bureau has made preventative water releases several times ? including within the past three years ? to cool waters in the Trinity and lower Klamath rivers to prevent fish kills like that of 2002, which left tens of thousands of fish dead on the lower Klamath. In 2014, the bureau released a preventative flow and an unprecedented emergency flow after a deadly parasite was discovered in a sample of fish, but the releases were challenged by Central Valley Project water users in subsequent lawsuits. The challenge for the 2014 preventative release was made by two Central Valley water districts, but a U.S. District court judge in Fresno denied the petition for a temporary injunction last year. The Interior Department opinion refutes previous arguments that these preventative releases in the first provision of the law count toward the 50,000 acre-feet allotment in the second provision. ?The prior interpretations generally deemed water to satisfy Humboldt County and downstream water users under Proviso 2 as being subsumed within the fishery releases of Proviso 1,? the opinion by Department of the Interior Solicitor Hilary C. Tompkins states. ?It is my conclusion that these interpretations may not be consistent with the distinct purposes of the two provisos. I conclude instead that the better reading of the statue is that the two provisos authorize and may require separate releases of water as requested by Humboldt County and potentially other downstream users pursuant to Proviso 2 ... .? The bureau?s Mid-Pacific Regional Director David Murillo wrote a message to tribes and stakeholders on Friday, stating that the department has also drafted a long-term plan ?that will serve as general guidance for considering and possibly undertaking actions to protect adult salmon in the lower Klamath River.? ?We look forward to taking the next step to determining uses for this water, and coordinating flow releases with resource agencies that will best benefit our North Coast communities,? 5th District Humboldt County Supervisor Ryan Sundberg said in a statement on Friday. Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries Director Mike Orcutt, who has been working on this issue for several years, stated that Interior?s recognition that the two provisos each refer to ?a separate and distinct water supply is a very, very very important decision to have been made.? Though there is still potential litigation relating to preventative releases in 2013, Orcutt said the opinion and draft plan for the lower Klamath will bring a lot to the table. ?I think it loads us up and gives us more assurances. There won?t be as much uncertainty,? he said. ?... That 50,000 feet of water is a substantial volume of water in this day and age.? Will Houston can be reached at 707-441-0504. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Jan 4 10:23:08 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2015 10:23:08 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Interior Solicitor's Opinion on HumCo's 50k AF available Message-ID: <1420395788.80596.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> You can obtain the Solicitor's Opinion on the C-WIN website at http://www.c-win.org/webfm_send/458 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 danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Tue Jan 6 07:41:29 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 07:41:29 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Tunnel critics urge Brown to inaugurate a new water solution In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/01/05/18766455.php http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/01/06/1355876/-Tunnel-critics-urge-Brown-to-inaugurate-a-new-water-solution Photo of Governor Jerry Brown at the State Capitol at the inauguration on January 5 by Dan Bacher. jerry_brown_1_5_15_.jpg Tunnel critics urge Brown to inaugurate a new water solution Bay Delta Conservation Plan is doomed! by Dan Bacher In his inaugural address January 5 at the State Capitol in Sacramento, Governor Jerry Brown made two references to California water as he discussed an array of issues. These included repaying the state's debt, funding education, promoting renewable energy and efficiency, addressing climate change, expanding health care, and dealing with changes in the criminal justice system. He didn't specifically mention the peripheral tunnels proposed under the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) during his talk, but he did tout the water bond and California Water Action Plan as "solutions" to California's water problems. "We also have the people to thank for Propositions 1 and 2, which save water and money and prepare us for an uncertain future," he stated. "These are measures that nearly every Democrat and Republican voted to put on the ballot and nearly 70 percent of voters ultimately approved. And I?m proud to report that as a result, by the end of the year, we will be investing in long overdue water projects and saving $2.8 billion in the state?s new constitutionally protected Rainy Day Fund." "We must also deal with longstanding infrastructure challenges. We are finally grappling with the long-term sustainability of our water supply through the recently passed Proposition 1 and our California Water Action Plan," Brown said. Restore the Delta (RTD), opponents of Gov. Brown?s rush to build giant water export Tunnels that would drain the Delta and doom sustainable farms, salmon and other Pacific fisheries, used the inauguration as an opportunity to call on Brown to ?inaugurate a new, sustainable water solution, and abandon the doomed BDCP tunnels, which violate the Clean Water Act, degrade Delta families? drinking water, and threaten salmon extinction,? said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of RTD. ?For $67 billion, Californians get no new water, lose our fisheries and spend generations paying to subsidize huge, unsustainable industrial agriculture on unsuitable, drainage impaired Westside San Joaquin Valley lands," said Barrigan-Parrilla. "That money would be better spent on alternatives that will make more water available to all Californians: recycling, storm water capture, conservation, groundwater cleanup and recharge etc. It?s time for a new, sustainable solution that makes new water, creates long-term jobs, promotes regional water independence and preserves fisheries and sustainable farms.? The tunnels? opponents called upon Gov. Brown to ?abandon the doomed project? and instead embrace a sustainable water solution that is fair to all Californians. That solution includes reducing Delta water exports, strengthening Delta levees, and investing in regional water independence through sustainable programs. ?Gov. Brown is offering us the same old worn out ideas regarding water management ? taking too much water from one part of the state, causing great harm to communities and fisheries, to ?fix? the problems for big agriculture on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. The tunnels will provide water only for big agribusiness growers on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley who farm unsustainable crops like almonds for export. The recent BDCP redesign of the pumps means absolutely nothing. It still violates the Endangered Species and Clean Water Acts and dooms our fisheries,? said Barrigan-Parrilla. Compare: Gov. Brown?s Tunnels Cost: $67 billion New Water: None Jobs: 10,000 short-term construction jobs, Destroys thousands of Delta farming, Destroys Pacific fisheries-related jobs Who benefits? Mainly huge west San Joaquin growers Sustainable Water Solution Cost: $12 billion New Water: 5-10 million acre feet Jobs: Thousands of long-term jobs installing water-saving devices, replacing infrastructure Who benefits? All Californians Below is the news release from the Governor's Office with the transcript of Brown's inaugural address: Governor Brown Sworn In, Delivers Inaugural Address SACRAMENTO ? Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. today took the oath of office as Governor of California and delivered his inaugural address in the Assembly Chamber. The address serves as the Governor's constitutionally required annual report to the Legislature. Edmund G. Brown Jr. Inaugural Address Remarks as Prepared January 5, 2015 Members of the Legislature, the Judiciary, Constitutional Officers, the extended family of my pioneering ancestors and fellow Californians: An inauguration is always a special occasion but today it is particularly special as I think about that day 40 years ago when my father and mother watched me take the oath as California?s 34th governor. It is also special because of how far we have come in the last four years. Then, the state was deep in debt ? $26 billion ? and our unemployment rate was 12.1 percent. Now, the state budget, after a decade of fiscal turbulence, is finally balanced ? more precariously than I would like ? but balanced. California has seen more than 1.3 million new jobs created in just four years and the unemployment rate has dropped to 7.2 percent. Thanks goes to the Legislature for cutting spending, the economy for recovering and the people for voting for temporary taxes. We also have the people to thank for Propositions 1 and 2, which save water and money and prepare us for an uncertain future. These are measures that nearly every Democrat and Republican voted to put on the ballot and nearly 70 percent of voters ultimately approved. And I?m proud to report that as a result, by the end of the year, we will be investing in long overdue water projects and saving $2.8 billion in the state?s new constitutionally protected Rainy Day Fund. And we?re not stopping there. Soon we will make the last payment on the $15 billion of borrowing made to cover budget deficits dating back to 2002. We will also repay a billion dollars borrowed from schools and community colleges and another $533 million owed to local governments. California has made bold commitments to sustain our environment, help the neediest and build for our future. We are leaders in renewable energy and efficiency; we have extended health care to millions; we are transforming our educational and criminal justice systems; we are building the nation?s only high-speed rail system; we raised the minimum wage; we are confronting the drought and longer-term water issues; and last, but not least, we have enacted real protections for our hardworking immigrants, including the issuance of long-awaited driver?s licenses. In 2011, we were handed a mess and through solid, steady work, we turned it around. While we have not reached the Promised Land, we have much to be proud of. As I embark upon this unprecedented fourth term as governor, my thoughts turn to a time long ago when I first entered this chamber, January 5, 1959, for my father?s inauguration. I sat there in front of the rostrum, next to my 81-year-old grandmother, Ida Schuckman Brown, feeling awkward in my priestly black suit and Roman collar. My perspective was different then. The previous August, as a young Jesuit living in what was then a pre-Vatican II seminary, I had taken vows of poverty, chastity and obedience. To me, the boisterous crowd, the applause, the worldliness of it all was jarring. That was 56 years ago, yet the issues that my father raised at his inauguration bear eerie resemblance to those we still grapple with today: discrimination; the quality of education and the challenge of recruiting and training teachers; the menace of air pollution, and its danger to our health; a realistic water program; economic development; consumer protection; and overcrowded prisons. So you see, these problems, they never completely go away. They remain to challenge and elicit the best from us. To that end, over the next four years ? and beyond ? we must dedicate ourselves to making what we have done work, to seeing that the massive changes in education, health care and public safety are actually carried out and endure. The financial promises we have already made must be confronted honestly so that they are properly funded. The health of our state depends on it. Educating the next generation is fundamental to our collective well- being. An issue that has plagued our schools for decades is the enormous barrier facing children from low-income families. When my father was governor, he sought to remedy the wide inequities among different school districts by calling for equalization of funding. His efforts were not successful. Now ? decades later ? we have finally created a much fairer system of school funding, called the Local Control Funding Formula. Under the provisions of this law, state funds are directed to school districts based on the needs of their students. Districts will get significantly more funds based on the number of students from foster care, low- income families and non-English-speaking parents. This program also breaks with decades of increasing centralization by reducing state control in favor of local flexibility. Clear goals are set, and their enforcement is entrusted to parents and local officials. This puts California in the forefront of educational reform. After years of underfunding and even borrowing from our local schools, the state now has significantly increased its financial support for education. Next year schools will receive $65.7 billion, a 39 percent increase in four years. The tasks ahead are daunting: making sure that the new system of local control works; recruiting and training tens of thousands of teachers; mastering the Common Core Curriculum; and fostering the creativity needed to inspire students. Teachers need to be held accountable but never forget: they have a tough job to do. They need our encouragement, not endless regulations and micro-management from afar. With respect to education beyond high school, California is blessed with a rich and diverse system. Its many elements serve a vast diversity of talents and interests. While excellence is their business, affordability and timely completion is their imperative. As I?ve said before, I will not make the students of California the default financiers of our colleges and universities. To meet our goals, everyone has to do their part: the state, the students and the professors. Each separate institution cannot be all things to all people, but the system in its breadth and diversity, through real cooperation among its segments, can well provide what Californians need and desire. Along with education, health and human services constitute a major part of what state government does. And in the past few years we have made massive commitments in this area, which will require increasing levels of spending, the full extent of which is not yet known. For example, two years ago California embraced the Affordable Care Act, dramatically increasing its health insurance coverage under the Medi- Cal program. The state will enroll 12.2 million people during this new budget year, a more than 50 percent increase. Providing the security of health coverage to so many Californians who need it is the right thing to do. But it isn?t free. Although the federal government will temporarily foot much of the bill, new state costs ? now and more so in the future ? will run into the billions. Another major state responsibility is our system of crime and punishment. And here too, I will refer to my father?s 1959 address. He worried then about California?s ?dangerously overcrowded prisons.? He talked about identifying ?those prisoners who should never be released to prey again on an innocent public,? but he also said, ?we should also determine whether some prisoners are now kept confined after punishment has served its purpose.? We face these same questions today: what purposes should punishment serve and for how long should a person be confined to jail or prison ? for a few days, a few years or for life? In response to a large increase in crimes beginning in the 1970s, the Legislature and the people ? through ballot initiatives ? dramatically lengthened sentences and added a host of new crimes and penalty enhancements. Today, California?s legal codes contain more than 5,000 separate criminal provisions and over 400 penalty enhancements, an arcane and complex mix that only the most exquisitely trained specialist can fathom. And funding has grown proportionately: during the 1970s we had 12 prisons holding fewer than 30,000 prisoners and corrections spending was only 3 percent of the budget; our system then grew to a peak of 34 prisons, with an inmate population of 173,000, eating up more than 10 percent of our budget dollars. Four years ago, the United States Supreme Court held that our prisons were unconstitutionally overcrowded and imposed strict capacity limits, far below the number of inmates that were then being held. Clearly, our system of crime and punishment had to be changed. And through the courts, the Legislature and the voters themselves, a number of far-reaching reforms have been enacted. The biggest reform is our realignment program, which places tens of thousands of lower- level offenders under county supervision. More recently, a federal three-judge panel ordered further measures to reduce prison overcrowding. And the voters, through Propositions 36 and 47, modified our criminal laws to reduce the scope of the Three Strikes law and change certain felonies into misdemeanors. All these changes attempt to find less expensive, more compassionate and more effective ways to deal with crime. This is work that is as profoundly important as it is difficult, yet we must never cease in our efforts to assure liberty and justice for all. The task is complicated by our diversity and our divisions and, yes, by shocking disparities. Since time immemorial, humankind has known covetousness, envy and violence. That is why public safety and respect for law are both fundamental to a free society. As we oversee these important changes to education, health care and public safety, we must not lose sight of our long-term liabilities. We have to face honestly the enormous and ever growing burden of the many commitments we have already made. Among these are the costs of pensions and retiree health care, the new obligations under the Affordable Care Act, the growing government costs of dealing with our aging population, bonded indebtedness and the deferred maintenance on our roads and other infrastructure. These specific liabilities reach into the hundreds of billions of dollars. My plan has been to take them on one at a time. We have now taken steps to deal with the unfunded teachers? pensions and those of the public employees. For the next effort, I intend to ask our state employees to help start pre-funding our retiree health obligations which are rising rapidly. We must also deal with longstanding infrastructure challenges. We are finally grappling with the long-term sustainability of our water supply through the recently passed Proposition 1 and our California Water Action Plan. Equally important is having the roads, highways and bridges in good enough shape to get people and commerce to where they need to go. It is estimated that our state has accumulated $59 billion in needed upkeep and maintenance. Each year, we fall further and further behind and we must do something about it. So I am calling on Republicans and Democrats alike to come together and tackle this challenge. We came together on water when many said it was impossible. We came together ? unanimously ? to create a solid Rainy Day Fund. We can do it again. Finally, neither California nor indeed the world itself can ignore the growing assault on the very systems of nature on which human beings and other forms of life depend. Edward O. Wilson, one of the world?s preeminent biologists and naturalists, offered this sobering thought: ?Surely one moral precept we can agree on is to stop destroying our birthplace, the only home humanity will ever have. The evidence for climate warming, with industrial pollution as the principal cause, is now overwhelming. Also evident upon even casual inspection is the rapid disappearance of tropical forests and grasslands and other habitats where most of the diversity of life exists.? With these global changes, he went on to say, ?we are needlessly turning the gold we inherited from our forebears into straw, and for that we will be despised by our descendants.? California has the most far-reaching environmental laws of any state and the most integrated policy to deal with climate change of any political jurisdiction in the Western Hemisphere. Under laws that you have enacted, we are on track to meet our 2020 goal of one-third of our electricity from renewable energy. We lead the nation in energy efficiency, cleaner cars and energy storage. Recently, both the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the President of the World Bank made clear that properly pricing carbon is a key strategy. California?s cap-and-trade system fashioned under AB 32 is doing just that and showing how the market itself can generate the innovations we need. Beyond this, California is forging agreements with other states and nations so that we do not stand alone in advancing these climate objectives. These efforts, impressive though they are, are not enough. The United Nations? Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, backed up by the vast majority of the world?s scientists, has set an ambitious goal of limiting warming to 2 degrees Celsius by the year 2050 through drastic reductions of greenhouse gases. If we have any chance at all of achieving that, California, as it does in many areas, must show the way. We must demonstrate that reducing carbon is compatible with an abundant economy and human well-being. So far, we have been able to do that. In fact, we are well on our way to meeting our AB 32 goal of reducing carbon pollution and limiting the emissions of heat-trapping gases to 431 million tons by 2020. But now, it is time to establish our next set of objectives for 2030 and beyond. Toward that end, I propose three ambitious goals to be accomplished within the next 15 years: Increase from one-third to 50 percent our electricity derived from renewable sources; Reduce today?s petroleum use in cars and trucks by up to 50 percent; Double the efficiency of existing buildings and make heating fuels cleaner. We must also reduce the relentless release of methane, black carbon and other potent pollutants across industries. And we must manage farm and rangelands, forests and wetlands so they can store carbon. All of this is a very tall order. It means that we continue to transform our electrical grid, our transportation system and even our communities. I envision a wide range of initiatives: more distributed power, expanded rooftop solar, micro-grids, an energy imbalance market, battery storage, the full integration of information technology and electrical distribution and millions of electric and low-carbon vehicles. How we achieve these goals and at what pace will take great thought and imagination mixed with pragmatic caution. It will require enormous innovation, research and investment. And we will need active collaboration at every stage with our scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs, businesses and officials at all levels. Taking significant amounts of carbon out of our economy without harming its vibrancy is exactly the sort of challenge at which California excels. This is exciting, it is bold and it is absolutely necessary if we are to have any chance of stopping potentially catastrophic changes to our climate system. California, since the beginning, has undertaken big tasks and entertained big ideas. Befitting a state of dreamers, builders and immigrants, we have not hesitated to attempt what our detractors have called impossible or foolish. In the last four years, in the last 40 years, yes ever since Gaspar de Portola in 1769 marched along the King?s Highway, California has met adversity with faith and courage. We have had setbacks and failures, but always in the end, the indomitable spirit of California has triumphed. Through it all, through good times and bad, California has been blessed with a dynamism and historic trajectory that carries each generation forward. Whether the early explorers came for gold or God, came they did. The rest is history: the founding of the Missions, the devastation of the native people, the discovery of gold, the coming of the Forty-Niners, the Transcontinental Railroad, the founding of great universities, the planting and harvesting of our vast fields, oil production, movies, the aircraft industry, the first freeways, the State Water Project, aerospace, Silicon Valley and endless new companies and Nobel Prizes. This is California. And we are her sons and daughters. Yes, California feeds on change and great undertakings, but the path of wisdom counsels us to ground ourselves and nurture carefully all that we have started. We must build on rock, not sand, so that when the storms come, our house stands. We are at a crossroads. With big and important new programs now launched and the budget carefully balanced, the challenge is to build for the future, not steal from it, to live within our means and to keep California ever golden and creative, as our forebears have shown and our descendants would expect. Link: http://cert1.mail-west.com/tByjgO/myuzjanmc7rm/1tBgt/vzh2/Br8k9qn73eg/fmiah21tBqvnqt/28gcqpmbxqe?_c=d%7Cze7pzanwmhlzgt%7C12unvzsozcdpt82&_ce=1420557837.5fae987f8a078a57adf521b7a69b99a4 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jerry_brown_1_5_15_.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 18209 bytes Desc: not available URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Tue Jan 6 07:41:29 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 07:41:29 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Tunnel critics urge Brown to inaugurate a new water solution In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/01/05/18766455.php http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/01/06/1355876/-Tunnel-critics-urge-Brown-to-inaugurate-a-new-water-solution Photo of Governor Jerry Brown at the State Capitol at the inauguration on January 5 by Dan Bacher. jerry_brown_1_5_15_.jpg Tunnel critics urge Brown to inaugurate a new water solution Bay Delta Conservation Plan is doomed! by Dan Bacher In his inaugural address January 5 at the State Capitol in Sacramento, Governor Jerry Brown made two references to California water as he discussed an array of issues. These included repaying the state's debt, funding education, promoting renewable energy and efficiency, addressing climate change, expanding health care, and dealing with changes in the criminal justice system. He didn't specifically mention the peripheral tunnels proposed under the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) during his talk, but he did tout the water bond and California Water Action Plan as "solutions" to California's water problems. "We also have the people to thank for Propositions 1 and 2, which save water and money and prepare us for an uncertain future," he stated. "These are measures that nearly every Democrat and Republican voted to put on the ballot and nearly 70 percent of voters ultimately approved. And I?m proud to report that as a result, by the end of the year, we will be investing in long overdue water projects and saving $2.8 billion in the state?s new constitutionally protected Rainy Day Fund." "We must also deal with longstanding infrastructure challenges. We are finally grappling with the long-term sustainability of our water supply through the recently passed Proposition 1 and our California Water Action Plan," Brown said. Restore the Delta (RTD), opponents of Gov. Brown?s rush to build giant water export Tunnels that would drain the Delta and doom sustainable farms, salmon and other Pacific fisheries, used the inauguration as an opportunity to call on Brown to ?inaugurate a new, sustainable water solution, and abandon the doomed BDCP tunnels, which violate the Clean Water Act, degrade Delta families? drinking water, and threaten salmon extinction,? said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of RTD. ?For $67 billion, Californians get no new water, lose our fisheries and spend generations paying to subsidize huge, unsustainable industrial agriculture on unsuitable, drainage impaired Westside San Joaquin Valley lands," said Barrigan-Parrilla. "That money would be better spent on alternatives that will make more water available to all Californians: recycling, storm water capture, conservation, groundwater cleanup and recharge etc. It?s time for a new, sustainable solution that makes new water, creates long-term jobs, promotes regional water independence and preserves fisheries and sustainable farms.? The tunnels? opponents called upon Gov. Brown to ?abandon the doomed project? and instead embrace a sustainable water solution that is fair to all Californians. That solution includes reducing Delta water exports, strengthening Delta levees, and investing in regional water independence through sustainable programs. ?Gov. Brown is offering us the same old worn out ideas regarding water management ? taking too much water from one part of the state, causing great harm to communities and fisheries, to ?fix? the problems for big agriculture on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. The tunnels will provide water only for big agribusiness growers on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley who farm unsustainable crops like almonds for export. The recent BDCP redesign of the pumps means absolutely nothing. It still violates the Endangered Species and Clean Water Acts and dooms our fisheries,? said Barrigan-Parrilla. Compare: Gov. Brown?s Tunnels Cost: $67 billion New Water: None Jobs: 10,000 short-term construction jobs, Destroys thousands of Delta farming, Destroys Pacific fisheries-related jobs Who benefits? Mainly huge west San Joaquin growers Sustainable Water Solution Cost: $12 billion New Water: 5-10 million acre feet Jobs: Thousands of long-term jobs installing water-saving devices, replacing infrastructure Who benefits? All Californians Below is the news release from the Governor's Office with the transcript of Brown's inaugural address: Governor Brown Sworn In, Delivers Inaugural Address SACRAMENTO ? Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. today took the oath of office as Governor of California and delivered his inaugural address in the Assembly Chamber. The address serves as the Governor's constitutionally required annual report to the Legislature. Edmund G. Brown Jr. Inaugural Address Remarks as Prepared January 5, 2015 Members of the Legislature, the Judiciary, Constitutional Officers, the extended family of my pioneering ancestors and fellow Californians: An inauguration is always a special occasion but today it is particularly special as I think about that day 40 years ago when my father and mother watched me take the oath as California?s 34th governor. It is also special because of how far we have come in the last four years. Then, the state was deep in debt ? $26 billion ? and our unemployment rate was 12.1 percent. Now, the state budget, after a decade of fiscal turbulence, is finally balanced ? more precariously than I would like ? but balanced. California has seen more than 1.3 million new jobs created in just four years and the unemployment rate has dropped to 7.2 percent. Thanks goes to the Legislature for cutting spending, the economy for recovering and the people for voting for temporary taxes. We also have the people to thank for Propositions 1 and 2, which save water and money and prepare us for an uncertain future. These are measures that nearly every Democrat and Republican voted to put on the ballot and nearly 70 percent of voters ultimately approved. And I?m proud to report that as a result, by the end of the year, we will be investing in long overdue water projects and saving $2.8 billion in the state?s new constitutionally protected Rainy Day Fund. And we?re not stopping there. Soon we will make the last payment on the $15 billion of borrowing made to cover budget deficits dating back to 2002. We will also repay a billion dollars borrowed from schools and community colleges and another $533 million owed to local governments. California has made bold commitments to sustain our environment, help the neediest and build for our future. We are leaders in renewable energy and efficiency; we have extended health care to millions; we are transforming our educational and criminal justice systems; we are building the nation?s only high-speed rail system; we raised the minimum wage; we are confronting the drought and longer-term water issues; and last, but not least, we have enacted real protections for our hardworking immigrants, including the issuance of long-awaited driver?s licenses. In 2011, we were handed a mess and through solid, steady work, we turned it around. While we have not reached the Promised Land, we have much to be proud of. As I embark upon this unprecedented fourth term as governor, my thoughts turn to a time long ago when I first entered this chamber, January 5, 1959, for my father?s inauguration. I sat there in front of the rostrum, next to my 81-year-old grandmother, Ida Schuckman Brown, feeling awkward in my priestly black suit and Roman collar. My perspective was different then. The previous August, as a young Jesuit living in what was then a pre-Vatican II seminary, I had taken vows of poverty, chastity and obedience. To me, the boisterous crowd, the applause, the worldliness of it all was jarring. That was 56 years ago, yet the issues that my father raised at his inauguration bear eerie resemblance to those we still grapple with today: discrimination; the quality of education and the challenge of recruiting and training teachers; the menace of air pollution, and its danger to our health; a realistic water program; economic development; consumer protection; and overcrowded prisons. So you see, these problems, they never completely go away. They remain to challenge and elicit the best from us. To that end, over the next four years ? and beyond ? we must dedicate ourselves to making what we have done work, to seeing that the massive changes in education, health care and public safety are actually carried out and endure. The financial promises we have already made must be confronted honestly so that they are properly funded. The health of our state depends on it. Educating the next generation is fundamental to our collective well- being. An issue that has plagued our schools for decades is the enormous barrier facing children from low-income families. When my father was governor, he sought to remedy the wide inequities among different school districts by calling for equalization of funding. His efforts were not successful. Now ? decades later ? we have finally created a much fairer system of school funding, called the Local Control Funding Formula. Under the provisions of this law, state funds are directed to school districts based on the needs of their students. Districts will get significantly more funds based on the number of students from foster care, low- income families and non-English-speaking parents. This program also breaks with decades of increasing centralization by reducing state control in favor of local flexibility. Clear goals are set, and their enforcement is entrusted to parents and local officials. This puts California in the forefront of educational reform. After years of underfunding and even borrowing from our local schools, the state now has significantly increased its financial support for education. Next year schools will receive $65.7 billion, a 39 percent increase in four years. The tasks ahead are daunting: making sure that the new system of local control works; recruiting and training tens of thousands of teachers; mastering the Common Core Curriculum; and fostering the creativity needed to inspire students. Teachers need to be held accountable but never forget: they have a tough job to do. They need our encouragement, not endless regulations and micro-management from afar. With respect to education beyond high school, California is blessed with a rich and diverse system. Its many elements serve a vast diversity of talents and interests. While excellence is their business, affordability and timely completion is their imperative. As I?ve said before, I will not make the students of California the default financiers of our colleges and universities. To meet our goals, everyone has to do their part: the state, the students and the professors. Each separate institution cannot be all things to all people, but the system in its breadth and diversity, through real cooperation among its segments, can well provide what Californians need and desire. Along with education, health and human services constitute a major part of what state government does. And in the past few years we have made massive commitments in this area, which will require increasing levels of spending, the full extent of which is not yet known. For example, two years ago California embraced the Affordable Care Act, dramatically increasing its health insurance coverage under the Medi- Cal program. The state will enroll 12.2 million people during this new budget year, a more than 50 percent increase. Providing the security of health coverage to so many Californians who need it is the right thing to do. But it isn?t free. Although the federal government will temporarily foot much of the bill, new state costs ? now and more so in the future ? will run into the billions. Another major state responsibility is our system of crime and punishment. And here too, I will refer to my father?s 1959 address. He worried then about California?s ?dangerously overcrowded prisons.? He talked about identifying ?those prisoners who should never be released to prey again on an innocent public,? but he also said, ?we should also determine whether some prisoners are now kept confined after punishment has served its purpose.? We face these same questions today: what purposes should punishment serve and for how long should a person be confined to jail or prison ? for a few days, a few years or for life? In response to a large increase in crimes beginning in the 1970s, the Legislature and the people ? through ballot initiatives ? dramatically lengthened sentences and added a host of new crimes and penalty enhancements. Today, California?s legal codes contain more than 5,000 separate criminal provisions and over 400 penalty enhancements, an arcane and complex mix that only the most exquisitely trained specialist can fathom. And funding has grown proportionately: during the 1970s we had 12 prisons holding fewer than 30,000 prisoners and corrections spending was only 3 percent of the budget; our system then grew to a peak of 34 prisons, with an inmate population of 173,000, eating up more than 10 percent of our budget dollars. Four years ago, the United States Supreme Court held that our prisons were unconstitutionally overcrowded and imposed strict capacity limits, far below the number of inmates that were then being held. Clearly, our system of crime and punishment had to be changed. And through the courts, the Legislature and the voters themselves, a number of far-reaching reforms have been enacted. The biggest reform is our realignment program, which places tens of thousands of lower- level offenders under county supervision. More recently, a federal three-judge panel ordered further measures to reduce prison overcrowding. And the voters, through Propositions 36 and 47, modified our criminal laws to reduce the scope of the Three Strikes law and change certain felonies into misdemeanors. All these changes attempt to find less expensive, more compassionate and more effective ways to deal with crime. This is work that is as profoundly important as it is difficult, yet we must never cease in our efforts to assure liberty and justice for all. The task is complicated by our diversity and our divisions and, yes, by shocking disparities. Since time immemorial, humankind has known covetousness, envy and violence. That is why public safety and respect for law are both fundamental to a free society. As we oversee these important changes to education, health care and public safety, we must not lose sight of our long-term liabilities. We have to face honestly the enormous and ever growing burden of the many commitments we have already made. Among these are the costs of pensions and retiree health care, the new obligations under the Affordable Care Act, the growing government costs of dealing with our aging population, bonded indebtedness and the deferred maintenance on our roads and other infrastructure. These specific liabilities reach into the hundreds of billions of dollars. My plan has been to take them on one at a time. We have now taken steps to deal with the unfunded teachers? pensions and those of the public employees. For the next effort, I intend to ask our state employees to help start pre-funding our retiree health obligations which are rising rapidly. We must also deal with longstanding infrastructure challenges. We are finally grappling with the long-term sustainability of our water supply through the recently passed Proposition 1 and our California Water Action Plan. Equally important is having the roads, highways and bridges in good enough shape to get people and commerce to where they need to go. It is estimated that our state has accumulated $59 billion in needed upkeep and maintenance. Each year, we fall further and further behind and we must do something about it. So I am calling on Republicans and Democrats alike to come together and tackle this challenge. We came together on water when many said it was impossible. We came together ? unanimously ? to create a solid Rainy Day Fund. We can do it again. Finally, neither California nor indeed the world itself can ignore the growing assault on the very systems of nature on which human beings and other forms of life depend. Edward O. Wilson, one of the world?s preeminent biologists and naturalists, offered this sobering thought: ?Surely one moral precept we can agree on is to stop destroying our birthplace, the only home humanity will ever have. The evidence for climate warming, with industrial pollution as the principal cause, is now overwhelming. Also evident upon even casual inspection is the rapid disappearance of tropical forests and grasslands and other habitats where most of the diversity of life exists.? With these global changes, he went on to say, ?we are needlessly turning the gold we inherited from our forebears into straw, and for that we will be despised by our descendants.? California has the most far-reaching environmental laws of any state and the most integrated policy to deal with climate change of any political jurisdiction in the Western Hemisphere. Under laws that you have enacted, we are on track to meet our 2020 goal of one-third of our electricity from renewable energy. We lead the nation in energy efficiency, cleaner cars and energy storage. Recently, both the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the President of the World Bank made clear that properly pricing carbon is a key strategy. California?s cap-and-trade system fashioned under AB 32 is doing just that and showing how the market itself can generate the innovations we need. Beyond this, California is forging agreements with other states and nations so that we do not stand alone in advancing these climate objectives. These efforts, impressive though they are, are not enough. The United Nations? Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, backed up by the vast majority of the world?s scientists, has set an ambitious goal of limiting warming to 2 degrees Celsius by the year 2050 through drastic reductions of greenhouse gases. If we have any chance at all of achieving that, California, as it does in many areas, must show the way. We must demonstrate that reducing carbon is compatible with an abundant economy and human well-being. So far, we have been able to do that. In fact, we are well on our way to meeting our AB 32 goal of reducing carbon pollution and limiting the emissions of heat-trapping gases to 431 million tons by 2020. But now, it is time to establish our next set of objectives for 2030 and beyond. Toward that end, I propose three ambitious goals to be accomplished within the next 15 years: Increase from one-third to 50 percent our electricity derived from renewable sources; Reduce today?s petroleum use in cars and trucks by up to 50 percent; Double the efficiency of existing buildings and make heating fuels cleaner. We must also reduce the relentless release of methane, black carbon and other potent pollutants across industries. And we must manage farm and rangelands, forests and wetlands so they can store carbon. All of this is a very tall order. It means that we continue to transform our electrical grid, our transportation system and even our communities. I envision a wide range of initiatives: more distributed power, expanded rooftop solar, micro-grids, an energy imbalance market, battery storage, the full integration of information technology and electrical distribution and millions of electric and low-carbon vehicles. How we achieve these goals and at what pace will take great thought and imagination mixed with pragmatic caution. It will require enormous innovation, research and investment. And we will need active collaboration at every stage with our scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs, businesses and officials at all levels. Taking significant amounts of carbon out of our economy without harming its vibrancy is exactly the sort of challenge at which California excels. This is exciting, it is bold and it is absolutely necessary if we are to have any chance of stopping potentially catastrophic changes to our climate system. California, since the beginning, has undertaken big tasks and entertained big ideas. Befitting a state of dreamers, builders and immigrants, we have not hesitated to attempt what our detractors have called impossible or foolish. In the last four years, in the last 40 years, yes ever since Gaspar de Portola in 1769 marched along the King?s Highway, California has met adversity with faith and courage. We have had setbacks and failures, but always in the end, the indomitable spirit of California has triumphed. Through it all, through good times and bad, California has been blessed with a dynamism and historic trajectory that carries each generation forward. Whether the early explorers came for gold or God, came they did. The rest is history: the founding of the Missions, the devastation of the native people, the discovery of gold, the coming of the Forty-Niners, the Transcontinental Railroad, the founding of great universities, the planting and harvesting of our vast fields, oil production, movies, the aircraft industry, the first freeways, the State Water Project, aerospace, Silicon Valley and endless new companies and Nobel Prizes. This is California. And we are her sons and daughters. Yes, California feeds on change and great undertakings, but the path of wisdom counsels us to ground ourselves and nurture carefully all that we have started. We must build on rock, not sand, so that when the storms come, our house stands. We are at a crossroads. With big and important new programs now launched and the budget carefully balanced, the challenge is to build for the future, not steal from it, to live within our means and to keep California ever golden and creative, as our forebears have shown and our descendants would expect. Link: http://cert1.mail-west.com/tByjgO/myuzjanmc7rm/1tBgt/vzh2/Br8k9qn73eg/fmiah21tBqvnqt/28gcqpmbxqe?_c=d%7Cze7pzanwmhlzgt%7C12unvzsozcdpt82&_ce=1420557837.5fae987f8a078a57adf521b7a69b99a4 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jerry_brown_1_5_15_.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 18209 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jan 7 06:51:51 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 06:51:51 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal: River plan, opinion may impact Trinity Message-ID: <1420642311.53622.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_79cd0884-960f-11e4-a814-ab45ea989767.html River plan, opinion may impact Trinity By AMY GITTELSOHN The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, January 7, 2015 6:15 am After several years of unscheduled water releases from Trinity Lake in the late summer and early fall to protect salmon in the lower Klamath River, the federal Bureau of Reclamation has released a draft long-term plan to address the issue. Comments on the draft plan can be submitted to Reclamation through Jan. 31, with a final version to be released in the spring. Events leading up to the draft plan span 12 years, beginning with die-off of at least 34,000 adult salmon returning to the lower Klamath in late September 2002. A U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service report indicated that these fall-run chinook salmon ? many bound for the Trinity River that feeds the Klamath ? died from severe infections of fish pathogens brought on by high fish densities, low flows and relatively high water temperatures. In a number of years since then, Reclamation has boosted releases from the Trinity reservoir to the Trinity River and hence the Klamath when there have been concerns of another die-off. The additional water releases were applauded by fisheries advocates but prompted a federal lawsuit from Central Valley Project water contractors and calls from all sides for a long-term solution. That draft plan is now out, and states that throughout the process of meeting with stakeholders and holding workshops, no viable non-flow alternatives for fish protection have been identified. Criteria for determining if higher flows are needed were developed in 2012 and include consideration of flow augmentation when the fall chinook run is projected to be 170,000 or greater and the flows in the lower Klamath are forecast to be 2,500 cubic feet per second or lower. Irrespective of these thresholds, Reclamation will continue to monitor conditions in the lower Klamath and work with partners and other experts to determine if degraded river conditions require a response, according to the draft plan. In 2012 through 2014, augmentation release volumes totaled approximately 39,000 acre-feet, 17,500 acre-feet and 64,000 acre-feet, respectively. The average volume released for augmentation in those years as well as 2003 and 2004 was 38,963 acre-feet, which Reclamation anticipates to be sufficient in most years when augmentation is needed. However, the need could exceed that amount, and a detailed evaluation of foreseeable augmentation needs and impacts will be included in the appropriate National Environmental Policy Act document supporting actions implemented under this plan, Reclamation said. Potential adverse environmental effects from releasing the additional water include decreases to the Trinity reservoir cold water pool that could compromise later efforts to comply with Trinity River temperature goals for fish. It could affect efforts to achieve temperature objectives on the Sacramento River during the year augmentation flows are provided and potentially succeeding years. Potential straying of Klamath River origin fish into the Trinity River is also noted. As to whose allocation the water will come from, the draft plan states Reclamation will coordinate with Humboldt County concerning the release of up to 50,000 acre-feet of water granted to Humboldt and for downstream users under the 1955 Act that authorized construction of the CVP Trinity River Division. Although CVP water and power users, and Reclamation itself, had stated in the past that the 50,000 acre-feet for Humboldt is included within the water released for fisheries, an Interior solicitor?s opinion recently made public states that it is separate. With no infrastructure as yet to put the water to other uses, ?Humboldt County has expressed that during instances when ROD flow releases and other flows in the Trinity and Klamath rivers are insufficient to protect fish, they may request the release of the water provided for them and for downstream users for the protection of fish and wildlife,? according to the draft plan. Because the water to Humboldt is an obligation under the 1955 act, ?no compensation will be owed to other water or power users for releasing a requested volume to Humboldt County,? the draft plan states. Otherwise, according to the draft plan, the most likely north of Delta sources from which to purchase water in challenging water years are the Sacramento River Settlement Contractors. In recent years, the cost per acre-foot for comparatively large volumes purchased from the SRSC has been $100 to $200. The draft plan draws mixed responses. From the Trinity Public Utilities District which is concerned with losing some of its allocation and paying higher power costs if more water goes down the river and through fewer power plants, General Manager Paul Hauser has complaints. ?The first just glaring omission in the plan is there?s no mention of any study of reduced summer flows to help with this potential fish die-off problem,? he said. ?The entire paper speaks of nothing but augmentation options.? Water and power users have noted that with the reservoirs the summer flows are kept higher than they naturally would be, and have suggested that the flows might be attracting fish in dry years when they normally would remain in the ocean. ?You?re using Trinity Lake water to fix problems on the Klamath,? Hauser added. ?Ratepayers of the TPUD are paying for that.? From the California Water Impact Network, Director Tom Stokely has a more favorable view. ?It?s certainly the Solicitor?s Opinion that accompanies it that is quite favorable to providing augmentation to fish in the fall,? he said, adding that while the opinion does not make it law ?it?s very helpful.? However, the draft plan puts no limits on CVP exports, so ?there?s the huge risk of draining Trinity Lake to a dead pool where there?s no cold water for fish and there actually isn?t any water for anybody at that point ? There still needs to be enforceable minimum carryover storage in lake to ensure water for fish.? ?It?s like they got half the answer,? he said. ?It?s definitely not the end of the story.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jan 7 07:01:08 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 07:01:08 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fresno Bee: Capitol Hill Californians will push for drought legislation again Message-ID: <1420642868.7009.YahooMailNeo@web120302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Another year, another California water fight. This week, as the 114th Congress commences, lawmakers prepare to revive anti-drought proposals that divided the state last year. Tactics and strategies are still being crafted and the outcome is uncertain, as are the lessons that may or may not have been learned. Capitol Hill Californians will push for drought legislation again By Michael Doyle Bee Washington Bureau January 6, 2015 Updated 5 hours ago David Valadao, greeting supporters at a 2014 election-night party in Hanford, introduced the House of Representatives? versions of California water legislation last Congress. He said Tuesday in Washington, D.C., after he was sworn in for a second term that lawmakers are considering their options for another run at a federal water bill. GARY KAZANJIAN ? The Fresno Bee WASHINGTON ? Another year, another California water fight. This week, as the 114th Congress commences, lawmakers prepare to revive anti-drought proposals that divided the state last year. Tactics and strategies are still being crafted and the outcome is uncertain, as are the lessons that may or may not have been learned. ?We?re still figuring out what our next step is going to be,? said Rep. David Valadao, R-Hanford. ?We have to see what?s possible.? Valadao introduced the House of Representatives? versions of California water legislation last Congress. The first passed the Republican-controlled House on a nearly party line vote in February, over the opposition of Northern California Democrats. A second version passed in December. Both versions steered more water to farmers south of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Both drew veto threats from the Obama administration and resistance from California Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, as well as from Gov. Jerry Brown?s administration. Both died. ?While there is no current congressional proposal on California water, we hope that any effort respects current state law, takes a collaborative approach to long-term solutions and includes all stakeholders in the process,? Richard Stapler, deputy secretary for communications at the California Natural Resources Agency, said Tuesday. Delta area lawmakers, in particular, decried the secrecy surrounding last year?s closed-door negotiations convened by House Republicans and California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein. Neither the House nor Senate conducted committee hearings on the legislation. The private maneuvering bred mistrust and seemed to harden positions. Those privy to last year?s negotiations, though, maintain that it would have done no good to include Northern California representatives because they would never have voted for the legislation anyway. ?We did everything we could,? Valadao insisted, adding that ?we have to make sure everyone at the table is sincere.? On Tuesday, Feinstein said she plans to introduce her latest California water bill ?soon.? ?We need a bill that will help all of California, while maintaining environmental protections and continuing to use the best available science in determining how we protect endangered species,? Feinstein said in a statement. Feinstein added that she thinks ?it will be possible to use improved science and regulatory flexibility to pinpoint when water must be released to protect species and when water can be moved to help Californians struggling from drought.? The Capitol Hill environment has changed, with uncertain consequences for the California water effort. With the swearing-in of the new Congress on Tuesday, Republicans enjoy a 246-188 margin, with one vacancy. More significantly, the GOP also controls the Senate, with what amounts to a 54-46 majority. The Senate power shift brings Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski front and center as the new chairwoman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Murkowski and her staff have already become acquainted with California water issues; now, they will have more say on key questions like oversight, scheduling and packaging, as well as legislative details. Committee spokesman Robert Dillon said Tuesday that Murkowski remains open to working on California drought legislation. ?There was considerable progress last year,? Dillon said, ?and we will wait to see what Sen. Feinstein and other members of the California delegation want to do this year.? The ranking Democrat on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington state, has a lifetime voting score of 90% from the League of Conservation Voters. Depending on how collaboratively the Senate operates under GOP control, Cantwell?s role could prove to be important. Other personnel changes could also influence the course of water legislation this Congress. The well-connected chief water staff aide for Rep. Devin Nunes, the Tulare Republican who has played a key role in drafting the water bills, has moved over to new responsibilities with the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Nunes himself has become chairman of the Intelligence panel, a move that enhances his power, but will also demand more of his time. Nunes? most aggressively vocal foe on water legislation, former Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez, has now retired after 40 years in the House. This shift, too, can cut several directions. Miller?s absence deprives Northern California of its most experienced water expert, and the one closest to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi. Potentially, though, Miller?s departure could also freshen up the bargaining room, liberating lawmakers from the burden of re-litigating old battles. A familiar lobbying contingent still fans out across Capitol Hill. Westlands Water District, keenly interested in the outcome, paid several lobbying firms $680,000 during the first nine months of last year, records show. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California reported spending $670,000 on lobbying in the same period, while other water districts throughout the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys paid lobbyists of their own. ?No, this work won?t be tidy,? House Speaker John Boehner acknowledged Tuesday, speaking of the myriad legislative fights ahead. ?The battle of ideas never ends, and never should.? Contact Michael Doyle: mdoyle at mcclatchydc.com, (202) 383-0006 or @MichaelDoyle10 on Twitter. Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/2015/01/06/4317173_capitol-hill-californians-will.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Wed Jan 7 12:34:38 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 20:34:38 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C4C56B9@057-SN2MPN1-043.057d.mgd.msft.net> Greetings All, Please see attachment for the Trinity River trapping summary update. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2014 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW1.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 60287 bytes Desc: 2014 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW1.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jan 8 07:38:18 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 07:38:18 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] E&E Daily: Drought bill negotiations 'hot and heavy' -- Feinstein Message-ID: <1420731498.12989.YahooMailNeo@web120303.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> E&E Daily WATER: Drought bill negotiations 'hot and heavy' -- Feinstein Debra Kahn and Nick Juliano, E&E reporters Published: Thursday, January 8, 2015 Negotiations between California lawmakers over water management during the state's historic drought are continuing, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said yesterday. Congressional solutions to California's drought over the past year have centered on increasing water deliveries to farms and cities in the southern half of the state. To do that, lawmakers have targeted Endangered Species Act protections for delta smelt and several salmon species that inhabit the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the state's main water hub, inflaming long-standing geographic tensions in the state over how much water is reserved for farms versus endangered fish and other species. Feinstein's attempts to reach a compromise with the Central Valley contingent of California's House delegation broke down at the end of last year, but work is ongoing with a bill expected fairly soon, she said in an interview. "It's something that we're working hot and heavy on and trying to see where we are," she said yesterday. "There are a number of people I want to sit down and discuss it with before and try to see that we get some wide input into it." "It's not imminent," she added. Northern California Democrats had objected to last year's negotiations, in which both chambers passed bills. The Senate held no hearings on Feinstein's legislation, S. 2198, which was considered a short-term solution. The House bill that passed in February, H.R. 3964, would have gone further, undoing a San Joaquin River restoration program that has been the object of a court settlement and intricate compromises between state and federal officials for decades, as well as capping the delivery of water for environmental purposes, lengthening irrigation contracts and lifting certain environmental protections in area watersheds, among other controversial provisions (E&E Daily, Nov. 20, 2014). Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), who co-sponsored another bill, H.R. 5781, that passed the House last month, downplayed the potential effects of last year's legislation. "It wasn't a plot or conspiracy of any kind," he said in an interview yesterday. "It was just trying to create more flexibility, under the existing biological opinions, to divert stormwater when it's going through." The biological opinions under the Endangered Species Act, which reserve water for fish in the delta during sensitive ecological periods, are a prime target for water contractors in the central and southern parts of the state, who have so far failed to overturn them in the courts (E&ENews PM, Dec. 22, 2014). Calvert said he hasn't seen a new bill from Feinstein yet. "I know she's worked hard on it, and I'm looking forward to working with our colleagues here in the House to do a bill and eventually getting back to conference again and trying to work out a solution that we can get enough support to pass," he said. One of the most ardent foes of the legislation, Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), has retired. And with the Senate now under Republican control, it would seem easier than ever to bypass Democratic opposition. But Calvert hedged when asked if the new Congress would improve the drought legislation's chances. "Water is water. It has no partisan divide," he said. "It's probably one of the more complex issues in the country. "There's some people you can't come to an agreement with, under any circumstances." Calvert also said he envisioned more long-term language dealing with water storage, which has proved more popular with Californians on both sides of the aisle. "In the end, we need more storage," he said. "If you believe that climate change is here, whether it's for whatever reason, then you don't have as much snowpack. So we're going to have to catch that stormwater when it's raining. "A lot of our friends in the environmental movements have said that they are in favor of storage, and it can be used also for environmental benefits," he said. "Well, let's see where we're at on this, because this is where we're going to have to go, ultimately." On Tuesday, California Rep. Jim Costa, a Central Valley Democrat who also supported the House bills, said he thought a Senate bill would be out soon, covering "most of those issues that we had agreed on" last year. "There certainly are enough votes in the House to pass it, and Senator Feinstein's the best judge to determine whether or not she thinks she can put the votes together in the Senate," he said in an interview in Fresno. "We'll see." An environmentalist who has been following the debate said she wasn't aware of any talks between Feinstein and wildlife advocates. "If she's broadening out the list of people, I'm not sure who the list is," said Kim Delfino, California program director for Defenders of Wildlife. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Thu Jan 8 10:06:54 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 10:06:54 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] USGS: Endangered Salmon Population Monitored with eDNA for First Time Message-ID: <012201d02b6d$e2e40b90$a8ac22b0$@sisqtel.net> This release can be found in the USGS Newsroom at: http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=4091. USGS main page News Release _____ January 5, 2015 Susan Kemp 541-750-1047 skemp at usgs.gov Paul Laustsen 650-329-4046 plaustsen at usgs.gov _____ Endangered Salmon Population Monitored with eDNA for First Time Bookmark and Share CORVALIS, Ore. - Scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey and Washington State University have discovered that endangered Chinook salmon can be detected accurately from DNA they release into the environment. The results are part of a special issue of the journal Biological Conservation on use of environmental DNA to inform conservation and management of aquatic species. The special issue contains eleven papers that move the detection of aquatic species using eDNA from concept to practice and include a thorough examination of the potential benefits, limitations and biases of applying eDNA methods to research and monitoring of animals. "The papers in this special edition demonstrate that eDNA techniques are beginning to realize their potential contribution to the field of conservation biology worldwide," said Caren Goldberg, Assistant Professor at Washington State University and lead editor of the special issue. DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is the hereditary material that contains the biological instructions to build and maintain all life forms; eDNA is the DNA that animals release into the environment through normal biological processes from sources such as feces, mucous, skin, hair, and carcasses. Research and monitoring of rare, endangered, and invasive species can be done by analyzing eDNA in water samples. A paper included in the special issue by USGS ecologists Matthew Laramie and David Pilliod, and Goldberg, looked at the potential for eDNA analysis to improve detection of Chinook salmon in the Upper Columbia River in Washington, USA and British Columbia, Canada. This is the first time eDNA methods have been used to monitor North American salmon populations. The successful project also picked up evidence of Chinook in areas where they have not been previously observed. "The results from this study indicate that eDNA detection methods are an effective way to determine the distribution of Chinook across a large area and can potentially be used to document the arrival of migratory species, like Pacific salmon, or colonization of streams following habitat restoration or reintroduction efforts," said Laramie. Spring Chinook of the Upper Columbia River are among the most imperiled North American salmon and are currently listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act. Laramie has been working with the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation Fisheries Program in the use of eDNA to document the success of reintroduction of Spring Chinook into the Okanogan Basin of the Upper Columbia River. The papers of the special issue focus on techniques for analyzing eDNA samples, eDNA production and degradation in the environment and the laboratory, and practical applications of eDNA techniques in detecting and managing endangered fish and amphibians. The co-editors, Goldberg, Pilliod, and WSU researcher Katherine Strickler, open the special issue with an overview on the state of eDNA science, a field developed from the studies of micro-organisms in environmental samples and DNA collected from ancient specimens such as mummified tissues or preserved plant remains. "Incorporating eDNA methods into survey and monitoring programs will take time, but dedicated professionals around the world are rapidly advancing these methods closer to this goal," said Goldberg. Strickler, Goldberg, and WSU Assistant Professor Alexander Fremier authored a paper which quantified the effects of ultraviolet radiation, temperature, and pH on eDNA degradation in aquatic systems. Using eDNA from bullfrog tadpoles, the scientists determined that DNA broke down faster in warmer temperatures and higher levels of Ultraviolet-B light. "We need to better understand how long DNA can be detected in water under different conditions. Our work will help improve sampling strategies for eDNA monitoring of sensitive and invasive species," said Strickler. "These papers lead the way in advancing eDNA sample collection, processing, analysis, and interpretation," said Pilliod, "eDNA methods have great promise for detecting aquatic species of concern and may be particularly useful when animals occur in low numbers or when there are regulatory restrictions on the use of more invasive survey techniques." _____ USGS provides science for a changing world. Visit USGS.gov, and follow us on Twitter @USGS and our other social media channels. Subscribe to our news releases via e-mail, RSS or Twitter. Links and contacts within this release are valid at the time of publication. ### Bookmark and Share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 2414 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.gif Type: image/gif Size: 325 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jan 9 10:55:25 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2015 10:55:25 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Lawmakers Introduce Klamath Basin Legislation Message-ID: <1420829725.65302.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=16922d8c-8d40-45dd-9513-14650e3e1881 Jan 08 2015 Lawmakers Introduce Klamath Basin Legislation Washington?Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) today joined Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley (both D-Ore.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) in sponsoring the Klamath Water Recovery and Economic Restoration Act. The bill codifies the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement and the most recent Upper Klamath Basin Comprehensive Agreement. The legislation authorizes the Department of the Interior to take action to achieve the benefits of those historic agreements, including increasing stream flows, providing more water predictability, protecting habitats and settling longstanding disputes over water, power and species management. ?The Upper Basin Agreement proves that different groups and interests can come together and forge a compromise that benefits us all,? Feinstein said. ?This agreement is a boon for California, improving our water supply reliability and offering many economic and environmental benefits to fishermen, wildlife, farmers, tribes and local communities.? The bill: * Codifies the agreements between Klamath Basin stakeholders. * Sets out a cooperative water management plan designed to protect fish and wildlife and provide more predictable water supplies for farmers and ranchers. * Permanently protects and enhances riparian areas, restoring hundreds of miles of fish habitat.### Permalink: http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2015/1/lawmakers-introduce-klamath-basin-legislation -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Mon Jan 12 08:14:38 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 08:14:38 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Article Submisssion: Delta smelt reaches new record low in fall survey In-Reply-To: <000c01d02dd9$0a10f120$1e32d360$@gmail.com> References: <000c01d02dd9$0a10f120$1e32d360$@gmail.com> Message-ID: http://www.fishsniffer.com/blogs/details/delta-smelt-reaches-new-record-low-in-fall-survey/ http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/01/09/1356714/-Delta-smelt-reaches-new-record-low-in-fall-survey http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/01/09/18766643.php "The 2014 Delta Smelt index is 9, making it the lowest index in FMWT history," wrote Steven Slater, CDFW environmental scientist, in a memo revealing the results of the survey. "Delta Smelt abundance was highest in 1970 and has been consistently low since 2003, except in 2011." 800_1280px-hypomesus_tran... original image ( 1280x742) Delta smelt reaches new record low in fall survey by Dan Bacher The Delta smelt, an indicator species that demonstrates the health of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, reached a new record low population level in 2014, according to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife's fall midwater travel trawl survey that was released on Friday, January 9. The smelt was once the most abundant fish in the Bay-Delta Estuary. It is considered an indicator species because the 2.0 to 2.8 inch long fish is endemic to the estuary and spends all of its life in the Delta. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) has conducted the Fall Midwater Trawl Survey (FMWT) to index the fall abundance of pelagic (open water) fish, including Delta smelt, striped bass, longfin smelt, threadfin shad and American shad, nearly annually since 1967. The index of each species is a number that indicates a relative population abundance. The dramatic decline of fish species this year is part of a long term decline of fish species, due to massive water exports out of the Delta, increases in toxic chemicals and the impact of invasive species. Scientists and leaders of fishing groups, Indian Tribes and environmental organizations pinpoint the export of massive amounts of water to corporate agribusiness interests on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley, Southern California water agencies, and oil companies conducting steam injection and fracking operations in Kern County as the key factor behind the fishery collapse. "The 2014 Delta Smelt index is 9, making it the lowest index in FMWT history," wrote Steven Slater, CDFW environmental scientist, in a memo revealing the results of the survey. "Delta Smelt abundance was highest in 1970 and has been consistently low since 2003, except in 2011." Found only in the upper Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the fish mainly inhabits the freshwater-saltwater mixing zone of the estuary, except during its spawning season when it migrates upstream to freshwater following winter "first flush" flow events from approximately March to May. Because of its one-year life cycle and relatively low fecundity, it is very susceptible to changes in the environmental conditions of its native habitat. The survey also revealed the continuing collapse of striped bass, longfin smelt, threadfin shad and American shad in the Delta, the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas. The 2014 age-0 striped bass index is 59, making it the third lowest index in the survey's history. Age-0 striped bass abundance was highest at the survey?s inception in 1967, according to Slater. The index for longfin smelt, a cousin of the Delta smelt, is 16, making it the second lowest index in history. Longfin smelt abundance was also highest in 1967. The 2014 threadfin shad index is 282, the sixth lowest in history and the seventh in a series of very low abundance indices. Threadfin shad abundance was highest in 1997, a year of high outflows into San Pablo and San Francisco bays. "The 2014 American Shad index is 278, which is the second lowest in FMWT history and only slightly higher than the 2008 index of 271," said Slater. "American Shad abundance was highest in 2003." Delta advocates pointed to mismanagement of Central Valley reservoirs and the Bay Delta Estuary by the state and federal governments as the primary reason for the decline. "These crashes in fish populations show that the Delta was not managed for fish protection in 2014," responded Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta. "We know from research that outflows to San Francisco Bay were needed to stop salinity intrusion at the state and federal export pumping facilities." "Thirty years of overpumping have led to the destruction of our fish species during the current severe drought. The question is whether proposed federal drought relief legislation proposed in Congress is going to even worsen the bad management practices and destroy Bay Delta fisheries in 2014," Barrigan-Parrilla stated. The surveys were initiated in 1967, the same year the State Water Project began exporting water from the Delta. The surveys show that population indices of Delta smelt, striped bass, longfin smelt, threadfin shad and American shad have declined 95.6%, 99.6%, 99.8%, 97.8%, 90.9%, respectively, between 1967 and 2013, according to Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA) and Board Member of the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN). Both the 2013 and 2014 indices for Sacramento splittail, another native fish, were not released, but results from 2012 reveal that splittail indices have dropped 98.5% from 1967 levels. In 2011, the Brown administration presided over a record "salvage" of 9 million splittail in 2011, a record year for exports by the federal and state projects. The release of the survey takes place as Governor Jerry Brown continues to back the controversial Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the twin tunnels under the Delta. The plan is based on the premise that taking more water from the Sacramento River above the Delta will "restore" the collapsing estuary. The $67 billion plan will hasten the extinction of Central Valley salmon, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other fish species, as well as imperil the salmon and steelhead populations on the Trinity and Klamath rivers. You can read the full report with graphs at: https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentId=92840 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_1280px-hypomesus_transpacificus.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 250442 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Jan 12 10:04:09 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 10:04:09 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Fw=3A_This_just_in_=E2=80=A6_Supreme_Cour?= =?utf-8?q?t_leaves_in_place_water_delivery_restrictions_to_protect_Delta_?= =?utf-8?q?smelt?= In-Reply-To: <88af2b23c65f1c863838dd9a5ee51fcf060.20150112172222@mail226.atl61.mcsv.net> References: <88af2b23c65f1c863838dd9a5ee51fcf060.20150112172222@mail226.atl61.mcsv.net> Message-ID: <1421085849.36579.YahooMailNeo@web120304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> On Monday, January 12, 2015 9:22 AM, Maven wrote: This just in ??Supreme Court leaves in place water delivery restrictions to protect Delta smelt Breaking News from Maven's Notebook Is this email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. Just posted at Maven's Notebook: This just in ? Supreme Court leaves in place water delivery restrictions to protect Delta smelt follow on Twitter | friend on Facebook | forward to a friend Copyright ? 2015 Maven's Notebook, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you opted in at Maven's Notebook. Our mailing address is: Maven's Notebook 19500 Do Not Mail Street, Santa Clarita, CASanta Clarita, CA 91351 Add us to your address book This email was sent to tstokely at att.net why did I get this? unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences Maven's Notebook ? 19500 Do Not Mail Street, Santa Clarita, CA ? Santa Clarita, CA 91351 ? USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jan 13 15:07:43 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 15:07:43 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: PCL/PCLF - Exciting Intern Opportunities! In-Reply-To: <2381712059.-1402158993@org2.org2DB.reply.salsalabs.com> References: <2381712059.-1402158993@org2.org2DB.reply.salsalabs.com> Message-ID: <1421190463.1592.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> On Tuesday, January 13, 2015 3:00 PM, Planning and Conservation League wrote: PCL PCL/PCL Foundation Seeking Interns Internships PCL/PCLF internships are a great way to become familiar with environmental policy in California and network with environmental non-profit organizations, government representatives, and other stakeholders. Possible work assignments include policy research, report writing, event planning, and outreach to community groups. Interns work on a core project and often provide support to PCL/PCLF staff on other assignments. Interns have opportunities to do work in the Capitol, such as attending hearings and meetings on assigned bills. This is a friendly, flexible, and fast-paced office, and our interns provide key support to our environmental mission. Qualifications We are looking for law students or graduate students in related fields for these positions; however, outstanding undergraduate interns will also be considered. All candidates should possess excellent research and communication skills, and be well suited to work in a fast-paced environment. These are unpaid internships, but PCL/PCLF will assist in attempting to secure funding for the position. PCL/PCLF currently has three internship positions open. For more information or to apply CLICK HERE! Or e-mail Meredith Mitchell at MMitchell at pcl.org 1107 9th Street, Suite 901, Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone (916) 822-5631 ? Fax (916) 822-5650 pclmail at pcl.org? www.PCL.org? www.PCLFoundation.org Please add pclmail at pcl.org to your address book to ensure delivery to your inbox. You are receiving this email because the email address tstokely at att.net was subscribed to our email list. Having trouble reading this email? View it on our website. Copyright, 2008 The Planning and Conservation League. All rights reserved. Privacy and Contribution Policies. Click here to unsubscribe -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jan 14 07:56:21 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 07:56:21 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal: Bucktail bridge grant application pursued Message-ID: <1421250981.33409.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_32220c2a-9b8f-11e4-8cd7-930345f96156.html Bucktail bridge grant application pursued By Sally Morris The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 6:15 am Bucktail Bridge Supervisors hope to improve recreational access by replacing the Bucktail Bridge over the Trinity River at Browns Mountain Road near Lewiston. The Trinity County Board of Supervisors last week voted 4-1 in favor of pursuing a Federal Lands Access Program grant of approximately $3.8 million to replace the Bucktail Bridge over the Trinity River at Browns Mountain Road near Lewiston and improve recreational access at the site. If the county?s grant application is successful, the Trinity River Restoration Program has pledged a local match of $437,186 to the project and the county would contribute an additional $20,201 from its road funds. Director of Transportation Rick Tippett said the county?s match is not essential, but demonstrates commitment and makes for a stronger application because ?they like to see counties with skin in the game and $20,000 for a $3 million project seems small. We?ve been juggling issues there for a long time.? The Bucktail Bridge is a county-owned structure and if the competitive grant application is successful, the proposed project would replace it to reduce scouring and erosion that has been occurring, secure access to the Bucktail boat ramp on BLM land and minimize the threat to public safety and potential damage to property posed by the existing potential for flooding. The development of two new public access trails and an expanded parking area near the boat ramp and existing restrooms are also proposed. One trail would be an approximately 0.13-mile long, hard surfaced pathway accessible by disabled people and the other trail would be a mile long, natural surface trail for use by cyclists, equestrians and pedestrians. The Trinity River Restoration Program staff has worked with county Transportation Department staff to develop plans and engineering specifications, bridge design and environmental studies for the bridge replacement project as well as pledging the suggested 11.47 percent in matching funds for the project. Tippett explained that although the existing bridge is sound and not at risk of failure, FEMA hydraulic models run in 2012 confirmed it is too low to allow passage of a 100-year event with river flows of 14,910 cubic feet per second when flood waters would be backing up into the Bucktail subdivision. He said that while the existing bridge does allow passage of the maximum 11,000 cfs Trinity Dam release called for in an extremely wet year by the Trinity River Restoration Record of Decision of 2000, the velocity of high flows has a serious scouring effect causing erosion of the bridge abutments. The proposal is to replace the bridge with a longer, wider one and a new overflow control structure upstream. The Trinity River Restoration Program has performed much previous work at the Bucktail Bridge site to accommodate higher restoration flows and improve fish habitat, prompting Sup. Keith Groves and others to question the need to replace the bridge now. From the audience, Kay Graves of Lewiston wondered why the county should spend anything on it if it was incorrectly designed in the first place by the federal agencies. ?Spending $20,000 or even one penny on it seems inappropriate during a time when our budget is so constricted and you just had workers out on strike,? she said. In the early 2000s, three other bridges were replaced at Salt Flat, Poker Bar and Treadwell/Biggers Road to allow for higher restoration flows, but at Bucktail the work included raising the approach roadway and installing a bottomless arch culvert in an overflow channel to divert the highest flows away from the bridge. The site has experienced repeated flooding problems since then with additional repairs and countermeasures performed. Ongoing county maintenance costs at the site were estimated at $35,000 annually. Sup. Groves had additional questions and asked to delay board action on the grant application for two weeks to allow more time to investigate the issues, but the vote was 4-1 in favor of moving forward with the application as presented. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jan 14 08:02:11 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 08:02:11 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fresno Bee: Westlands leader says drainage negotiations were no secret Message-ID: <1421251331.89407.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.fresnobee.com/2015/01/13/4328414_environmentalists-incensed-about.html?rh=1 Westlands leader says drainage negotiations were no secret BY MARK GROSSI The Fresno BeeJanuary 13, 2015 Updated 20 hours ago Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/2015/01/13/4328414_environmentalists-incensed-about.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy When I saw the headline ?Westlands reaches secret deal? Monday in The Bee, I knew it was about the toxic irrigation drainage that caused a wildlife disaster in western Merced County more than three decades ago. The ?secret deal? story is talking about negotiations between Westlands and the federal government to settle three lawsuits over cleaning up land tainted by the brackish water trapped just below the surface of some west-side land. The government ? meaning taxpayers ? is on the hook for a $2.7 billion cleanup. Let?s talk about the secret part before looking at the deal. Westlands General Manager Tom Birmingham told me the negotiations indeed were confidential and completely private. But the existence of the talks was no secret, he said. Westlands has regularly briefed the federal court about the talks, Birmingham said, adding that environmental groups and others last year were told of the six-page ?principles of agreement? from the negotiations. The finished version of the agreement should become public in the next couple of months, he said. Then Congress will review it and decide how to proceed. The process is no surprise to anyone who has followed it, Birmingham said. ?It?s incomprehensible to characterize this negotiation as a secret,? he said. ?We?ve been talking about a drainage settlement for the last two and a half years.? But there is plenty in the ?principles of agreement? to incense environmentalists and water activists. I can understand why they would have liked to be involved in the talks and feel this was just a backroom deal. Under the outline of the agreement, Westlands, the 600,000-acre district based mostly in west Fresno County, would get a permanent water contract, meaning no more renewals at 25-year intervals and more assurances of water delivery. Plus, hundreds of millions of dollars in construction debt for the federal Central Valley Project would be forgiven for Westlands. Many environmentalists say the alkali sections of Westlands? land should never have been farmed, much less receive Northern California water. The water is desperately needed to save the declining Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta ecosystem, they say. Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of the advocacy group Restore the Delta, released this statement: ?The idea that the Westlands Water District can secretly negotiate a settlement with the federal government that secures Westlands? water rights, by circumventing state water rights, and that lets Westlands walk away from hundreds of millions of dollars of debt that they owe to U.S. taxpayers is incomprehensible.? At the same time, the deal would wipe out the $2.7 billion cleanup cost for taxpayers. Westlands would have to figure out how to deal with the cleanup. And the district?s water contract would be adjusted to 75% of its current 1.1 million acre-foot allotment, which has been drastically cut back due to drought and environmental protections in recent years. This drainage problem dates back decades. I?ve covered it periodically since 1993. The disaster at Kesterson in western Merced County was discovered in 1982 a few years after federal officials decided to send the salty drainage water from 43,000 acres of Westlands cropland to evaporation ponds there. A concentrated trace element called selenium poisoned wildlife. The government was forced to stop the drainage. Farmers sued the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and Westlands in 1989. Westlands also filed suit against the government, citing federal responsibility to provide drainage. Courts have sided with Westlands, requiring a drainage solution. It has been nearly 15 years since that decision was made, Birmingham said, and the problem remains. JOIN THE CONVERSATION The Fresno Bee is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts. Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/2015/01/13/4328414_environmentalists-incensed-about.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Tue Jan 13 08:25:23 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 08:25:23 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Article Submission: Tunnel critics respond to secret settlement as Delta smelt nears extinction In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1E811366-2E97-43A0-9C7A-8E54CF047E7D@fishsniffer.com> http://www.fishsniffer.com/blogs/details/tunnel-critics-respond-to-secret-settlement-as-delta-smelt-nears-extinction/ http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/01/12/1357321/-Tunnel-Opponents-Respond-to-Westlands-Secret-Settlement-Delta-Smelt-Record-Low-Numbers http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/01/12/18766805.php http://www.calitics.com/diary/15672/tunnel-critics-respond-to-secret-settlement-as-delta-smelt-nears-extinction delta_smelt.jpg Tunnel critics respond to secret settlement as Delta smelt nears extinction by Dan Bacher When you think that things can't get worse in the toxic nightmare that is California water politics, be assured - "Yes, They Can!" Restore the Delta (RTD), opponents of Governor Jerry Brown's rush to build massive Peripheral Tunnels that would drain the Delta and doom sustainable farms, salmon and other Pacific fisheries, today responded to the prospect of a secret settlement of the debt Westlands Water District owes to US taxpayers and the near extinction presently of Delta smelt. Restore the Delta Executive Director Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla stated, ?The idea that the Westlands Water District can secretly negotiate a settlement with the Federal Government that secures Westlands? water rights, by circumventing state water rights, and that lets Westlands walk away from hundreds of millions of dollars of debt that they owe to U.S. taxpayers is incomprehensible. Worse, Westlands is not being required to document how they will continue to farm without belching polluted discharge water back into the watershed, or how their farmers will pay for the approximate $2 billion that it will cost to fix their drainage issues." "American taxpayers should not be on the hook to subsidize water profits for 600 rich farming corporations. Westlands should not be given Federal entitlements to water right seniority over California farmers who were in production decades before Westlands farmers, especially during times of water scarcity, as during this drought. It seems that Westland?s extensive lobbying and media efforts are buying the best government available in Washington," she said. Barrrigan-Parrilla emphasized that this deal is "especially disturbing" considering the recent numbers from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Fall Midwater Trawl Survey that show that the Delta Smelt population has reached a new record low. (https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentId=92840( "The smelt, which was once the most abundant fish in the Bay-Delta Estuary, is an indicator species, meaning that it demonstrates the health of the Bay-Delta estuary," continued Barrigan-Parrilla. "The species is nearly extinct; other Bay-Delta fisheries are in rapid decline, and nobody is thinking about the economic damage that will be inflicted on commercial fisheries and their connected economies resulting from the over pumping of the Delta." The survey also revealed the continuing collapse of striped bass, longfin smelt, threadfin shad and American shad in the Delta, the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas. The population index for striped bass is the third lowest in history, while the index for longfin smelt is the second lowest ever recorded. The population index for threadfin shad is the sixth lowest, while the index for American shad is the second lowest. (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/01/09/1356714/-Delta-smelt-reaches-new-record-low-in-fall-survey ) Barrigan-Parrilla said, ?While Westlands continues to push Federal legislation for increased water exports at the pumps during the drought, enhanced water rights through secret negotiations, an unrestricted license to pollute, and their bills paid by American taxpayers, the Delta ecosystem is unraveling. Westlands leaders will never be satisfied until they have all the water they want, when they want, without any restrictions, despite the economic and environmental consequences for the rest of California. They want the Delta tunnels so they can take as much water from Northern California as quickly as possible, and without the tunnels they want laws passed that simply let them muscle their way to the front of the line, even before the fish, to take all the water they want. They talk about feeding the world and their economic importance to the nation ? which in reality is 0.3% of California?s GDP. The truth is that their free hand of the marketplace is in our back pockets grabbing our tax dollars and the future sustainability of the Bay- Delta estuary for California?s children." She concluded, "We call on the Bureau of Reclamation and the Obama Administration to make public the details of these secret negotiations, and to bring all impacted parties to the table to work on California?s water challenges "in a manner that supports the enforcement of existing laws." For more information about the secret settlement, go to: http://bit.ly/1C0aSyW Again, please remember that when you think it can't get any worse, the state and federal governments have an uncanny ability to find a new, unprecedented low in their mad race to the bottom. Add Your Comments -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: delta_smelt.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 19724 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jan 14 08:13:21 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 08:13:21 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Mother Jones: Invasion of the Hedge Fund Almonds Message-ID: <1421252001.18329.YahooMailNeo@web120304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/01/california-drought-almonds-water-use Invasion of the Hedge Fund Almonds It takes a gallon of water to produce one almond. And that's not the most insane fact about the mad dash to plant the thirsty trees in the middle of a catastrophic drought. By Tom Philpott | Mon Jan. 12, 2015 6:00 AM EST ________________________________ Social Title: Invasion of the hedge fund almonds Social Dek: It takes a gallon of water to produce one almond. And that's not the most insane fact about the mad dash to plant the thirsty trees in the middle of a catastrophic drought. By Tom Philpott [1] | Mon Jan. 12, 2015 6:00 AM ET On a sunbaked August morning, off a rural road in the heart of California's Central Valley, a low-slung tractor rumbles between neat rows of identical, light-green trees. To its right, a plume of dust billows up, thick enough to blot out the sky above the treetops. A chute on the truck sends a steady stream of almonds flying into the trailer hitched behind. Sweating as I skitter around to avoid the moving tractor, I'm witnessing what has emerged as one of the Central Valley's most lucrative rituals [2]: the almond harvest. Here in western Fresno County, which generates more than a fifth of California's almonds, production has more than doubled [3] since 2005. Almonds are now nearly as valuable [4] as the state's vaunted grape harvest.Learn more about photographer Matt Black's project [5] documenting the communities affected by the California drought. Another truck has already been through the orchard, armed with a giant metal forceps that grabs each tree trunk and shakes it violently for a few seconds, sending nuts clattering to the ground like a slow-moving hailstorm. Next, sweepers come through, mounding the almonds into long, narrow piles along the center of each row. Last comes the harvester to hoover them up. The pale, sandy soil is bone-dry?hence all the dust. But that has nothing to do with the drought that is gripping California [6], the region's worst in decades. The San Joaquin Valley, which forms the southern half of the 450-mile-long Central Valley, is technically a desert: In good years, it relies on irrigation water guided in from mountain ranges to the north and east through an impressive system [7] of channels [8]. And in the weeks before a harvest, almond farmers cut way back on watering, both to hasten the ripening of the nuts and to ensure a dry bed for them when they fall. The harvest is a notoriously hot, dusty affair.Charts and maps by Julia Lurie [9] and Lei Wang [10]. As I gape at the efficiency on display?just a few workers and machines can harvest thousands of trees in several hours?an angry voice cuts through the truck's roar. "Hey!" It's a guy who looks to be in his 20s, slender, in a dusty baseball cap, a plaid shirt, and jeans. He says he's heard from my travel companions?a photographer and an almond specialist from the University of California Cooperative Extension named Gurreet Brar [11]?that I'm a magazine writer looking into California's almond boom. He demands to know what my angle is. Am I going to blame almonds for the state's mounting water woes, like other articles have? When I assure him I'm after the whole story, he softens. He declines to give his name or be interviewed at length, but says his family farms almonds, apricots, and raisin grapes. Now they're pulling the grapes to put in more almonds?raisins, he explains, aren't a very well-marketed crop, so it's harder to make a profit. And with that, he excuses himself to go manage the harvest. His logic is unassailable. Almond products?snack mixes, butters, milk?are flying off supermarket shelves. The value of the California almond market hit $4.8 billion in 2012 [4]?that's triple the level of a decade earlier. Only dairy is worth more to the state than almonds and grapes. In fact, almonds, along with California-grown pistachios and walnuts, are becoming so lucrative that big investment funds [12], eager to get in on the boom, are snapping up land and dropping in trees. There's just one problem: Almond orchards require about a third more water per acre [13] than grape vineyards. In fact, they're one of California's thirstiest crops. It takes a gallon of water [14] to produce a single almond?more than three times the amount required for a grape and two and a half times as much for a strawberry. There's more water embedded in just four almonds than there is in a full head of lettuce. But unlike row crops, which farmers can choose not to plant during dry spells, almond trees must be watered no matter what. In the midst of the worst drought in California's history, you might expect almonds' extreme thirst to be a deal breaker. But it's not. In fact, the drought has had hardly any impact at all on the almond boom. The state's farmers bought at least [15] 8.33 million young almond trees between July 2013 and July 2014, a 25 percent increase from the previous year. About a quarter of the saplings went to replace old orchards, but most of the rest were new plantings, some 48,000 acres' worth, an area equal to three Manhattans.A worker drives a harvester through an orchard. In order to thrive, almond trees need a Mediterranean climate, hot summers and mild winters. Those come free in the Central Valley. But steady access to water is just as crucial to an almond grove's success. So where is the water for all these new orchards coming from? No longer California's famed irrigation projects, which draw on the state's rivers and have slowed to a trickle during the drought. Instead, farmers are tapping into groundwater. In all of the other water-scarce states in the West, authorities restrict [16] how much water a user can pump out of the ground. But in California, landowners can drop a well wherever they want, unimpeded by the state [17]. Some counties require permits for wells (though they're usually easy to get), and in a few Central Valley watersheds, things have gotten so contentious [18] that courts have stepped in to limit water pumping. But mostly, California groundwater is yours for the taking. As the State Water Resources Control Board puts it [19] on its website, "To get a right to groundwater, you simply extract the water and use it for a beneficial purpose." As a result, Central Valley farmers have for years been drawing down groundwater at an alarming rate. Between 2003 and 2010, the valley's aquifers lost a total of 20 cubic kilometers [20] of groundwater?enough to meet the household water needs of New York City for 11 years. And then came the current drought, which started in 2011, when suddenly the region's groundwater was being pumped up [21] at an estimated rate of nearly seven cubic kilometers per year. That's the same amount of water that everyone in Texas uses at home annually. Jay Famiglietti [22], a senior water scientist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory who tracks groundwater depletion, points out that no one knows exactly how much water is left in the region's aquifers?mainly because the state's lax regulation means no one keeps track?but the current depletion rate has pushed the state "to the edge of a cliff," he recently wrote [20]. Meanwhile, several recent studies suggest that the West is actually in the early stages of a multidecade "megadrought [23]." Experts worry that the combination of overpumping and drought could be catastrophic for the Central Valley, whose economy depends [24] on being one of the world's most productive farming areas. Richard Howitt [25], an agricultural economist at the University of California-Davis Center for Watershed Sciences, told me that he considers the situation "a slow-moving train wreck." You may think of almonds as the crunchy joy in your candy bar, the protein blast in your cereal. But to Wall Street, they have emerged as a white-hot global commodity?spawning a mini-gold-rush for the Central Valley, where more than 80 percent [26] of the world's almonds, as well as increasing percentages of pistachios [27] and walnuts [28] (43 percent and 28 percent, respectively), are grown. Low in carbohydrates and high in monounsaturated fat and protein, these nuts are buoyed by a rising wave of nutritional consensus and diet fads (gluten-free, paleo, low-carb, etc.). In the United States, per capita almond consumption [29] has jumped 225 percent since 2005?hitting two pounds per year and surpassing peanuts [30] as America's favorite nut. (Yes, botany sticklers, neither peanuts nor almonds are technically nuts; the former are legumes and the latter the seeds of drupes.) WhiteWave Foods (owner of the Silk brand) reports that US sales of its almond milk leapt 52 percent [31] in the first quarter of 2014 compared to the previous year. Almond milk now makes up about two-thirds of the company's total US faux-milk sales, trouncing even soy. Our increasing fondness for nuts?along with a $28-million-a-year marketing campaign by the Almond Board of California [32]?are part of what has prompted the almond boom. But the main driver comes from abroad. Nearly 70 percent of California's almond crop is exported [32], with China the leading customer: Between 2007 and 2013, US almond exports to China and Hong Kong more than quadrupled, feeding a growing middle class' appetite for high-protein, healthy food. Almonds now rank as the No. 1 US specialty crop export, beating wine by a count of $3.4 billion to $1.3 billion in 2012. (Walnuts and pistachios hold the third and fourth spots, each bringing in more than $1 billion in foreign sales.) As a result, wholesale almond prices jumped [4] 78 percent between 2008 and 2012, even as production expanded 16 percent. According to UC-Davis' Howitt, the shift to almonds and other tree nuts is part of a long-term trend in California, the nation's top agricultural state. Farmers in the Central Valley once grew mostly wheat and cattle. But over time, they have gravitated toward [33] more-lucrative crops that take advantage of the region's rare climate. "It's a normal, natural process driven by market demand," Howitt says. "We grow the stuff that people buy more of when they have more money." Like nuts, which can replace low-margin products such as cotton, corn, or beef. Family farms are reaping part of the almond windfall: According to [32] the Almond Board of California, 72 percent of the state's 6,500 almond farms are owned by families, and half are smaller than 50 acres. But massive financial interests?banks, pension funds, investment arms of insurance companies?are moving rapidly into the nut trade. Take TIAA-CREF, a New York-based retirement and investment fund with nearly a half-trillion dollars in total assets under management. The firm, which owns 37,000 acres [34] of California farmland, claims to be one of the globe's top five almond producers. On its website, TIAA-CREF says its California holdings produce more than 18 million pounds of almonds, or "enough to circle the world more than nine times." In a report last year [35], the firm had one word for investors: nuts. It cited the rise of the nut-hungry Asian middle class and a global land base that's "vanishing" because of urban sprawl, water scarcity, and environmental degradation. Almond orchards, said TIAA-CREF, were an "attractive long-term investment theme" with the potential to combine the steady income of bonds with the growth potential of stocks?a kind of investor's holy grail. Then there's Hancock Agricultural Investment Group, a subsidiary of the sprawling Canadian insurance and financial services giant Manulife Financial. It manages $2.1 billion worth [36] of farmland, mainly for large institutional investors like pension funds. Individuals can buy in?for a minimum investment of $5 million. HAIG owns at least 24,000 acres [37] of almonds, pistachios, and walnuts, making it California's second-largest nut grower [38]. In a recent report [37] to investors, HAIG reported that its nut holdings delivered more than 30 percent in total return (income from crop sales plus land appreciation) in 2013, far outpacing gains from its other crops like wine grapes, apples, cranberries, corn, and soybeans. But the largest California nut grower [38] of all is neither an insurance conglomerate nor (exactly) a family operation. Paramount Farms, owned by the Beverly Hills magnates [39] Stewart and Lynda Resnick, has more than 70,000 acres of almonds and pistachios, and claims on its website [40] to be the "world's largest vertically integrated supplier" of those commodities, meaning that its operations control (and capture profits from) all the phases of production, from growing to processing and marketing. The power couple has also been adept at ensuring their nut and pomegranate plantations get plenty of surface water: They store it for dry years in the Kern Water Bank [41], a man-made, underground reservoir built by the state of California for public water storage. In an infamous deal [42] in 1994, the Resnicks' holding company gained a controlling interest [43] in the water bank, making their nut groves less directly reliant on groundwater. Meanwhile, they've ramped up [44] their campaign donations at the federal level, where lawmakers have a say [45] in how much surface water?which, unlike groundwater, is highly regulated by both the federal and state governments?makes it into the Kern bank. Having previously turned island water (Fiji) and pomegranate juice (Pom Wonderful) into ubiquitous products?and amassed a $3.8 billion fortune [39]?the Resnicks have more recently turned their attention to pistachios, hiring the Korean rapper Psy and Stephen Colbert ("They're wonderful. I'm wonderful?I think we're done") to pitch their Wonderful Pistachios brand. According to Howitt, the flow of big money into almonds is a "rational response" to two broad economic factors: low interest rates, which make safe investments like bonds unattractive, and that ever-rising demand from China. All summer long, the Central Valley is baking hot (100-plus-degree days are common) and dry as dust. Yet the valley ranks as one of the globe's most productive farm landscapes [46], accounting for a third of US-grown fruits and vegetables. Making it bloom requires moving titanic amounts of water, mostly from snowmelt flowing down from the eastern mountain ranges and into California's elaborate network of canals and aqueducts. Of this total?what the state refers to as "developed" water?agriculture uses about 80 percent [13], and almond groves suck up nearly 9 percent of that. That's more than enough water, notes Carolee Krieger of the California Water Impact Network [47], to supply the yearly household needs of greater Los Angeles, San Diego, and the San Francisco Bay Area combined?around two-thirds of California's population. Even in good precipitation years, California agriculture has gotten so ravenous for surface water that the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, a critical engine of coastal biodiversity, stands at the edge of biological collapse [48]. The state's once-prolific salmon run, which depends on water making it all the way to the ocean, barely persists [49]; more than 90 percent of marshes [50]have been drained. And when droughts hit, there's not enough water to divert to agriculture either: Two major canal-and-pipeline systems that move water from the mountains to farmland?the federally run Central Valley Project and the California-run State Water Project?cut farmers off entirely [51] for several months [52] this year. While farmers can forgo annual crops like tomatoes and melons during droughts, failing to irrigate trees means losing the entire orchard. That leaves many nut and fruit farmers with only one option: groundwater. A recent UC-Davis study estimated that in the 2014 growing season, pumped-up groundwater will replace as much as 75 percent [53] of the surface water that went missing due to the drought. There's a financial metaphor that helps to explain California's dilemma. To live off surface water is to live off your paycheck. To rely on groundwater is to tap into your 401(k). Every draft you take is one that you won't be able to replenish, at least not easily. The water-drilling frenzy is worst in the San Joaquin Valley, which contains the great bulk of California's almond and pistachio production. In most San Joaquin counties, the number of well permits nearly doubled [54] between 2011 and 2013, an analysis of county records by the San Jose Mercury News found. This region is home to the epicenter of California's nut juggernaut?Kern, Fresno, and Tulare counties, together known as the Tulare Basin. Kern and Fresno counties are by a wide margin the state's leading almond producers [32], churning out 43 percent of California's total harvest, or about one of every three almonds consumed on Earth. The Almond Board of California likes to point out that almond production has become considerably less water-intensive [55] as farmers have turned to drip irrigation and other methods for squeezing more crop from each drop. Gurreet Brar, the University of California Cooperative Extension almond specialist, tells me that the amount of water it takes to produce a pound of almonds has fallen by a third [56] since 1990. But amped-up production has more than offset efficiency gains. As recently as 1995, California orchards were cranking out 370 million pounds of almonds a year. In 2013, they produced 2 billion pounds?a five-and-a-half-fold increase [4]. Today, 80 percent of almonds consumed around the world, and about 40 percent of pistachios, come from California. And land devoted to almonds just keeps growing, expanding by 20 percent between 2007 and 2013 and now reaching 940,000 acres [57], an area larger than Rhode Island. Pistachios are spreading at an even faster clip. Between 2005 and 2012, pistachio acreage jumped 75 percent [58]. Last summer, as orchards grew, the drought persisted, and the water tables dropped, the panicked California Legislature finally did something that agriculture interests had successfully fought back for a century: It took a baby step [59] in the direction of groundwater regulation. Legislation passed in September orders the state's watershed districts to create a framework for regulating groundwater?but the rules don't go into effect for six years, and no one knows yet how effective [60] they will be. They could take decades to make a difference, and they are still weaker than those of other Western states?for example, they don't require a permitting process for new wells. Still, some farm groups?California's Agricultural Council and Farm Bureau, along with nut growers and processors?were outraged [61] by the new legislation and lobbied against it. The day after my trip to Fresno, I'm making my way down dirt roads alongside irrigation ditches, into a stand of new pistachio trees planted in neat, monotonous rows nearly to the horizon: some nine square miles of scrawny saplings, connected by drip irrigation tubes. It's like Iowa's endless cornfields, but with nuts. Deep inside the orchard, I come upon a three-man crew working on a massive well. A red crane towers 30 or so feet into the sky next to a stack of 20-foot metal pipes. The crew shoos us back, but my guide for the day, John Burchard, the soft-spoken, energetic octogenarian who manages the local municipal water supply, can tell they're deepening a well. A lanky man in dark dungarees, a long-sleeved blue work shirt, and a brown felt cowboy hat turned up sharply at the sides, Burchard has friendly eyes and a neatly trimmed white goatee. It's his job to deliver safe water to the 1,026 residents of Alpaugh, a hardscrabble farmworker town in the heart of the parched Tulare Basin. Tulare County granted 831 well permits in 2013?more than any other county [54] in the San Joaquin Valley, and twice as many as in 2011. Alpaugh was once rich in water [62]?in fact, it was an island, sitting in the middle of Tulare Lake, the biggest freshwater lake west of the Mississippi River before it was drained in the early 20th century to feed irrigation projects. Ever since, the lake-bottom land around it has been fertile farm country. But these days, things are dire. Under a morning sun still cranking up to full fire, Burchard shows me one of the town's two active wells [63]. For years, Alpaugh got its tap water from here. But as the drought dragged on, Burchard found the water table dropping a stunning 10 feet per week. By May, the well became inoperable. "If we kept using it, we'd soon be pumping air," he says. So he had to switch to the town's other well, which is 100 feet deeper. It taps a different part of the aquifer with higher levels of naturally occurring arsenic [64]. Burchard's first well was barely compliant with the EPA's arsenic limit, 10 parts per billion. The water from the deeper well had 30 parts per billion. Chronic low-level exposure to arsenic has been linked to heart disease [65] and cancer [66]; children and fetuses are particularly vulnerable. When the water from Burchard's second well hit Alpaugh's taps, the town warned residents about the arsenic. They now rely on bottled water, spending roughly $1,200 annually per household, or $400,000 for all residents put together?a huge burden in a town largely made up of low-wage farmworkers. "That's more than our total budget," says Burchard, noting that the entire town government has about $300,000 to spend on water[67]. With an extra $400,000, Burchard says, he could filter out the arsenic?"I could send rose water" through the taps. Across the valley, the pumping frenzy is causing severe strains. Jessi Snyder, a community development specialist with Central Valley-based Self-Help Enterprises [68], says that several other towns in Tulare County struggle with [69] similar arsenic issues. More than 300 residents of East Porterville saw their wells simply dry up last August, forcing the county to send in emergency bottled-water rations [70]. Meanwhile, under a recent decree from Gov. Jerry Brown, Burchard says he has to impose "severe" water use restrictions [71] on Alpaugh's residents, as part of a statewide effort to combat the drought. People who already can't drink the water will now face tough rules on when they can water their lawns and gardens. As he explains what he calls this "bitter irony," I look around at the town's low-slung modest houses with their small yards supporting patches of grass and the occasional fruit tree. Peach trees that supply fresh fruit to cash-strapped families face water restrictions while the vast nut orchards around them thrive. Of course, any water savings Burchard manages to wring out of residents will amount to a rounding error compared to the water going to agriculture. In his irrigation district, just 2 percent of water goes to homes. The other 98 percent goes to farms. In some Central Valley towns, residents now rely on bottled water when their wells run dry due to demand from nearby nut orchards. When will California's nut boom end? Might some other country?say, China?just step in and put down massive plantings? Doubtful, says David Doll [72], an orchard adviser with the University of California Cooperative Extension. No other region has California's combination of land, climate, infrastructure, and research support to supplant it as the globe's almond king. "India and China have tried, and failed," he says. But an ongoing almond boom will bear ecological costs along with vast profits. As the water table drops from overpumping, the remaining water picks up higher concentrations of minerals from deep in the earth. When orchards are irrigated with such hard water, the salts build up in the soil [73], eventually killing [74] the trees. In Fresno County, I saw entire groves of almond trees looking yellow and wan, signs of salt stress. The land around Alpaugh is already too salty [75] to support almonds; that's why the pistachio is the nut of choice there. The new groundwater legislation won't solve the problems?at least not any time soon. It takes a gradualist approach [60] to an urgent problem?the state's most water-stressed districts don't have to submit sustainability plans until 2020, and then they have additional 20 years to prevent a "significant and unreasonable depletion of supply," which isn't clearly defined. And the California Water Impact Network's Krieger fears that corporate farms will hijack the process. She says that the special water districts that the legislation calls on to regulate water are prone to takeover by private interests?like what happened when the Resnicks gained a controlling interest in the Kern Water Bank. "The last thing California needs is the privatization of our groundwater," she says. On the other hand, California's nut industry may need strong regulation to save itself from its own thirst. In a September note to investors, Brett Hundley, an agribusiness analyst for BB&T Capital Markets, wrote [76] that "the long-term viability of the industry depends on [effective regulation], given sustained declines in surface water availability." That is, without regulation, tree farms will use up the very water they depend on. For now, Doll expects that the almond expansion will continue apace, ending only "when the crop stops making money"?if China loses its appetite for nuts, or the wells finally run dry. Until then, though, the orchards will surely keep growing. After my morning in Alpaugh, I headed about 40 miles south and west through Tulare County toward Lost Hills, a company town that houses the main almond-processing plant [77] of the Resnicks' Paramount Farms. This area was once home to King Cotton, and I still saw the occasional soft green field. But mostly, the roads were lined with almond and pistachio groves. For mile after mile, I sped past orchards, the bushy canopy studded with this year's bumper crop, gleaming and golden in the midday sun. ________________________________ Source URL: http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/01/california-drought-almonds-water-use Links: [1] http://www.motherjones.com/authors/tim-murphy [2] https://www.tiaa-cref.org/public/assetmanagement/insights/commentary-perspectives/perspectives/almonds-harvesting-value [3] http://www.almonds.com/sites/default/files/content/attachments/2013_almanac.pdf [4] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/1310072-2012-nass [5] http://www.motherjones.com/media/2014/12/photos-the-communities-affected-by-the-california-drought [6] http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/02/140213-california-drought-record-agriculture-pdo-climate/ [7] http://www.usbr.gov/projects/Project.jsp?proj_Name=Central+Valley+Project [8] http://www.water.ca.gov/swp/ [9] http://www.motherjones.com/authors/julia-lurie [10] http://www.motherjones.com/authors/lei-wang [11] http://cefresno.ucanr.edu/Contact_Us/?facultyid=22680 [12] http://blogs.wsj.com/privateequity/2014/02/11/investors-are-going-nuts-for-nuts/ [13] https://www.motherjones.com/documents/1310073-uc-davis-agricultural-irrigation [14] http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/02/wheres-californias-water-going [15] http://www.almonds.com/newsletters/handle/almond-nursery-sales-833-million-trees [16] http://www.ncsl.org/research/environment-and-natural-resources/state-water-withdrawal-regulations.aspx [17] https://www.motherjones.com/documents/1310074-groundwater-governance [18] https://www.motherjones.com/documents/1310075-groundwater-legislation [19] http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/board_info/faqs.shtml [20] http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2014/02/04/epic-california-drought-and-groundwater-where-do-we-go-from-here/ [21] https://www.motherjones.com/files/ucchm_water_advisory_1.pdf [22] http://jayfamiglietti.com/ [23] http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00282.1 [24] http://www.library.ca.gov/crb/97/09/ [25] https://watershed.ucdavis.edu/people/howitt [26] http://www.almonds.com/sites/default/files/content/Technical%20%20Information%20Kit.pdf [27] http://apps.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/psdReport.aspx?hidReportRetrievalName=Pistachio+Summary+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++&hidReportRetrievalID=2364&hidReportRetrievalTemplateID=8 [28] http://apps.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/psdReport.aspx?hidReportRetrievalName=Walnut+Summary++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++&hidReportRetrievalID=2099&hidReportRetrievalTemplateID=8 [29] http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/fruit-and-tree-nut-data/yearbook-tables.aspx#40907 [30] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/08/06/the-rise-of-the-american-almond-craze-in-one-nutty-chart/ [31] http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Manufacturers/Almond-milk-accounts-for-two-thirds-of-sales-in-plant-based-milk-category-says-WhiteWave-Foods [32] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/1310088-2013-almanac [33] https://www.motherjones.com/documents/1310090-agriculture-california [34] https://www.tiaa-cref.org/public/assetmanagement/insights/commentary-perspectives/perspectives/withstanding-historic-drought [35] https://www.motherjones.com/documents/1310094-tiaacref-almondharvest [36] http://haig.jhancock.com/about_profile.htm [37] http://haig.jhancock.com/pdf/spring_summer_2014.pdf [38] http://www.growingproduce.com/fruits/2013-top-nut-growers/ [39] http://www.forbes.com/profile/stewart-and-lynda-resnick/ [40] http://www.paramountfarms.com/press/Almond_plant_release_FINAL.pdf [41] http://www.kwb.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Pages.Page/id/360 [42] http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/18/business/la-fi-hiltzik-20100818-1/2 [43] http://www.kwb.org/store/files/50.pdf [44] http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/08/california-water-politics-drought-players [45] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/1310098-water-heist [46] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/14/magazine/californias-central-valley-land-of-a-billion-vegetables.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 [47] https://www.c-win.org/board.html [48] http://cdec.water.ca.gov/cdecapp/drought/get5SI.action [49] http://www.nrdc.org/water/conservation/sanjoaquin.asp [50] http://www.motherjones.com/documents/1310092-california-marshland [51] http://www.mercurynews.com/science/ci_25201634/california-drought-big-cut-backs-announced-water-that [52] http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/california-farmers-to-get-more-water/2014/04/19/ccd922b6-c7d3-11e3-8b9a-8e0977a24aeb_story.html [53] https://www.motherjones.com/documents/1310097-uc-davis-groundwater [54] http://www.mercurynews.com/drought/ci_25447586/california-drought-san-joaquin-valley-sinking-farmers-race [55] http://www.almonds.com/newsletters/handle/almond-board-outreach-water-issues [56] https://www.motherjones.com/documents/1310091-almond-irrigation [57] https://www.motherjones.com/documents/1310089-2014-almond-acreage [58] https://www.motherjones.com/documents/1310093-pistachio-acreage [59] http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/30/us-usa-california-water-idUSKBN0GU03M20140830 [60] http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-groundwater-20140908-story.html [61] http://insideepa.com/Inside-Cal/EPA/Inside-Cal/EPA-03/28/2014/farmers-lobby-against-new-wrcb-groundwater-authority-in-budget-bill/menu-id-1097.html [62] http://www.tularehistoricalmuseum.org/Gallery%20page%20articles/tularelake.htm [63] http://drinc.ca.gov/DWW/JSP/WaterSystemDetail.jsp?tinwsys_is_number=5976&tinwsys_st_code=CA&wsnumber=CA5410050 [64] http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/2011/its-elemental-many-private-wells-are-contaminated [65] http://newsatjama.jama.com/2013/09/23/chronic-low-level-arsenic-exposure-linked-to-heart-risk/ [66] http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1205875/ [67] http://www.visaliatimesdelta.com/story/news/local/2014/07/28/tulare-county-gets-million-drought-help/13266557/ [68] http://www.selfhelpenterprises.org/default.asp?contentID=631 [69] http://californiawatch.org/dailyreport/rural-towns-devise-unique-plan-solve-water-problems-16180 [70] http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-central-california-residents-wells-go-dry-20140826-story.html [71] http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-new-california-water-use-restrictions-20140729-story.html [72] http://cemerced.ucanr.edu/about/contact/?facultyid=3347 [73] http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/gama/docs/coc_salinity.pdf [74] http://www.textbookalmonds.com/news-resources/almond-growers-face-new-water-and-salt-issues/ [75] http://westernfarmpress.com/tree-nuts/sjv-almond-salinity-problems [76] http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/09/08/usa-walnuts-drought-idINL1N0R91EY20140908 [77] http://westernfarmpress.com/tree-nuts/new-paramount-almond-processor -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jan 15 08:04:04 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 08:04:04 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Walters: California gold miners score another win over state Message-ID: <1421337844.44937.YahooMailNeo@web120304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> California gold miners score another win over state -- Dan Walters in the Sacramento Bee$ -- 1/15/15 California?s 21stcentury gold miners have scored a second major victory over state efforts to restrict ? or ban ? them from searching for the precious metal in rivers and streams on federally owned land, such as national forests. On Monday, San Bernardino County Judge Gilbert Ochoa, building on a previous decision by a state appellate court, declared that the state?s moratorium on using suction dredges to sift through gravel had become a de facto ban and thus violated federal mining law, which encourages mining on federal lands. His ruling was a victory for the Western Mining Alliance, which has battled the moratorium signed into law in 2009 by then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. While the law allowed dredging permits to be issued, they had to meet conditions that Ochoa and the appellate court said are impossible to meet. It was also a setback for environmental groups, which had sponsored the legislation, contending that suction dredging damages spawning grounds for salmon and other fish. Last October, the 3rdDistrict Court of Appeal overturned the conviction of a miner who had been charged with illegal dredging in Plumas County, citing federal court rulings that the federal Mining Act of 1872 specifically includes ?the encouragement of exploration and mining of valuable minerals on federal lands?? Judge Ochoa referred to that ruling, saying that the state permitting process ?stands as an obstacle to the full purposes and objectives of Congress.? Craig Lindsay, president of the miners? organization, said that those rulings ?allow us to work with the state to ensure the protection of water quality and wildlife, while still allowing us to recover gold.? Call The Bee?s Dan Walters, (916) 321-1195. Back columns, www.sacbee.com/walters. Follow him on Twitter @WaltersBee. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jan 16 08:09:17 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 08:09:17 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: North State ranchers against grazing regulations Message-ID: <1421424557.39432.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/north-state-ranchers-against-grazing-regulations_27383913 North State ranchers against grazing regulations Damon Arthur 6:00 PM, Jan 14, 2015 5:14 PM, Jan 15, 2015 REDDING, California - State water officials who came to Redding to hear what residents and ranchers thought about a proposed grazing regulation program got an overwhelmingly negative response Thursday. People interested in the proposed Grazing Regulatory Action Project filled the Redding City Council Chambers on Thursday to learn about the program and comment on it. Among the 48 people who spoke during the morning meeting, nearly all of them said they were against further regulation they didn?t think was necessary. ?We don?t need the state up here. We?re doing just fine,? Bill Flournoy of Modoc County told representatives of the state Water Resources Control Board. State water officials are concerned about possible livestock waste getting into streams and degrading water quality. Cattle and other livestock can also walk in springs and on stream banks, causing sedimentation. Animals on stream banks also kill vegetation that keeps streams cool and prevents erosion, said Matt St. John, executive officer of the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board. While water officials said they haven?t yet decided how grazing would be regulated, ranchers said they were certain they didn?t need state oversight. Ellington Peek, 86, who owns Shasta Livestock Auction Yard in Cottonwood, told state officials he has been drinking out of mountain streams for years and it hasn?t hurt him. He echoed other ranchers who said they already take measures to keep cattle from ruining creeks and rivers. ?We?ve already got too much government as it is,? Peek said. Others said the cost of regulating grazing could cut ranchers? profits and drive some out of business. Billie Roney, whose family runs cattle in Lassen and Tehama counties said the proposed regulation could make cattle manure the new spotted owl because of the effect it would have on cattle ranchers. Putting the spotted owl on the federal endangered species list in the early 1990s is widely blamed for devastating the logging industry and hurting rural communities. St. John state officials will compile the comments from the meeting, as well as input from two other meetings around the state. The comments will help guide the state when drawing up proposed grazing regulations, he said. There also will be further meetings with ranchers, environmental groups and others interested in grazing and water quality, he said. Water officials are expected to take proposed regulations to the state water board in 2016, St. John said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Jan 17 09:02:17 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2015 09:02:17 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] San Diego UT: Delta tunnels ignore local market changes Message-ID: <1421514137.49067.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/jan/16/delta-tunnels-ignore-local-water-markets/ Delta tunnels ignore local market changes San Diego and other agencies might not need so much future Delta water By Steven Greenhut4:14 p.m.Jan. 16, 2015In this 2006 file photo, houses located in the Pocket Area of Sacramento, Calif., are seen along the Sacramento River. On July 25, 2012, the state announced plans to build two tunnels that would carry part of the Sacramento River's flow underneath the Delta and to the California Aqueduct. ? AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli Since his inauguration this month, Gov. Jerry Brown has widely touted his proposed high-speed rail system and even attended a groundbreaking ceremony in Fresno, but has been less talkative about the other massive infrastructure project on his agenda: The $25-billion-plus plan to build twin tunnels underneath the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The 30-mile tunnels would bypass the aging levees in the Delta estuary and route Sacramento River water southward to San Joaquin Valley farmers and Southern California metropolises. The goal is to increase water reliability and restore the area?s fragile habitat, but it has met with controversy and a sea of problems. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency?s regional office in August argued the proposal ?would contribute to increased and persistent violations of water quality standards in the Delta, set under the Clean Water Act ? .? State water officials in December announced their plan to scratch pumping stations from the north part of the Delta ? to placate concerns by local residents(who remain unimpressed by the changes, according to news reports), and protect some of the fish species the EPA said might be harmed. A new analysis from the Legislative Analyst?s Office pointed to a more pressing problem: ?some sources of funding ? such as state bond funds for ecosystem restoration activities ? may not materialize. In addition, the costs to implement the Delta Plan are unknown but potentially significant.? But the biggest threat to its construction may not be federal regulators and financial uncertainties and has gone widely unaddressed. It may be a simple market matter: the declining reliance by major water agencies on flows from the Delta. Who pays for these long-term, fixed infrastructure costs if these agencies don?t really need the water in the future? One of the project?s champions is the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, a consortium of agencies that provide water throughout Southern California, including the San Diego County Water Authority. ?Met? says the project, known as the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, ?shows the most promise for maintaining a reliable water system for the next generation? and that it ?stabilizes water supplies at roughly the last 20-year average for as long as 50 years.? But Metropolitan?s biggest member agency, the San Diego County Water Authority, says it isn?t planning on needing the same amount of future water supplies from Met that it had been receiving in the past decades. SDCWA is on track to reduce its water purchases from Metropolitan by 66 percent over a 30-year period. Metropolitan?s second-biggest customer, the city of Los Angeles, is predicting a 50-percent cut in in purchases from Met by 2035. ?They are the twin pillars, the two largest agencies of Met, saying we?re buying less Met water, which means less Bay Delta water ? and that?s permanently shutting the demand on Met,? explained Dennis Cushman, assistant general manager of the San Diego County agency, which has not taken a formal position on the Delta project. Those local water projects include conservation, saltwater desalination, recycled water, a canal-lining project that reduces seepage and a deal for additional Colorado River water. ?Met is going to invest somewhere between four, six, eight billion dollars in BDCP and they said their only plan on how to pay for it is to raise their rates on the sale of a commodity that?s declining,? Cushman added, noting that ?the worst-kept secret? in the water world is that Metropolitan?s member agencies are voting with their pocketbook. As Metropolitan water rates go up, member agencies develop even more local sources, which then forces Met to again raise rates to pay for all its infrastructure investments. ?While development of local supplies is important, you will never be able to replace the supplies from the Colorado River and the Delta,? said Brett Barbre, a Met director representing Orange County. He said the Delta will always be an important part of the overall water-supply picture. Still, this declining demand is an issue. The state can probably get enough cash to plod ahead ? and it no doubt can assuage the fears of federal officials (and force the project on locals). But what if the state?s water-agency customers don?t really need as much Delta water? That?s a question no one seems to be answering. Greenhut is the California columnist for U-T San Diego. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jan 21 08:43:04 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 08:43:04 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal: Court rules in favor of dredge miners Message-ID: <1421858584.37077.YahooMailNeo@web120303.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_e8f65686-a111-11e4-b951-db300a96026a.html Court rules in favor of dredge miners By AMY GITTELSOHN The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 6:15 am Court rules in favor of dredge miners A miner uses a suction dredge in search of gold along the Trinity River before the moratorium in 2009. A California Superior Court judge in San Bernardino ruled last week the state has violated federal law by effectively banning suction dredge gold mining on federal mining claims. Currently, there is a moratorium in effect on issuance of required permits from the state Department of Fish and Wildlife for the dredging, which uses gas or diesel powered machines to vacuum up gravel and sand from streams and river bottoms in search of gold. Miners have used the dredges in areas around the state, including Trinity County. The moratorium was enacted in 2009, and state lawmakers passed legislation to keep it in effect until the DFW certifies regulations to mitigate all significant impacts of suction dredging and the Legislature adopts new permit fees to cover program costs. With more to be ironed out, the moratorium is still in effect for now, said Mark Stopher, senior policy adviser for the DFW in Redding. Judge Ochoa is expected to issue a subsequent order in the next month or so, Stopher said, ?Then it gets complicated.? ?We?re not set up to start issuing permits tomorrow,? Stopher said. ?If the moratorium is lifted and we?re ordered to sell permits we have some second tier questions about what kinds of permits we?re selling.? Questions include whether the agency will use regulations adopted in 2012 or new ones, Stopher said, and how much to charge for the permits. Also, he noted that Ochoa?s decision is based on case law after a miner named Rinehart in Plumas County was cited for suction dredging in violation of the moratorium. He was found guilty in Plumas, but a California Court of Appeals sided with Rinehart, saying an 1872 mining law pre-empts the moratorium. The DFW has asked the California Supreme Court to review the Rinehart decision Judge Ochoa relied on, Stopher said, and the Supreme Court has until Feb. 13 to decide whether it will do that. Furthermore, he said, it seems likely if the judge orders the moratorium lifted that the state, one of the tribes or an environmental group will appeal. Ochoa?s decision was decried by environmental groups and applauded by miners. Suction dredging ?harms state water supplies by suspending toxic mercury, sediment and heavy metals,? the Center for Biological Diversity said in a news release. ?It destroys sensitive habitat for important and imperiled wildlife, including salmon and steelhead trout, California red-legged frogs and sensitive migratory songbirds.? Miners disagree about the impacts, saying they actually remove mercury from past mining techniques from the water, and no harm to species has been proven. From Public Lands for the People which sued the state, President Walt Wegner said in a message to members that a settlement conference is scheduled for Friday with the intent of settling on ?reasonable regulations that will not prohibit us illegally.? As to whether or not to suction dredge mine in the meantime, Wegner wrote, ?That, as far as the state is concerned, is still illegal. As far as the federal law goes, you have statutory rights to mine that cannot be pre-empted or prohibited by arbitrary state action.? It?s up to the individual to decide, he said, but recommended that anyone deciding to suction dredge mine apply for a permit and keep a record of the date, time, location and name of the DFW official if the permit is denied. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jan 21 19:48:24 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 19:48:24 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Chronicle: Boxer takes on GOP leader over water Message-ID: <1421898504.32763.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Boxer-takes-on-GOP-leader-over-water-6030934.php Boxer takes on GOP leader over water By Carolyn Lochhead Updated 3:36 pm, Wednesday, January 21, 2015 WASHINGTON ? Sen. Barbara Boxer, a self-described Brooklyn street fighter, took a swing Wednesday at House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield over water, saying she told the Republican, ?Don?t threaten me.? Her famous scrappiness was on full display during a meeting with California reporters, with the retiring Democratic senator anything but retiring when asked about McCarthy?s charge that Boxer had killed a secret water deal last fall between Central Valley House Republicans and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Boxer?s Democratic colleague. The talks collapsed after Feinstein suddenly pulled the plug, following outcries from Bay Area House Democrats. In a warning shot to Central Valley Republicans now working to craft a water bill with both the House and Senate under GOP control, Boxer said she would not be party to secret negotiations and insisted any legislation have the approval of all parts of the state. McCarthy will get a water bill only ?if he?s not afraid to sit in a room with people from Southern California and Northern California and me,? Boxer said. ?He chooses not to do it, and then he says I?m to blame. People in my state don?t like secret negotiations. Let me be clear. I will not be part of it, ever. Never. Never.? Boxer said McCarthy called her personally to accuse her of killing last year?s deal. Describing the finger-pointing as ?high school,? Boxer said she told him, ?You are dreaming. Why didn?t you allow me to invite members from Northern California and Southern California who were concerned about your bill and have a briefing?? He wouldn?t do it. He still won?t do it.? Boxer said McCarthy told her that he just wanted to talk to her, one on one. ?This isn?t about personalities and some kind of street fight. I?m good at street fights,? Boxer said she told him. ?I grew up in Brooklyn, so don?t threaten me with street fights. Because I don?t run from it.? Central Valley Republicans moved water legislation through the House last year that amounted to a farmer?s wish list, overriding the Endangered Species Act among other things. Boxer co-sponsored water legislation with Feinstein that sought to increase ?flexibility? among water agencies, in order to move water more easily around the state. Neither bill required public hearings, and Bay Area environmentalists feared Feinstein?s bill would give farms more water at the expense of wildlife. Senate approval Feinstein managed to get her bill passed in the Senate, and then began months of closed-door negotiations with congressmen from the Central Valley, including Republicans Devin Nunes of Tulare and David Valadao of Hanford (Kings County), as well as Democrat Jim Costa of Fresno. The aim of the talks was to find a way to move more water from the San Joaquin/Sacramento River Delta to farms and other users in the Central Valley. Republicans thought they were on the brink of a deal late last fall, but Feinstein abruptly backed out. Bay Area House Democrats had complained to Boxer that they had been shut out of the talks. Boxer said she will not support such a process this year. Even a Republican-controlled Senate is unlikely to pass water legislation specific to California without the support of both the state?s senators. ?I am not going to partake in water wars,? Boxer said, arguing that any agreement that favors only one part of the state is pointless because it would only wind up in court. Boxer said she hopes Feinstein can come up with a deal that ?brings everyone together.? If she does, ?we take it to everyone,? Boxer said. ?She knows how I feel.? On other issues, Boxer said candidates vying for her seat in 2016 face a campaign that will cost more than $50 million, adding that such sums make it less likely that House Democrats who are exploring bids could repeat her surprising victory when she ran for the office two decades ago as a Marin County congresswoman. Big change on panel Boxer also handed the gavel of the Environment and Public Works Committee she chaired for eight years to Sen. James Inhofe, a conservative Oklahoma Republican whom she called her close personal friend. ?It was really hard to do,? Boxer said. She apologized for her gloating eight years ago by presenting Inhofe with a T-shirt bearing her comment from the time that said, ?Elections have consequences.? Boxer also gave Inhofe several toys, including a Prius car, expressing her hope that he would consider clean energy fuels, and a toy bicycle. ?The big fight we always have over the transportation bill is whether to build bike paths,? Boxer said, adding that 35 million Americans now regularly use bicycles for transportation. ?We work really well together on infrastructure,? Boxer said. ?On the downside, there is not a scintilla of togetherness on climate change. He continues to be a denier. ... That?s the way it is, I accept it, and stay tuned for another chapter.? Carolyn Lochhead is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: clochhead at sfchronicle.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jan 22 08:45:48 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 08:45:48 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] New California law seeks to cap groundwater overdraft Message-ID: <1421945148.53390.YahooMailNeo@web120303.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> ________________________________ New California law seeks to cap groundwater overdraft Western Farm Press Todd Fitchette Wed, 2015-01-21 00:15 A trio of state laws that went into effect Jan. 1 in California will not immediately turn the tide on decades of groundwater overdraft though that is their long-term goal. The immediate impacts of California?s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 (SGMA) will generally not be seen by farmers and those with domestic wells, but will take place in board rooms and offices. That?s not to mean farmers and those in agriculture will want to sit back and ignore what they don?t see: quite the opposite. David Orth, general manager of the Kings River Conservation District (KRCD), says anyone with a stake in groundwater needs to be involved in the process of developing groundwater sustainability agencies and their associated plans. More from Western Farm Press New DPR chloropicrin rules a 'public health safeguard? Irrigating during dormancy to reduce drought impact ?Pay particular attention to what is happening locally and through DWR?s rulemaking and regulatory process as this will define with more clarity some provisions in the statute,? Orth said. KRCD was formed through special legislation in 1951 to secure natural resources in the San Joaquin Valley and today is a leading resource management agency for the Kings River region serving agriculture, business and residential communities within portions of Fresno, Kings and Tulare counties. Last year California lawmakers passed the SGMA, a package of three laws signed by Gov. Edmund Brown Jr. which seeks to stop the long-term overdraft of aquifers in California. The law mandates that local groundwater sustainability agencies (GSA) be formed by mid-2017 and that those agencies with groundwater basins in critical overdraft have plans in place by early 2020 to correct overdraft conditions within the next 20 years. Practically speaking that means most of the groundwater basins in California and all of those in the Central Valley from Redding to Bakersfield will need to have plans in place by 2020 and reach sustainability by 2040. Adjudicated basins are exempt from the law. In most cases, new agencies and joint powers agreements will be necessary to begin the process towards groundwater sustainability in California. Sustainability? As with any legal document the details are in the definitions and some of those have not been clearly defined in the act, according to Louie Brown, an attorney with Kahn, Soares & Conway in Sacramento. The law firm specializes in agricultural issues and represents many agricultural organizations in political discussions at the state capitol. Though dictionary definitions exist, legal definitions for words like ?sustainable? were not made clear in the SGMA and could lead to litigation unless legislation addressing these shortcomings is passed. ?The word ?sustainable? had not been defined by the courts,? Brown said. ?We heard some whispers before the law was passed that if it passes lawyers are ready to litigate the word,? said Lauren Noland-Hajik, an attorney with Kahn, Soares & Conway. We?ve already heard questions and threats of litigation, Orth suggested. ?I think until action is taken that is adverse to various interest I?m not sure what the lawsuits will be,? Orth continued. According to Brown, the Legislature could have chosen to define the term ?sustainable? in the act, which is used numerous times, but did not. Or, as Brown continued: ?they could have chosen to use terms that had already been litigated and adjudicated that the water community has understood and operated under for years.? For instance, terms like ?safe-yield? have been defined by the courts. Unknown to many participants is why the Legislature purposefully chose the word ?sustainable.? There is already talk at various meetings on the subject of the SGMA that the 2015 legislative session will need to include ?clean-up? legislation to address some of the act?s shortcomings. Drought Almost a year before the SGMA was signed by Gov. Brown, Orth was involved in discussions that would lead to the act. According to Orth, the writing was on the wall in late 2013 as seasonal rains failed to appear by Christmas and newspaper editorials and articles were talking drought. ?As a result I spent the better part of 2014 in Sacramento working on policy documents, then on the legislation,? said Orth. Some, including Orth and California Water Foundation Director Lester Snow, believe that effective groundwater management and the goal of long-term sustainability of water resources for agricultural, urban and environmental users in California must be tied to effective surface water management. According to Snow the act assumes that groundwater pumping in drought years will be unsustainable by the very fact it is replacing what is not available through surface water allocations, which is why he believes that ample surface water storage and effective management of those resources become part of the overall process to reach balance in California groundwater basins. ?The new groundwater act assumes that we are going to over-pump our groundwater basins during a drought,? Snow said. ?The key thing is we?ve got to stop doing that during average years so we have storage under shortage conditions.? The connection between surface and groundwater came to a head in 2014 when state and federal water managers denied surface water deliveries to California farms, leaving growers with no choice but to pump water from underground. While typical years can see 40 percent of a grower?s water supply come from underground and 60 percent in dry years, a zero-percent surface allocation to California farms meant that 100 percent of what most farmers used to grow what little crops they could came from underground aquifers. It was only a few farmers with the most senior of water rights and access to limited surface supplies who saw any surface water in 2014. The effects on the rest of agriculture were catastrophic as those without wells saw permanent crops die and domestic wells in some parts of the state dried up, leaving residents without water. Deadlines The SGMA seeks to return groundwater basins to balance by 2040 with a series of deadlines between now and then to mark that progress. While the law is designed to allow local agencies to achieve these goals, the State of California can step in and assume that role if local agencies do not. ?Our objective here is to keep groundwater management at the local level and not at the State Water Resources Control Board, or in many cases by the guys in the black robes through the judicial process,? said Orth. State Water Board Member Dorene D?Adamo says the state water board would prefer that local agencies handle those efforts though the state agency is willing to step in if necessary. ?There should be a limited state role in the event that the locals either don?t have the political will or are unable to formulate those plans,? D?Adamo said. In some cases county boards of supervisors may assume the role as a GSA and formulate groundwater plans, though because the various water districts and county boundaries do not match up neatly over groundwater basins, the likelihood is high that these agencies will need to form joint powers agreements. Further challenging efforts will be the science and staffing needed to study and implement these plans. According to Orth, many of these agencies could find themselves challenged to commit to such detailed work within the prescribed timelines. What could help the process is that the US Geological Survey?s National Water Information System is said to contain extensive water data for the nation. Public access to these data is provided. The latest agricultural news each day to your Inbox. Click here for the free Western Farm Press Daily e-mail newsletter. Cost is yet another factor in all this as scientific studies don?t come cheap, nor do efforts to increase surface storage to reduce the pressure it presents on pumping aquifers when surface supplies are insufficient. Some money is available from Proposition 1, the water bond, to do some of the work related to groundwater, as is $2.5 billion for surface water storage. Still, Snow remains concerned that if surface storage issues are not addressed in the long term, and that if reservoirs do not refill in the short-term, further impacts to California?s imbalanced water system could be even worse. ________________________________ Source URL: http://westernfarmpress.com/irrigation/new-california-law-seeks-cap-groundwater-overdraftWestern Farm Press Todd Fitchette Wed, 2015-01-21 00:15 A trio of state laws that went into effect Jan. 1 in California will not immediately turn the tide on decades of groundwater overdraft though that is their long-term goal. The immediate impacts of California?s Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 (SGMA) will generally not be seen by farmers and those with domestic wells, but will take place in board rooms and offices. That?s not to mean farmers and those in agriculture will want to sit back and ignore what they don?t see: quite the opposite. David Orth, general manager of the Kings River Conservation District (KRCD), says anyone with a stake in groundwater needs to be involved in the process of developing groundwater sustainability agencies and their associated plans. More from Western Farm Press New DPR chloropicrin rules a 'public health safeguard? Irrigating during dormancy to reduce drought impact ?Pay particular attention to what is happening locally and through DWR?s rulemaking and regulatory process as this will define with more clarity some provisions in the statute,? Orth said. KRCD was formed through special legislation in 1951 to secure natural resources in the San Joaquin Valley and today is a leading resource management agency for the Kings River region serving agriculture, business and residential communities within portions of Fresno, Kings and Tulare counties. Last year California lawmakers passed the SGMA, a package of three laws signed by Gov. Edmund Brown Jr. which seeks to stop the long-term overdraft of aquifers in California. The law mandates that local groundwater sustainability agencies (GSA) be formed by mid-2017 and that those agencies with groundwater basins in critical overdraft have plans in place by early 2020 to correct overdraft conditions within the next 20 years. Practically speaking that means most of the groundwater basins in California and all of those in the Central Valley from Redding to Bakersfield will need to have plans in place by 2020 and reach sustainability by 2040. Adjudicated basins are exempt from the law. In most cases, new agencies and joint powers agreements will be necessary to begin the process towards groundwater sustainability in California. Sustainability? As with any legal document the details are in the definitions and some of those have not been clearly defined in the act, according to Louie Brown, an attorney with Kahn, Soares & Conway in Sacramento. The law firm specializes in agricultural issues and represents many agricultural organizations in political discussions at the state capitol. Though dictionary definitions exist, legal definitions for words like ?sustainable? were not made clear in the SGMA and could lead to litigation unless legislation addressing these shortcomings is passed. ?The word ?sustainable? had not been defined by the courts,? Brown said. ?We heard some whispers before the law was passed that if it passes lawyers are ready to litigate the word,? said Lauren Noland-Hajik, an attorney with Kahn, Soares & Conway. We?ve already heard questions and threats of litigation, Orth suggested. ?I think until action is taken that is adverse to various interest I?m not sure what the lawsuits will be,? Orth continued. According to Brown, the Legislature could have chosen to define the term ?sustainable? in the act, which is used numerous times, but did not. Or, as Brown continued: ?they could have chosen to use terms that had already been litigated and adjudicated that the water community has understood and operated under for years.? For instance, terms like ?safe-yield? have been defined by the courts. Unknown to many participants is why the Legislature purposefully chose the word ?sustainable.? There is already talk at various meetings on the subject of the SGMA that the 2015 legislative session will need to include ?clean-up? legislation to address some of the act?s shortcomings. Drought Almost a year before the SGMA was signed by Gov. Brown, Orth was involved in discussions that would lead to the act. According to Orth, the writing was on the wall in late 2013 as seasonal rains failed to appear by Christmas and newspaper editorials and articles were talking drought. ?As a result I spent the better part of 2014 in Sacramento working on policy documents, then on the legislation,? said Orth. Some, including Orth and California Water Foundation Director Lester Snow, believe that effective groundwater management and the goal of long-term sustainability of water resources for agricultural, urban and environmental users in California must be tied to effective surface water management. According to Snow the act assumes that groundwater pumping in drought years will be unsustainable by the very fact it is replacing what is not available through surface water allocations, which is why he believes that ample surface water storage and effective management of those resources become part of the overall process to reach balance in California groundwater basins. ?The new groundwater act assumes that we are going to over-pump our groundwater basins during a drought,? Snow said. ?The key thing is we?ve got to stop doing that during average years so we have storage under shortage conditions.? The connection between surface and groundwater came to a head in 2014 when state and federal water managers denied surface water deliveries to California farms, leaving growers with no choice but to pump water from underground. While typical years can see 40 percent of a grower?s water supply come from underground and 60 percent in dry years, a zero-percent surface allocation to California farms meant that 100 percent of what most farmers used to grow what little crops they could came from underground aquifers. It was only a few farmers with the most senior of water rights and access to limited surface supplies who saw any surface water in 2014. The effects on the rest of agriculture were catastrophic as those without wells saw permanent crops die and domestic wells in some parts of the state dried up, leaving residents without water. Deadlines The SGMA seeks to return groundwater basins to balance by 2040 with a series of deadlines between now and then to mark that progress. While the law is designed to allow local agencies to achieve these goals, the State of California can step in and assume that role if local agencies do not. ?Our objective here is to keep groundwater management at the local level and not at the State Water Resources Control Board, or in many cases by the guys in the black robes through the judicial process,? said Orth. State Water Board Member Dorene D?Adamo says the state water board would prefer that local agencies handle those efforts though the state agency is willing to step in if necessary. ?There should be a limited state role in the event that the locals either don?t have the political will or are unable to formulate those plans,? D?Adamo said. In some cases county boards of supervisors may assume the role as a GSA and formulate groundwater plans, though because the various water districts and county boundaries do not match up neatly over groundwater basins, the likelihood is high that these agencies will need to form joint powers agreements. Further challenging efforts will be the science and staffing needed to study and implement these plans. According to Orth, many of these agencies could find themselves challenged to commit to such detailed work within the prescribed timelines. What could help the process is that the US Geological Survey?s National Water Information System is said to contain extensive water data for the nation. Public access to these data is provided. The latest agricultural news each day to your Inbox. Click here for the free Western Farm Press Daily e-mail newsletter. Cost is yet another factor in all this as scientific studies don?t come cheap, nor do efforts to increase surface storage to reduce the pressure it presents on pumping aquifers when surface supplies are insufficient. Some money is available from Proposition 1, the water bond, to do some of the work related to groundwater, as is $2.5 billion for surface water storage. Still, Snow remains concerned that if surface storage issues are not addressed in the long term, and that if reservoirs do not refill in the short-term, further impacts to California?s imbalanced water system could be even worse. ________________________________ Source URL: http://westernfarmpress.com/irrigation/new-california-law-seeks-cap-groundwater-overdraft -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jan 22 16:15:38 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 16:15:38 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Capitol Public Radio: Salmon Survival In California's Drough Message-ID: <1421972138.49686.YahooMailNeo@web120304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.capradio.org/articles/2015/01/20/salmon-survival-in-californias-drought/ Salmon Survival In California's Drought * Amy Quinton Tuesday, January 20, 2015 | Sacramento, CA | Permalink playPhotos of Big Springs Creek before (left) and after cattle exclusion fencing (right). Carson Jeffres / UC Davis Big Springs Creek is a tributary of the Shasta River, which historically was one of the most productive salmon streams in California. But over time, cattle grazed on the aquatic plants that provide salmon shady cool water and plenty of insects to eat. Salmon populations plummeted. In 2009, the Nature Conservancy leased the pasture so ranching could continue, but put up a fence along the creek. The result: a seven degree drop in water temperature. ?There is no other project I can think of that can demonstrate this kind of success in such a short time period,? says Ann Willis, lead researcher with UC Davis?s Center for Watershed Sciences. ?That?s the kind of thing that people spend millions of dollars removing dams and re-operating dams to try to achieve,"says Willis. "That kind of change in Big Springs was achieved simply by putting up this fence and targeting this temperature impairment problem.? Average returns of fall-run Chinook salmon in the last four years have now quadrupled, even in the drought. droughtsalmonUC DavisDrought 2015 * Amy Quinton Environment Reporter Amy came to Sacramento from New Hampshire Public Radio (NHPR) where she was the Environment Reporter. Amy has also reported for NPR member stations WFAE in Charlotte, NC, WAMU in Washington D.C. and American Public Media's "Marketplace." Read Full Bio @CapRadioQuinton Email Amy Quinton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From unofelice at gmail.com Fri Jan 23 12:55:37 2015 From: unofelice at gmail.com (Felice Pace) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 12:55:37 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Capital Radios Report on Shasta River salmon and restoration Message-ID: Restoration programs are very adept at claiming credit for things for which they have little or no responsibility. There is near scientific consensus that the relatively "good" salmon returns we've seen up and down the coast the past few years are mainly due to excellent ocean conditions and not to "restoration" of habitat. What TNC has done on the Shasta is a good thing and clearly a benefit to those salmon which go up Parks Creek. But these recent runs are not anywhere near what they should be. Most importantly, TNC's good work is being use to provide "cover" to those who continue to starve key Shasta salmon habitat of water; that includes the main stem below Dwinnell Dam and the Little Shasta River. TNC also provides a means to avoid the single most effective action which could be taken to recover Shasta River Salmon, that is removal of the illegal, salmon-killing Dwinnell Dam and Reservoir. I see that it is not TNC but the UC Davis Watershed Center which issued the press release resulting in this story. That Center's real mission is to provide cover for the environmental impacts of agriculture; they are not a credible source and there is no real science behind their claim. During the last few drought summers, irrigators on the Shasta turned on their diversions after the watermaster went home at 5 PM and stole water all night. TNC and UCDavis Watershed Center folks likely knew what was going on but did not report it or take action to end it. DFG, DWR and SWRCB almost certainly knew what was going on (or should have known) but failed to take any meaningful action. The failure to provide adequate flows for salmon will trump anything good that TNC does; restoration is no substitute for adequate stream flows. Felice Pace Klamath, CA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Jan 26 17:46:40 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 17:46:40 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] CDFW: Multi-agency Cannabis Pilot Project Finishes Successful Three-Day Inspection Message-ID: <1422323200.4653.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> https://cdfgnews.wordpress.com/2015/01/23/multi-agency-cannabis-pilot-project-finishes-successful-three-day-inspection-of-marijuana-grows-in-eel-river-watershed/ Multi-agency Cannabis Pilot Project Finishes Successful Three-Day Inspection of Marijuana Grows in Eel River Watershed JANUARY 23, 2015 Media Contacts: George Kostyrko, State Water Boards, (916) 341-7365 Jordan Traverso, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, (916) 654-9937 An innovative multi-agency partnership involving state and local agencies today finished inspections of 14 private properties with active marijuana grow operations along Sproul Creek within the Eel River watershed. The three-day effort, which began Jan. 21, is intended to ensure existing and future marijuana grow operations on private lands aren?t impacting nearby waterways and wildlife. The partnership includes staff from the State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water Rights, North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, biologists and wildlife officers from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and members of the Humboldt County Sheriff?s Office and Humboldt County staff. Sproul Creek is home to five endangered salmonid species, including one of the most important populations of coho salmon in the Eel River watershed. This stream went dry last year for the first time in many years. This is most likely a result of water diversions for marijuana cultivation combined with the ongoing drought conditions. In addition, the agencies are concerned about potentially significant pollutants entering the watershed from sediments, pesticides, fertilizers and other contaminants that, when not properly regulated or monitored, degrade the environment and threaten native plants and wildlife. ?Sproul Creek is one of several at-risk watersheds this multi-agency partnership will be visiting and inspecting in the weeks and months ahead where known grow operations exist,? said Cris Carrigan, Chief of the State Water Board?s Office of Enforcement, which is specifically focused on compliance with existing environmental regulations. ?What we are seeking from the growers is a commitment to work with us to solve the water quality and water supply problems in the watershed.? Carrigan said the goal of the integrated effort is to be proactive with our enforcement resources in acutely impacted watersheds and hold those responsible for existing environmental damage accountable, while providing a pathway toward compliance for those operators who want to cultivate in an environmentally sound manner. The Water Boards and CDFW hope that most or many of the growers will be interested in working with state and local agencies cooperatively to prepare for and then enroll in permits that may be required, such as a conditional waiver of waste discharge requirements and/or streambed alteration agreement. The North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board is creating a conditional waiver to better monitor and regulate activities associated with cannabis cultivation much like it regulates and monitors other activities on California?s North Coast. Currently, grow operations are not regulated for potential environmental impacts. ?Voluntary compliance with the law is the best-case scenario and we expect to see an increase in the number of permit applications following these inspections,? said Lt. DeWayne Little of CDFW?s Watershed Enforcement Team. ?We do have the authority to serve search warrants, cite those who are damaging the environment and confiscate crops. We hope to not have to resort to those measures, but it is imperative that we take every precaution to avoid the loss of the coho run for a second year in a row.? Following this inspection effort of the 14 locations, state and regional water board staff observed a variety of potential and actual violations that will be addressed in the coming weeks. Possible violations appear to be unlawful diversion and storage of water for growing operations, and discharge of waste to waterways including some indications of the use of pesticide or fertilizers in ways that could degrade nearby waterways. Individuals on site at a majority of the inspected parcels gave consent for the team to look at the operations and were cooperative in identifying areas of interest for the inspectors, negating the need to serve administrative warrants to enter properties to perform the inspections. The state and regional water board staff will be studying the evidence, and providing inspection reports to the property owners detailing any issues that need to be addressed. Those reports should be finalized in the next several weeks. Following issuance of those reports, formal enforcement orders may follow from the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board and/or State Water Board to ensure compliance with all applicable Water Code provisions. During this inspection effort, no grow operations were eradicated and Proposition 215 cards were not reviewed. For more information on the activities of the State Water Board?s Office of Enforcement efforts relative to cannabis cultivation, please visit our resources page here. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Mon Jan 26 16:49:00 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 00:49:00 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Jweek 3 update Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C4D4DDC@057-SN2MPN1-043.057d.mgd.msft.net> Please see attachment for the Trinity River trapping summary update for Jweek 3. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2014 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW3.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 60310 bytes Desc: 2014 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW3.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jan 27 17:50:55 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:50:55 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Rep. Jared Huffman Announces New Environmental Leadership Message-ID: <1422409855.79746.YahooMailNeo@web120303.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> For Immediate Release January 27, 2015 Contact: Paul Arden 202.225.5187 Rep. Jared Huffman Announces New Environmental Leadership Role in 114th Congress Will serve as Ranking Member on newly-created Water, Power, and Oceans Subcommittee WASHINGTON-Congressman Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael) today was named Ranking Member of the newly-created House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans. The Subcommittee is responsible for matters concerning America's water resources, federal irrigation projects, generation of electric power from federal water projects and interstate water issues. This is Huffman's second term in Congress, and his first Subcommittee leadership position. "I am honored that my colleagues have supported me for this important position, and grateful to Ranking Member Grijalva and outgoing Ranking Member Napolitano for their leadership," said Huffman. "As Ranking Member of the newly-created Water, Power, and Oceans Subcommittee, I know we'll have our work cut out for us to restore fisheries, improve West-wide water supply reliability, and protect our coastline. I have been privileged to work on a number of statewide water successes in my career, and I look forward to tackling the complex natural resource issues that we face in a constructive, problem-solving manner." The Subcommittee's oversight and legislative jurisdiction includes: * All measures and matters pertaining to irrigation and reclamation projects and other water resources development and recycling programs, including policies and procedures. * Indian water rights and settlements. * Generation and marketing of electric power from Federal water projects by Federally chartered or Federal regional power marketing authorities. * All measures and matters concerning water resources planning conducted pursuant to the Water Resources Planning Act, water resource research and development programs and saline water research and development. * Compacts relating to the use and apportionment of interstate waters, water rights and major interbasin water or power movement programs. * Rights of way over public lands for energy-related transmission. * Fisheries management and fisheries research generally, including the management of all commercial and recreational fisheries (including the reauthorization of the Magnuson Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act), interjurisdictional fisheries, international fisheries agreements, aquaculture, seafood safety and fisheries promotion. * All matters pertaining to the protection of coastal and marine environments and estuarine protection and coastal barriers (except coastal zone management). * Oceanography. * Marine sanctuaries. Last week, Huffman was also named to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure's Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, and the Subcommittee on Water, Resources and Environment. Huffman was also named today to the Natural Resources Committee's Federal Lands Subcommittee and Oversight Subcommittee. When serving in the California Assembly, Huffman chaired the Water, Parks, and Wildlife Committee. In that capacity, he played a leading role in crafting and passing an historic set of water reforms in 2009. That bipartisan water reform package was hailed as the most significant policy advance for California water in half a century and was broadly supported by agricultural and urban water managers and stakeholders throughout the state - from San Diego to Los Angeles, the Central Valley, and the San Francisco Bay Area. The legislation was endorsed by conservationists, fishermen, and water interests statewide, a major accomplishment in an area that is frequently the source of significant conflict. Prior to his election to the Assembly, Huffman was a publicly elected director of the Marin Municipal Water District, serving 190,000 people and overseeing a water system that includes seven dams, a recycling plant, a regional conveyance pipeline, and many cutting-edge water conservation programs. He also spent six years as an environmental attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, where he focused on river and fishery restoration. ### -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jan 27 19:46:18 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 19:46:18 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Mercury News: Plan to raise Shasta Dam takes hit after federal biologists say they can't support it Message-ID: <1422416778.82004.YahooMailNeo@web120302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.mercurynews.com/science/ci_27406666/plan-raise-shasta-dam-takes-hit-after-federal Plan to raise Shasta Dam takes hit after federal biologists say they can't support it By Paul Rogers progers at mercurynews.com POSTED: 01/27/2015 06:26:45 PM PST# COMMENTS| UPDATED: 36 MIN. AGO Click photo to enlarge Shasta Dam (AP Photo/San Francisco Examiner, Kim Komenich) ( KIM KOMENICH ) Less than three months after California voters approved a water bond that contains $2.7 billion for new water storage, one of the leading projects under consideration has suffered a potentially fatal setback.Biologists at the main federal agency that oversees the Endangered Species Act have concluded they cannot endorse a $1.1 billion plan to raise the height of the dam at California's largest reservoir, Shasta Lake, because of its impact on endangered salmon.In a 349-page draft report completed in late November, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concluded that it is "unable to support" any of the project's five options being considered.The study has been shared with other federal agencies but not made public -- and only came to light after environmentalists filed a Freedom of Information Act request."This is a huge setback. It shows they need to go back to the drawing board," said Tom Stokely, a spokesman for the California Water Impact Network, a nonprofit group based in Santa Barbara that obtained the documents.Supporters of raising the dam said they are concerned about the report."People are going to be frustrated," said Mike Wade, executive director of the California Farm Water Coalition. "The voters made their point. They want to see investment in water storage projects along with conservation and ecosystem investment. By 2-1, people voted in favor of all of it." Located 10 miles north of Redding, the Shasta Dam is a linchpin of California's water supply. Built by the Roosevelt administration from 1935 to 1945, it holds back a vast reservoir that when full contains enough water for the yearly needs of 20 million Californians. Much of the water from Shasta is used to irrigate Central Valley farms, but some also goes to Bay Area cities via the Santa Clara Valley Water District and the East Bay Municipal Utility District. Although Shasta Lake is only 42 percent full now because of the state's severe drought, farmers, some city leaders and government engineers have for more than 20 years embraced the idea of raising the dam to store more water in wet years. The most recent plan by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which owns the 521-foot-high dam, would increase its height by 18.5 feet and require the relocation of roads, bridges, utilities and railroad lines. Bureau officials have justified the project's $1.1 billion cost by saying that it would allow the lake to store 14 percent more water -- for an increased average annual yield of up to 113,000 acre feet, enough water for about 550,000 people a year. It also would help boost the number of endangered Chinook salmon on the Sacramento River, bureau officials say, by allowing for the regular release of more cold water behind the dam into the river, particularly during dry years. Under that justification, they have proposed that federal taxpayers pay 61 percent of the cost of the project while California farms and cities that use the extra water and hydro-electric power would pay the other 39 percent. But in their evaluation, biologists at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Bay-Delta office in Sacramento concluded that raising Shasta Dam would flood salmon habitat and that any benefits would be offset by the degradation of salmon habitat downstream in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. That had not been considered in the Shasta Dam studies so far. Further, the biologists said, looking at historic rainfall patterns, "in about 90 percent of the years, there would be no benefit" to salmon. Obtaining the support of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is key. Unless the project receives permits under the Endangered Species Act from the service, it cannot be built. In addition, environmental groups who oppose the project, claiming nearly all of its benefits would go to large farm operations in the Central Valley while taxpayers would pay the majority of the costs, could use the report as a basis for a lawsuit to block the dam expansion. "This isn't just an environmental and fisheries issue. It's about the squandering of taxpayer dollars," said Bill Jennings of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, an opponent of the project. "It's about pork-barrel politics, about public money flowing from the public coffers to the handful of corporate farmers in the San Joaquin Valley." Opponents say more water can be obtained at a cheaper cost through water recycling, conservation, underground storage and storm water capture. Raising Shasta Dam is one of three major new storage projects that could be funded with money from the November water bond. The others are Sites Reservoir in Colusa County and Temperance Flat, near Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Park. Bureau of Reclamation officials said Tuesday they will take the biologists' concerns on the Shasta project under consideration. The bureau released a draft environmental impact statement in 2013 and is still finishing the final document, which is needed before Congress can consider whether to fund the project. "It's too early at this stage to say how these particular comments might impact the final report," said Louis Moore, a spokesman for the bureau. Meanwhile, officials at the Fish and Wildlife Service indicated they may be altering some language in the report. "It is a draft so it is subject to change," said Steve Martarano, a spokesman for the service. A federal government source familiar with the report said that Bureau of Reclamation officials were unhappy with it and have pressured the service to rewrite it. Environmentalists say they are worried that top leaders in the Fish and Wildlife Service, particularly its regional director, Ren Lohoefener, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush, will overrule the biologists for political reasons. They cited the case of Julie MacDonald, a former deputy assistant secretary in the service who resigned in 2007 after an investigation found she had reversed several decisions by the agency's biologists to weaken protections for endangered species in California. The investigation also found that she had given internal documents to the oil industry and property rights groups. When asked about those concerns, Martarano said: "It's going through the typical process of a draft." Paul Rogers covers resources and environmental issues. Contact him at 408-920-5045. Follow him at Twitter.com/PaulRogersSJMN. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jan 27 19:49:01 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 19:49:01 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] C-WIN, CSPA Press Release : US Fish and Wildlife Service Issues Report Opposing the Enlargement of Shasta Dam Message-ID: <1422416941.22162.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> https://www.c-win.org/content/media-release-delta-smelt-plummets-extinction-new-rules-allow-increased-kill.html January 28, 2015 For Immediate Release US Fish and Wildlife Service Issues Report Opposing the Enlargement of Shasta Dam The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has issued a revised draft report on the proposed enlargement of Shasta Dam, stating that it will harm salmon populations. The agency concluded that it cannotsupport any of the proposed action alternatives presented by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which controls and operates the dam. The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) issued a draft Environmental Impact Statement on dam enlargement in 2013. The project must be approved by Congress, and justified by both economic and environmental rationales. Taxpayers would pay for two-thirds of the $1.1 billion project. In an earlier cost/benefit analysis, BOR determined that payments by Central Valley Project water and power customers alone would provide minimal justification for the project economically. Consequently, 61% of the ?economic justification? now touted by the agency is a larger cold water pool behind the dam to improve Sacramento River salmon survival during critically dry years. In response, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) stated in its recent draft report that the project is not justifiable because it provides no net benefits to salmon, and will result in negative environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated. ?This report documents the Bureau of Reclamation?s own data that shows the project will not benefit salmon in the Sacramento River,? said Tom Stokely, water policy analyst for the California Water Impact Network. ?We knew all along that the Bureau of Reclamation had a phony economic justification to enlarge Shasta Dam. Now we have another federal agency agreeing with us.? Stokely said it is clear that any water that would result from the enlargement of the dam ?is intended for the poisoned lands of the Westlands Water District south of the Delta. This is just another deception by BOR to provide more subsidized water under the guise of a public benefit.? The USFWS report further stated that the Bureau of Reclamation would have considered several options that were removed early in the consideration process if salmon restoration had been a true priority. Those actions include repairing the multi-million dollar Shasta Dam temperature control device; restoring the riparian corridor along the Sacramento River; operationalchanges to Shasta Dam to increase cold water storage and increase minimum flows; increasing water use efficiency in local canals; and considering conjunctive use of other existing and planned water storage facilities in the Central Valley. ?It?s instructive to note that all these actions would cost a fraction of dam enlargement,? said Bill Jennings of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. ?This isn?t just an environmental and fisheries issue. It?s about the squandering of taxpayer dollars. It?s about pork barrel politics, about public money flowing from the public coffers to the handful of corporate farmers in the San Joaquin Valley who control water in California.? Jennings noted that the report is only a revised draft, and that it could be steamrolled by BOR and politicians controlled by corporate agriculture. ?Given the political implications of the report, CSPA is very concerned that it may be rewritten by Obama Administration political appointees who support enlargement of Shasta Dam,? he said. The Bureau of Reclamation?s egregious dishonesty in spinning the ?benefits? of enlarging Shasta Dam also calls into question the economic justification for other new or enlarged dams planned for California, including Sites Reservoir and Temperance Flat. Both these projects may be eligible for funding under Proposition 1. But the evidence is increasing that they?re economic and environmental boondoggles, and will provide little if any benefit in mitigating the state?s water crisis. ?The Stanford Woods Institute recently came out with a study stating that underground storage is six times more cost effective than surface storage,? Stokely said. ?Obviously, destructive and expensive infrastructure projects are the wrong track. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had the guts and integrity to say as much. We applaud them for it.? # Contacts: Tom Stokely Bill Jennings California Water Impact Network California Sportfishing Protection Alliance 530-926-9727 cell 530-524-0315 209-464-5067 cell 209-938-9053 tstokely at att.net deltakeep at me.com The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?s Revised Draft Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report on the Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation can be found at http://www.c-win.org/webfm_send/466 The San Jose Mercury News article on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report can be found at http://www.mercurynews.com/science/ci_27406666/plan-raise-shasta-dam-takes-hit-after-federal The Stanford Woods Institute report on underground storage costs compared to surface storage can be found at http://waterinthewest.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Storing_Water_in_CA.pdf The California Water Impact Network (C-WIN, online at www.c-win.org) promotes the just and environmentally sustainable use of California's water, including instream flows and groundwater reserves, through research, planning, media outreach, and litigation. The California Sportfishing Protection Alliance is a non-profit conservation and research organization established in 1983 for the purpose of conserving, restoring, and enhancing the state's water quality and fishery resources and their aquatic and riparian ecosystems. www.calsport.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jan 28 05:33:18 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 05:33:18 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Larger salmon releases planned after fish die-off Message-ID: <1422451998.46561.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/larger-salmon-releases-planned-after-fish-die-off_76757413 Larger salmon releases planned after fish die-off Damon Arthur 5:45 PM, Jan 27, 2015 5:45 PM, Jan 27, 2015 local news | homepage showcase | tablet showcase Copyright 2014 Scripps Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Winter rain recently attracted Chinook salmon into Salt Creek west of Redding. DAMON ARTHUR/RECORD SEARCHLIGHT HIDE CAPTION REDDING, California - After a massive die-off last year, officials are more than tripling the number of endangered winter-run Chinook salmon released into the Sacramento River. Next month the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service plans to release about 600,000 winter-run Chinook into the river below Keswick Dam. The first of three releases from the Livingston Stone National Fish Hatchery is expected next week, agency spokesman Steve Martarano said. The winter-run salmon, which rely on cool water for spawning, took a hit when water coming out of Shasta and Keswick dams got too warm, killing off 95 percent of the eggs and recently hatched fish released from the hatchery. Officials also believe nearly all the wild, naturally spawning salmon died due to warmer water in the river, where the fish lay eggs in the gravel. ?It means there is a high likelihood that there may not be many, if any, naturally spawned winter-run returning to spawn in 2017,? said Jordan Traverso, a spokeswoman for the state Department of Fish and Wildlife. Typically, about 27 percent of the young salmon released from the hatchery survive. State officials estimate survival last year at about 5 percent, Traverso said. The eggs and recently hatched salmon need water temperatures below 60 degrees to survive. But low water levels in Lake Shasta drove the water temperature up, said Sheri Harral, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which operates Shasta and Keswick dams. ?There was no more cold water left in the lake,? Harral said. During normal years, bureau officials get colder water for fish from a deeper pool beneath the surface of the lake and send it through the dam into the river. But after three years of drought, the lake fell to its second-lowest level on record and the cold water pool was depleted, Harral said. Before Shasta and Keswick dams were built, the winter-run salmon spawned in the cooler water upstream of where Shasta Lake is now. State and federal wildlife agencies have been working for decades to restore winter-run salmon levels. But from 1992 to 2012 an average of 6,191 naturally spawned winter-run returned each year to the Sacramento River, well short of the goal of 110,000. The winter-run is one of four Sacramento River salmon runs ? winter, spring, fall and late fall. The fall run is the largest, drawing an average 70,845 naturally spawning Chinook each year. Officials also plan several other steps during the year to aid the fish, including rescuing fish stranded in warm water pools in the Sacramento River, releasing some fish into the cooler water of Battle Creek, doing more restoration work on Battle Creek and possibly reducing salmon catch limits in the ocean and in the river. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jan 28 06:02:41 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:02:41 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fresno Bee: Feinstein hosts 7 California reps in closed-door water bill talk Message-ID: <1422453761.11439.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.fresnobee.com/2015/01/27/4350996_feinstein-hosts-7-california-reps.html?rh=1 Feinstein hosts 7 California reps in closed-door water bill talk BY MICHAEL DOYLE Bee Washington BureauJanuary 27, 2015 Updated 18 hours ago Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/2015/01/27/4350996_feinstein-hosts-7-california-reps.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy The never-sending search for a California water bill showed, perhaps, a little progress Tuesday as seven Democratic House members met for over an hour with Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein. The late-morning meeting in Feinstein?s third-floor Senate office was the first of its kind in the new Congress. ?It was a constructive conversation,? said Rep. Jim Costa, D-Fresno. Exactly how constructive, though, is a matter for speculation, as each of the House members exited the private meeting with their lips effectively sealed. One participant, Rep. Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, briefly explained the group no-comment by saying that ?all of us are interested in building trust.? Feinstein, in a statement, called the meeting ?very helpful and productive.? ?I am also meeting with individuals and members of a wide range of groups and continue to work on drafting a bill,? Feinstein said. Also participating in the meeting were Northern California Reps. Doris Matsui, John Garamendi, Mike Thompson, Sam Farr and Jerry McNerney. Contact Michael Doyle: mdoyle at mcclatchydc.com, (202) 383-0006 or @MichaelDoyle10 on Twitter Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/2015/01/27/4350996_feinstein-hosts-7-california-reps.html?rh=1#storylink=cpy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jan 28 08:34:39 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 08:34:39 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] C-WIN, CSPA Press Release : US Fish and Wildlife Service Issues Report Opposing the Enlargement of Shasta Dam In-Reply-To: <1422416941.22162.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1422416941.22162.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1422462879.40851.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Oops, I sent the wrong url for the Shasta Dam press release. It should be this one http://www.c-win.org/content/media-release-us-fish-and-wildlife-service-issues-report-opposing-enlargement-shasta-dam.htm 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 Tuesday, January 27, 2015 7:49 PM, Tom Stokely wrote: https://www.c-win.org/content/media-release-delta-smelt-plummets-extinction-new-rules-allow-increased-kill.html January 28, 2015 For Immediate Release US Fish and Wildlife Service Issues Report Opposing the Enlargement of Shasta Dam The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has issued a revised draft report on the proposed enlargement of Shasta Dam, stating that it will harm salmon populations. The agency concluded that it cannotsupport any of the proposed action alternatives presented by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which controls and operates the dam. The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) issued a draft Environmental Impact Statement on dam enlargement in 2013. The project must be approved by Congress, and justified by both economic and environmental rationales. Taxpayers would pay for two-thirds of the $1.1 billion project. In an earlier cost/benefit analysis, BOR determined that payments by Central Valley Project water and power customers alone would provide minimal justification for the project economically. Consequently, 61% of the ?economic justification? now touted by the agency is a larger cold water pool behind the dam to improve Sacramento River salmon survival during critically dry years. In response, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) stated in its recent draft report that the project is not justifiable because it provides no net benefits to salmon, and will result in negative environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated. ?This report documents the Bureau of Reclamation?s own data that shows the project will not benefit salmon in the Sacramento River,? said Tom Stokely, water policy analyst for the California Water Impact Network. ?We knew all along that the Bureau of Reclamation had a phony economic justification to enlarge Shasta Dam. Now we have another federal agency agreeing with us.? Stokely said it is clear that any water that would result from the enlargement of the dam ?is intended for the poisoned lands of the Westlands Water District south of the Delta. This is just another deception by BOR to provide more subsidized water under the guise of a public benefit.? The USFWS report further stated that the Bureau of Reclamation would have considered several options that were removed early in the consideration process if salmon restoration had been a true priority. Those actions include repairing the multi-million dollar Shasta Dam temperature control device; restoring the riparian corridor along the Sacramento River; operationalchanges to Shasta Dam to increase cold water storage and increase minimum flows; increasing water use efficiency in local canals; and considering conjunctive use of other existing and planned water storage facilities in the Central Valley. ?It?s instructive to note that all these actions would cost a fraction of dam enlargement,? said Bill Jennings of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. ?This isn?t just an environmental and fisheries issue. It?s about the squandering of taxpayer dollars. It?s about pork barrel politics, about public money flowing from the public coffers to the handful of corporate farmers in the San Joaquin Valley who control water in California.? Jennings noted that the report is only a revised draft, and that it could be steamrolled by BOR and politicians controlled by corporate agriculture. ?Given the political implications of the report, CSPA is very concerned that it may be rewritten by Obama Administration political appointees who support enlargement of Shasta Dam,? he said. The Bureau of Reclamation?s egregious dishonesty in spinning the ?benefits? of enlarging Shasta Dam also calls into question the economic justification for other new or enlarged dams planned for California, including Sites Reservoir and Temperance Flat. Both these projects may be eligible for funding under Proposition 1. But the evidence is increasing that they?re economic and environmental boondoggles, and will provide little if any benefit in mitigating the state?s water crisis. ?The Stanford Woods Institute recently came out with a study stating that underground storage is six times more cost effective than surface storage,? Stokely said. ?Obviously, destructive and expensive infrastructure projects are the wrong track. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had the guts and integrity to say as much. We applaud them for it.? # Contacts: Tom Stokely Bill Jennings California Water Impact Network California Sportfishing Protection Alliance 530-926-9727 cell 530-524-0315 209-464-5067 cell 209-938-9053 tstokely at att.net deltakeep at me.com The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?s Revised Draft Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report on the Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation can be found at http://www.c-win.org/webfm_send/466 The San Jose Mercury News article on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report can be found at http://www.mercurynews.com/science/ci_27406666/plan-raise-shasta-dam-takes-hit-after-federal The Stanford Woods Institute report on underground storage costs compared to surface storage can be found at http://waterinthewest.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Storing_Water_in_CA.pdf The California Water Impact Network (C-WIN, online at www.c-win.org) promotes the just and environmentally sustainable use of California's water, including instream flows and groundwater reserves, through research, planning, media outreach, and litigation. The California Sportfishing Protection Alliance is a non-profit conservation and research organization established in 1983 for the purpose of conserving, restoring, and enhancing the state's water quality and fishery resources and their aquatic and riparian ecosystems. www.calsport.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jan 28 16:18:37 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 16:18:37 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal: S.A.F.E. joins lawsuit challenging pesticide spraying plan In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1422490717.85586.YahooMailNeo@web120304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Trinity Journal S.A.F.E. joins lawsuit challenging pesticide spraying plan Posted: Wednesday, January 28, 2015 5:15 am Eleven groups and the city of Berkeley, including Trinity County-based Safe Alternatives for our Forest Environment, sued the California Department of Food and Agriculture last week over the agency?s approval of a statewide ?pest management? plan that allows pesticide spraying on schools, organic farms and residential yards, including aerial spraying over homes in rural areas. California approved the program despite tens of thousands of public comment letters calling for a less toxic approach that would protect the vitality and resilience of the state?s food system and the economic interests of organic farmers. The approved program allows the state to use, without any additional environmental review, 79 pesticides that cause cancer, birth defects and reproductive harm and are also highly toxic to bees, butterflies, fish and birds. Pesticides used in the program include chlorpyrifos, which is banned in Europe and a recent U.S. EPA study found poses hazards to workers and drinking water; the neonicotinoid imidacloprid, which is highly toxic to bees; the deadly, ozone-depleting fumigant methyl bromide, which is being phased out because of an international treaty; and chloropicrin, which causes genetic damage. The California Department of Pesticide Regulation last week announced strict new standards for chloropicrin because of the threat is poses to public health. ?This program puts people and some of California?s most imperiled species, like salmon and tiger salamanders, directly in harm?s way from dangerous pesticides,? said Jonathan Evans, toxics and endangered species campaign director at the Center for Biological Diversity. ?It?s frightening that the state would spray these toxic chemicals throughout California without fully analyzing their effects or telling the public of the consequences.? The plan, approved Dec. 24 as part of the Statewide Plant Pest Prevention and Management Environmental Impact Report, allows these dangerous chemicals to be used anywhere in the state, any time into the indefinite future, without an option for affected communities to stop the spray. The state can also approve new pesticide treatments and treatment sites behind closed doors without public scrutiny or notice. The lawsuit, filed in Alameda Superior Court, outlines numerous ways the spray plan violates state environmental laws, including failure to notify the public of future pesticide spraying and failure to analyze the impacts of the pesticides on human and environmental health, including harm to infants and contamination of drinking water. ?Municipal drinking water sources that are already contaminated with pesticides would be further degraded by this pesticide program. How can the department realistically claim that pesticides sprayed under this program will never reach any of those bodies of water?? said attorney Jason Flanders of ATA Law Group. The suit was brought by Center for Biological Diversity, Environmental Working Group, California Environmental Health Initiative, MOMS Advocating Sustainability, Center for Food Safety, city of Berkeley, Pesticide Action Network North America, Center for Environmental Health, Environmental Action Committee of West Marin, Beyond Pesticides, Californians for Pesticide Reform, and Safe Alternatives for our Forest Environment. The plaintiffs are represented by Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, along with ATA Law Group. Safe Alternatives for our Forest Environment was organized in 1979 in response to massive pesticide spraying on public and private timberlands in Trinity County. S.A.F.E. was formed to promote alternatives to pesticide spraying. S.A.F.E. is involved in advocating and informing the public about environmentally sound forest management. S.A.F.E. is a member of the Trinity Collaborative effort. Find it online at http://safealt.org/. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jan 28 18:35:00 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 18:35:00 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Federal fish agency opposes Shasta Dam raise In-Reply-To: References: <008801d03b63$d2766540$77632fc0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1422498900.83763.YahooMailNeo@web120303.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Photo: Mark Miyoshi and Chief Caleen Sisk watch as Jesse Sisk and James Ward work on lighting the ceremonial fire. Photo by Dan Bacher. 800_mark_miyoshi__chief_s... Federal fish agency opposes Shasta Dam raise by Dan Bacher The Winnemem Wintu Tribe, fishing groups and environmentalists have been fighting a federal plan to raise Shasta Dam for many years, since the 18-1/2 foot proposed dam raise would flood many of the Tribe's remaining sacred sites and further imperil salmon and steelhead populations on the Sacramento River. The Tribe held a war dance at Shasta Dam in September 2004 to oppose the dam raise - and conducted another war dance in September 2014 to oppose the dam expansion and the Brown Water Plan to drain the Delta. ?Any raising of the dam, even a few feet, will flood some of our last remaining sacred sites on the McCloud River ? sites we still use today,? said Caleen Sisk, Winnemem Chief and Spiritual Leader. "We can't be Winnemem any place else but the McCloud River. The dam raise is a form of cultural genocide." ?We pray that the spirit beings hear us and bring all of our helpers, from the high mountain meadows all of the way to the ocean,? she stated before the war dance began. ?Our concern is the health of the waterways. We are here at the dam that blocks the salmon on a river that should be full of salmon.? She described Shasta Dam as ?a weapon of mass destruction? against the Winnemem Wintu and said the idea of dams is a ?horrible archaic project.? The campaign by the Tribe and their allies to stop Shasta Dam from being raised received a boost when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recently issued a revised draft report on the proposed enlargement of the dam revealing how the dam raise will indeed harm salmon populations. The agency concluded that it cannot support any of the proposed action alternatives, including the preferred alternative presented by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the federal agency controls and operates the dam. The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) issued a controversial draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) on dam enlargement in 2013. The project must be approved by Congress - and justified by both economic and environmental rationales, according to a joint news release from the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) and the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA). Taxpayers would pay for two-thirds of the $1.1 billion project, In an earlier cost/benefit analysis, BOR determined that payments by Central Valley Project water and power customers alone would provide minimal justification for the project economically. Consequently, 61% of the "economic justification"' now touted by the agency is a larger cold water pool behind the dam to "improve" Sacramento River salmon survival during critically dry years, the groups said. In response, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) stated in its recent draft report that the project is not justifiable because it provides no net benefits to salmon, and will result in negative environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated. "The limited benefit derived from dam enlargement and the preferred alternative CP4A during dry and critically dry years will likely be offset by river conditions downstream of RBPP (Red Bluff Pumping Plant) in the mainstem Sacramento and the Delta," the report stated. "The enlargement of Shasta Dam and the water management scenario described for CP4A will reduce the rearing capacity of the Sacramento River for juvenile salmonids by further altering the natural successional process of riparian forest habitat, and by reducing juvenile salmonid access to the high quality rearing habitat found in floodplains and bypasses because of reduced high water flow events." Tom Stokely, water policy analyst for the California Water Impact Network, commented, ?This report documents the Bureau of Reclamation?s own data that shows the project will not benefit salmon in the Sacramento River. We knew all along that the Bureau of Reclamation had a phony economic justification to enlarge Shasta Dam. Now we have another federal agency agreeing with us.? Stokely said it is clear that any water that would result from the enlargement of the dam ?is intended for the poisoned lands of the Westlands Water District south of the Delta. This is just another deception by BOR to provide more subsidized water under the guise of a public benefit.? The USFWS report further stated that the Bureau of Reclamation would have considered several options that were removed early in the consideration process if salmon restoration had been a true priority. Those actions include repairing the multi-million dollar Shasta Dam temperature control device; restoring the riparian corridor along the Sacramento River; operational changes to Shasta Dam to increase cold water storage and increase minimum flows; increasing water use efficiency in local canals; and considering conjunctive use of other existing and planned water storage facilities in the Central Valley. ?It?s instructive to note that all these actions would cost a fraction of dam enlargement,? said Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. ?This isn?t just an environmental and fisheries issue. It?s about the squandering of taxpayer dollars. It?s about pork barrel politics, about public money flowing from the public coffers to the handful of corporate farmers in the San Joaquin Valley who control water in California.? Responding to the report, Chief Caleen Sisk said, "While the US Fish and Wildlife biologists are on track, they offer no resolve as to a 'fix.'" She criticized the agencies for refusing to include the Tribe in efforts to restore wild salmon. "So far the US Fish and Wildlife Service, NOAA and BOR have not included the Winnemem Wintu Tribe in the solutions to address the wild Chinook," Sisk emphasized. "There are no studies, that I am aware of, that address the flooding of salmon spawning grounds, unless they have finally realized that the raise of Shasta Dam will flood the Sacramento River, McCloud River, and Squaw Creek. These are all possible rich spawning waters that will be flooded by the 18.5' raise." "Perhaps the BOR is now being held accountable for more than the 'cold water pool' to help salmon," she said. "The Shasta Dam raise EIS cites no effort to provide a swimway passage for the wild winter run and all runs of Chinook, nor makes any effort to assist salmon in the mountain waters." The Tribe has been trying for years to restore winter run Chinook to the McCloud River above Shasta Lake by reintroducing the original strain of winter Chinook that are now thriving in the Rakaira and other rivers in New Zealand, but the federal agencies have to date refused to back their efforts. "There is no effort to work with the Indigenous Peoples of the McCloud River Watershed," said Sisk. "The BOR's plans for wild winter run Chinook fall desperately short of a real viable production of salmon." She concluded, "The Winnemem Wintu stand ready to assist as soon as Sue Fry of the Bureau of Reclamation will allow us to participate in the plan." Jennings noted that the report is only a revised draft, and that it could be "steamrolled" by the Bureau and politicians controlled by corporate agribusiness. ?Given the political implications of the report, CSPA is very concerned that it may be rewritten by Obama Administration political appointees who support enlargement of Shasta Dam,? he said. Jennings also said the Bureau of Reclamation?s "egregious dishonesty" in spinning the ?benefits? of enlarging Shasta Dam also calls into question the economic justification for other new or enlarged dams planned for California, including Sites Reservoir and Temperance Flat. Both these projects may be eligible for funding under Proposition 1, Governor Jerry Brown's water bond that the voters approved in November. The Winnemem Wintu Tribe, California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, California Water Impact Network and other Tribes and organizations opposed Prop. 1, while agribusiness, the oil industry, Big Tobacco, corporate environmental "NGOs," timber barons, billionaires, other corporate interests and the Governor spent over $16.4 million to pass the bond. But Stokely emphasized, "the evidence is increasing that they?re economic and environmental boondoggles, and will provide little if any benefit in mitigating the state?s water crisis." ?The Stanford Woods Institute recently came out with a study stating that underground storage is six times more cost effective than surface storage,? Stokely said. ?Obviously, destructive and expensive infrastructure projects are the wrong track. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service had the guts and integrity to say as much. We applaud them for it.? The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?s Revised Draft Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report on the Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation can be found at http://www.c-win.org/webfm_send/466 The Stanford Woods Institute report on underground storage costs compared to surface storage can be found athttp://waterinthewest.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Storing_Water_in_CA.pdf For more information, go to: California Water Impact Network (C-WIN): http://www.c-win.org California Sportfishing Protection Alliance: http://www.calsport.org Winnemem Wintu Tribe: http://www.winnememwintu.us -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_mark_miyoshi__chief_sisk__jesse_sisk_and_james_ward_1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 367366 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jan 29 10:07:47 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 10:07:47 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Federal biologists oppose raising Shasta Dam Message-ID: <1422554867.79542.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/federal-biologists-oppose-raising-shasta-dam Federal biologists oppose raising Shasta Dam Damon Arthur 10:16 AM, Jan 28, 2015 2 hours ago Copyright 2015 Scripps Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. NATHAN MORGAN/ RECORD SEARCHLIGHT A federal wildlife agency is contradicting claims that raising the height of Shasta Dam would benefit endangered salmon, challenging one of the primary justifications officials give for the $1.1 billion project. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said in an internal report obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request that it could not support raising the height of the dam 18? feet because there would be only minor benefits to fish and it would harm other wildlife and rare plants. Tom Stokely, a water policy analyst for the California Water Impact Network, said the fish and wildlife report exposes as a ?phony justification? the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation?s reasons for raising the height of the dam. ?It?s not going to protect those fish,? said Stokely, whose group filed the FOIA request for the document. ?It cuts the legs out of the economic justification for the project,? he said, noting the bureau estimates about $655 million of the project cost would be borne by taxpayers because of its benefits to salmon. Raising the dam will primarily benefit San Joaquin Valley farmers rather than Chinook salmon, said Bill Jennings of the California Sport Fishing Alliance. ?This isn?t just an environmental issue. It?s about the squandering of taxpayer dollars. It?s about pork-barrel politics, about public money flowing from the public coffers to the handful of corporate farmers in the San Joaquin Valley who control water in California,? Jennings said in a statement. The 349-page report says numerous plants and animals, many of them unique to the area around Lake Shasta, will suffer if the dam is raised. It also says there will be little benefit to fish downstream of the dam in the Sacramento River. ?The service has also determined that the proposed project does not provide any substantial benefit to anadromous fish downstream of the RBPP (Red Bluff Pumping Plant) and only provides minimal benefit to anadromous fish (winter- and spring-run Chinook salmon) upstream of the RBPP,? the report says. The report goes on to say ?the service is unable to support the adoption of any of the proposed action alternatives? for raising the dam. Habitat restoration along the Sacramento River downstream of the dam would provide greater benefits to salmon than raising the height of the dam, the report says. A higher lake level, as well as construction from relocating roads and campgrounds,would harm some rare plants and animals found only around Lake Shasta, such as the Shasta snow-wreath, the Shasta salamander, Shasta sideband snail, Wintu sideband snail, Shasta chaparral snail and the Shasta hesperian snail, the reports says. But Steve Martarano, a spokesman for the agency, said the report sent to the bureau?s Mid-Pacific Regional director in November is a draft and could undergo changes before it becomes final. ?It?s a draft. It?s not the final report. It still could change,? Martarano said. He would not say whether the report signals the wildlife service?s opposition to raising the dam. ?The report speaks for itself. We had concerns and those are being addressed,? he said. Louis Moore, a spokesman for the bureau, downplayed the report?s importance, saying the agency?s statements do not receive more weight than any other comment submitted on the draft environmental impact statement about the dam project. But Ross Marshall, who owns the Lakeshore Inn & Resort in Lakehead, said Wednesday he welcomes any news that casts doubt on the future of the dam-raising proposal. ?That?s good news because they?ve already taken our property values and thrown them in the toilet,? Marshall said. Marshall said he had hoped to sell his business, but plans to raise the lake level up to 20 feet has made that difficult because at high water the reservoir would inundate portions of the resort. Numerous bridges and roads would need to be relocated because of the lake?s higher level, according to bureau reports on the proposal. Many other businesses and homes would have to be compensated or relocated because of the new high water mark. Matt Doyle, general manager of Lake Shasta Caverns, said he was also concerned about the effect of ongoing studies to raise the dam are having on homeowners and businesses. There have been numerous studies and proposals to raise the dam, he said. ?Each time, it?s a hardship on the people that live up here and work up here,? Doyle said. The bureau?s Moore said there is no estimated date when the agency would release a final environmental impact statement on the most recent proposal. After that report is complete, the secretary of the Department of the Interior has to sign off on the project, and then Congress would then need to vote on whether to fund it, he said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jan 29 12:37:30 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 12:37:30 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Hayfork wetland planting In-Reply-To: <000901d03bd6$50057740$f01065c0$@thewatershedcenter.com> References: <000901d03bd6$50057740$f01065c0$@thewatershedcenter.com> Message-ID: <1422563850.88328.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> On Thursday, January 29, 2015 7:15 AM, Joshua Smith wrote: Hello all, The Watershed Center is pleased to announce the development of the Hayfork Community Wetland! During the summer of 2014 the Watershed Center and partners worked to enhance wetland features of an intensely damaged property in downtown Hayfork. The Hayfork Community Wetland area is located in between Hayfork High School and the US Forest Service compound and Hayfork Creek. The enhancement activities will help to restore 20 acres of mining tailings, expanding existing wetland habitat, supporting wildlife, filtering water and helping create a beautiful outdoor classroom for our schools and community. We are excited to invite the community to see this great project in action, and help in its development! We would like to invite the community to a planting and trail building day at the Hayfork Community Wetland onFebruary 25th. We will be aiding the renovation process by planting an assortment of native vegetation in the disturbed areas. This is a family-friendly event that's fun for all ages-- come learn about our wetlands, local ecology, and spend some time in the beautiful outdoors helping develop our new community wetland. A suite of professionals will be on hand to help lead the event. Riparian ecologists, botanists, master gardeners, and more will work hand-in-hand with students and volunteers, teaching them about plant propagation, native plants, wetlands, ecology and more. We have a collection of native plants that we will be planting throughout the wetland plus we?d like to propagate some native plants from healthy parts of the wetland into the newly constructed areas. If anyone is interested in coming but isn?t into plants, we also would love assistance building a foot trail through the wetlands. Experienced trail builders will be on hand to lead volunteers. The Watershed Center will bring food, some tools, and some maps/description of the project for folks. We will be out there from 9am-2pm and you are welcome to come along for any or all of the activities. Dress warmly, and in clothes you don't mind getting grubby. Anyone is welcome to attend but please RSVP so that we can be sure to have enough food and refreshments for all. Please call Josh or Piper at 628-4206 so we can discuss where to meet and other pertinent details. Feel free to forward this to anyone who might be interested. Hope to see you there! Josh and the Watershed Center crew ? The Watershed Research & Training Center 98 Clinic Ave, Hayfork, Ca 96041-0356 (530)628-4206 (work phone) (530)515-1364 (cell phone) www.thewatershedcenter.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jan 29 13:04:42 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 13:04:42 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: Humboldt Steelhead Days next event: International Fly Fishing Film Festival In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1422565482.35336.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> On Thursday, January 29, 2015 12:39 PM, Darren Mierau wrote: Humboldt Steelhead Days is underway! The kickoff weekend, January 24th marked the beginning of the fishing competition and educational fun events. And its not too late to get involved in the celebration or the fishing competition ? below are the upcoming events ? please share this info with people who like fish and fishing! Friday, January 30 at 7 pm ($20 ticket; $5 off with HSD Ticket and/or student ID) The International Fly Fishing Film Festival at the Arcata Theater Lounge [Hosted by CalTrout] The International Fly Fishing Film Festival? consists of short and feature length films produced by professional filmmakers from all corners of the globe, showcasing the passion, lifestyle and culture of fly-fishing. The films at this popular event are capturing the attention of anglers around the world. IF4? contains exclusive content and is a must see experience coming to the Arcata Theater Lounge at 7pm on January 30th, 2015. ? Saturday, January 31 at 12pm (free) Presentation ?Salmon and Steelhead in the Eel River? at the Redwoods State Park Interpretive Centeron Avenue of Giants near Weott & Saturday, January 31 at 5pm (free, donation requested) Fish Tacos, Raffle and the presentation ?Salmon and Steelhead in the Eel River? at the Monday Club in Fortuna On Saturday, January 31, the Eel River Recovery Project and Cal Trout will be co-sponsoring two events for Humboldt Steelhead Days. At noon at the Humboldt Redwood State Park Interpretive Center there will be a slide presentation and videos by fish biologist Pat Higgins on Salmon and Steelhead of the Eel River. From 5-8 PM come to the Monday Club in Fortuna for a lively evening of events entitled Eel River Fish Tales. Call 223-7200 for more information of see www.eelriverrecovery.org on-line or our Facebook page. Friday, February 6 at 6pm (free) Friends of the Arcata Marsh sponsored talk ?Arcata Marsh ? The History of a Salmonid Fish Hatchery? at the Arcata Marsh Interpretive Center Did you know? The Arcata Marsh & Wildlife Sanctuary was designed on the principle that wastewater is a resource. Dr. George Allen from Humboldt State University's Fisheries Department, was one of the key figures in this innovative wastewater treatment system design and used the system as a salmonid fish hatchery. Come learn the details from Dave Couch, who was a student of Dr. Allen's and is a long-time board member of Friends of the Arcata Marsh (FOAM). Lecture is at the Arcata Marsh Interpretive Center on South G Street, Arcata. Saturday, Feb. 7 at 6 pm- 10 pm (Free with HSD ticket) Humboldt Steelhead Days Awards & Prizes Dinner at the Wharfinger Building in Eureka ? Steelhead Slideshow of everyone?s catches ? Over $3500 in prizes & awards ? Keynote speaker: Terry Roelofs ? Catered dinner by Blackberry Bramble BBQ serving tri-tip ? Mad River Brewing Co.?s award-winning Steelhead Extra Pale Ale ? Sonoma?s Steelhead Vineyards wine ? Shane Anderson?s film, ?Wild Reverence: The Wild Steelhead?s Last Stand.? Come join the celebration! And if you are lucky enough to catch a steelhead, make the choice to keep your wild steelhead wet! ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by McAfee. ______________________________________________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: IF4_eblast_header_Arcata_rev.png Type: image/png Size: 230878 bytes Desc: IF4_eblast_header_Arcata_rev.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 3243CE96-A704-4250-B7EC-7A0FA9B10F4D.png Type: image/png Size: 129545 bytes Desc: 3243CE96-A704-4250-B7EC-7A0FA9B10F4D.png URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jan 30 11:13:03 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 11:13:03 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Geographical=3A_California=E2=80=99s_almo?= =?utf-8?q?nd_crisis?= Message-ID: <1422645183.15025.YahooMailNeo@web120302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://geographical.co.uk/nature/climate/item/744-california-s-almond-crisis California?s almond crisis * Written by Tom Hart * Published in Climate Almond orchards in blossom in Sacramento Doug Raphael 29Jan 2015 The current drought hitting the west coast of America is giving the nation?s almond growers a particular headache Last week, California?s drought became a state of emergency. ?We can?t make it rain, but we can be much better prepared for the terrible consequences that California?s drought now threatens, including dramatically less water for our farms and communities and increased fires in both urban and rural areas,? said Governor Edmund Brown in his official declaration of the emergency. California?s state government wants to see a 20 per cent reduction in water usage. It?s a challenge, and not least for the state?s thriving almond orchards. California produces 82 per cent of the world?s almonds. The annual crop takes around 493 million gallons of water to produce, a big strain on a drought-hit state. Almond trees are not native to California, but thrive in the state?s climate. California?s long, hot summers and limited rainfall in the winter mimic the almond tree?s native Mediterranean climate, according to David Doll who studies almond production at the University of California. Better get to Waitrose, these are about to be rarer than hen?s teeth (Photo: Silverjohn) The problem comes with the almond?s water requirements. One kilogram of kernels ? an almond?s edible part ? needs 110 gallons of water. ?Although this may seem like a lot, it is important to consider the amount of calories and protein in that,? says Doll. Almonds offer 2,608 calories and 96 grams of protein per 450 grams compared with beef?s 1,136 calories and 117 grams of protein. Almonds might offer large nutritional returns for each gallon of water, but California?s vast orchards stretch water resources. Almond orchards take up ten per cent of the state?s water supply, according to the US Department of Agriculture. Some orchards have resorted to pumping groundwater. ?This is a serious concern,? says Doll. Pumping groundwater is a common practice during a drought, but the current drought has been exceptionally long, straining groundwater reserves. ?There are impacted groundwater basins that have experienced subsidence, while others still have high capacity pumping,? says Doll. ?The water source, recharge rate, extraction rate, and of course, long-term sustainability are all unknown.? Who eats California?s almonds? (Credit: Almond Board of California) Water use per almond tree acre has decreased over the years. ?We term this water use efficiency, or ?crop per drop? and it has increased over 30 per cent over the past 30 years,? says Doll. New technologies have allowed farmers to now tell when a tree is stressed to better time irrigation. Impressive efficiency has not offset massive almond orchard expansion. Farmers have a strong economic incentive to reduce water use, with around 20 to 30 per cent of production cost spent on water, but there?s a limit to technological fixes. ?We don?t currently have the capacity to breed an almond variety that has a higher water use efficiency,? says Doll. Unlike drought-tolerant wheat strains, new almond strains are still far away. It takes around 20 years for a new almond tree variety to be matured. ?The complex genetics and the lack of acceptance of GMOs make it is a large challenge,? he adds. Water irrigation pipes in the dry Southern California farmland (Photo: Eddie J. Rodriquez) Whether California will see more orchards planted is a question of economics and environment. ?When prices are higher, farmers can afford to produce fewer almonds because they make more money per pound. This means they can plant marginal ground and still make money,? says Doll. World almond prices reached a nine-year high last autumn. How California?s farmers will react to high prices, environmental constraints and the state?s drought prevention measures will change almond consumption across the world. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jan 30 13:21:07 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 13:21:07 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Delta advocates: Shasta Dam raise is a 'massive waste of taxpayer money' In-Reply-To: <8d532659bb6150b30f9fa57e7461519b@fishsniffer.com> References: <8d532659bb6150b30f9fa57e7461519b@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <1422652867.6667.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/01/30/18767837.php Photo: The Winnemem Wintu Tribe and their allies protest the plans to raise Shasta Dam and build the peripheral tunnels at the Shasta Dam overlook in September 2013. Photo by Dan Bacher. Delta advocates: Shasta Dam raise is a 'massive waste of taxpayer money' Restore the Delta (RTD), opponents of Gov. Brown?s plan to build Tunnels that would drain the Delta and doom salmon and other Pacific fisheries, today called upon the California Water Commission to reject funding the raising of Shasta Dam. A recent US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) report was highly critical of a proposal to raise the height of Shasta Dam, the US Bureau of Reclamation?s main reservoir in the Central Valley Project northwest of Redding. The USFWS found that the project would harm fish habitat in the Delta and Yolo Bypass, as well as around Shasta Lake, and along the length of the Sacramento River. ?Combine enlarging Shasta with the Delta tunnels project, and you would have two effective ways to kill the Delta without solving California?s water problems,? said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, RTD executive director. ?There are better solutions, from recycling and storm water capture, to increasing household, industrial, and farm water use efficiencies.? Reducing flood flows to the Delta could reduce the ability of Delta waters to dilute and assimilate contaminants and salts over the long term. ?Enlarging Shasta Dam would be a massive waste of taxpayer money,? added RTD policy analyst Tim Stroshane. ?The Bureau would get very little water for the sums they would spend. The Fish and Wildlife Service confirms it would be an ecological disaster as well.? Raising Shasta Dam would decrease Sacramento River flood flows because its purpose would be to increase storage in Shasta Lake by ?skimming? future floods. The Bureau?s preferred alternative would only yield another 47,300 acre-feet of supplies to California, at a total cost of over $1.3 billion. The water for that alternative might cost as much as $1,200 an acre-foot. (EWC comment letter, Table 2, http://ewccalifornia.org/reports/shastadeiscomments.pdf) Decreasing flood flows in the spring would affect Delta fish such as the Delta smelt, Sacramento splittail, and juvenile salmon. These fish depend on flood flows and different flow signals throughout the year to determine when and where they move to survive. In addition, enlarging Shasta Lake, say the federal biologists, would result ?in an increase in Delta exports during critically dry water years which could increase the entrainment of Delta smelt and other fish species at the Jones and Banks pumping facilities.? (p. 166) ?A decrease in Sacramento River flood flows would reduce Bay-Delta flushing flows, affect Delta water quality, and affect Delta outflows? while likely increasing Delta exports, said the USFWS biologists. ?All of these factors may further contribute? to declines of Delta smelt and other fish that live year-round in Delta waters, or migrate through the Delta to and from the Pacific Ocean. (p. 127) ?Neither the Bureau nor the California Department of Water Resources have looked at enlarging Shasta Dam and the Tunnels project in good faith,? said Stroshane. ?In 2007, the Fish and Wildlife Service told the Bureau that only in the worst 10 percent of the time would salmon see any benefits from the project. When will the Bureau recognize it cannot make a silk purse from this sow?s ear?? The biologists recommended that the Bureau should redo its no action alternative, evaluate how to increase salmon survival without enlarging Shasta Dam, and make changes to the enlargement alternatives, including revisiting ideas for mitigating fish impacts that the Bureau earlier had rejected. ?Enlarging Shasta Dam is the very definition of a boondoggle,? said Barrigan-Parrilla. ?A lot of money up front, a lot of environmental damage along the way, but only a little bit of water down the road for all that effort and heartache. Fortunately, there are better solutions.? Source: US Bureau of Reclamation, Draft Plan Formulation Appendix, Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation, California, June 2013, Tables 5-9 and 5-10, pp. 5-110 and 5-111; and California Environmental Water Caucus. Excerpted from EWC Comments on Shasta Raise DEIS, September 2013, online at http://ewccalifornia.org/reports/shastadeiscomments.pdf. Contact: Steve Hopcraft 916/457-5546; steve [at] hopcraft.com; Twitter: @shopcraft; Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla 209/479-2053 barbara [at] restorethedelta.org; Twitter: @RestoretheDelta -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Winnemem-Wintu-Tribe-and-supporters.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 62846 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Feb 1 08:38:43 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2015 08:38:43 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Chronicle: State let oil companies taint drinkable water in Central Valley Message-ID: <1422808723.2974.YahooMailNeo@web120304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/State-let-oil-companies-taint-drinkable-water-in-6054242.php State let oil companies taint drinkable water in Central Valley By David R. Baker Updated 8:22 am, Sunday, February 1, 2015 Oil companies in drought-ravaged California have, for years, pumped wastewater from their operations into aquifers that had been clean enough for people to drink. They did it with explicit permission from state regulators, who were supposed to protect the increasingly strained groundwater supplies from contamination. Instead, the state allowed companies to drill more than 170 waste-disposal wells into aquifers suitable for drinking or irrigation, according to data reviewed by The Chronicle. Hundreds more inject a blend of briny water, hydrocarbons and trace chemicals into lower-quality aquifers that could be used with more intense treatment. RELATED STORIES * California fracking hasn?t unearthed an oil boom * Some fracking to be permitted in national forest * Stanford endowment adds fracking investments Most of the waste-injection wells lie in California?s parched Central Valley, whose desperate residents are pumping so much groundwater to cope with the historic drought that the land has started to sink. ?It is an unfolding catastrophe, and it?s essential that all oil and gas wastewater injection into underground drinking water stop immediately,? said Kassie Siegel, director of the Climate Law Institute at the Center for Biological Diversityenvironmental group. The problem developed over decades, starting with a bureaucratic snafu between state and federal regulators. It was made worse by shoddy record keeping and, critics say, plain negligence. The issue erupted into public view last summer when state officials abruptly shut down 11 waste-injection wells in Kern County, fearing they could taint groundwater supplies already feeding homes and farms. No contamination So far, tests of nearby drinking-water wells show no contamination, state officials say. But the federal Environmental Protection Agency, which helped uncover the practice, is threatening to seize control of regulating the waste-injection wells, a job it has left to California officials for over 30 years. The state faces a Feb. 6 deadline to tell the EPA how it plans to fix the problem and prevent it from happening again. ?If there are wells having a direct impact on drinking water, we need to shut them down now,? said Jared Blumenfeld, regional adminstrator for the EPA. ?Safe drinking water is only going to become more in demand.? California produces more oil than any state other than Texas and North Dakota, and its oil fields are awash in salty water. A typical Central Valley oil well pulls up nine or 10 barrels of water for every barrel of petroleum that reaches the surface. In addition, companies often flood oil reservoirs with steam to coax out the valley?s thick, viscous crude, which is far heavier than petroleum found in most other states. They pump high-pressure water and chemicals underground to crack rocks in the controversial practice of hydraulic fracturing. They use acid and water to clear up debris that would otherwise clog their oil-producing wells. All of that leftover water, laced with bits of oil and other chemicals, has to go somewhere. Pumping the liquid ? known in the industry as produced water ? back underground is considered one of the most environmentally responsible ways to get rid of it. ?If we?re not able to put the water back, there?s no other viable thing to do with it,? said Rock Zierman, chief executive officer of the California Independent Petroleum Association, which represents smaller oil companies in the state. ?If you were to shut down hundreds of injection wells, obviously that?s a lot of jobs, a lot of tax revenue.? Farmers fear that the groundwater they increasingly need to nurture their orchards and crops may one day show signs of pollution, even if it hasn?t surfaced yet. ?When I?m concerned for my farm, I?m looking at future generations and reaching a point where they can?t use the groundwater because of things we?re doing today,? said Tom Frantz, 65, a farmer and retired teacher who grows almonds near the town of Shafter (Kern County). The wastewater injection problem stretches back to 1983. EPA officials that year signed an agreement giving California?s oil field regulators ? the state?s Divison of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources ? responsibility for enforcing the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. The agreement listed, by name, aquifers considered exempt, where oil companies could legally inject leftover water with a simple permit from the division. If state regulators wanted to add any aquifers to the list, they would need EPA?s aproval. But there were two signed copies of the agreement, said Steven Bohlen, the division?s new supervisor. Eleven aquifers listed as exempt on one copy weren?t included on the other. The state and the oil companies considered those aquifers exempt ? perfectly suitable places to dispose of wastewater. The EPA didn?t. ?We cannot tell, nor can the EPA, which version is correct,? said Bohlen, appointed by Gov. Jerry Brown last year. The bureaucratic confusion didn?t stop there. In some cases, the state treated entire aquifers as exempt when, in fact, only specific portions of them had been approved for oil industry use. In other instances, the state issued injection permits for aquifers that the EPA had never declared exempt, Blumenfeld said. Program audit The EPA first suspected something was amiss after auditing the division?s underground injection control program in 2011 and reviewing its aquifer exemptions the following year. The division scoured its records and found that it had authorized oil companies to pump wastewater into some high-quality aquifers that were supposed to be off-limits. Poor record keeping added to the problem. Studies on the 11 disputed aquifers, Blumenfeld said, dated from the 1980s and came in printouts stored in envelopes. Vital documents went missing. ?We?d sit down with them and go through these manila envelopes, and there?d be nothing in them, and they?d say, 'Well, there?s nothing in this one,?? Blumenfeld said. ?That?s when we knew we really had a problem.? In all, 464 wells injected wastewater into aquifers that were supposed to be protected, according to state data. That includes 94 wells drilled into the 11 aquifers that the state considered exempt and the EPA didn?t. Some of the aquifers that were breached were so salty that they would be difficult to use. But a third of the aquifers are believed to hold water that ? at least before injection began ? was clean enough to drink, either with some treatment or none at all. To gauge water quality in a river, lake or aquifer, researchers often start with the water?s total dissolved solids ? salts and other materials in the liquid. High counts don?t necessarily make water harmful to drink, but they can cloud it and give it a salty or bitter taste. In general, anything below 500 parts per million requires no treatment and is considered high quality. Water from San Francisco?s Hetch Hetchy system, piped straight from the Sierra, averages 71. State water officials want to prevent contamination of any aquifers that are below 3,000. More permits And yet, the oil industry drilled 171 injection wells into aquifers with counts of 3,000 parts per million or less, according to state data. Companies also received permits to drill five wells into aquifers of the same quality, but for those wells there is no record of injections. Another 253 injection wells went into saltier but potentially usable aquifers that the EPA considers protected. Companies received permits for an additional 26 wells of the same quality. Finally, companies drilled 40 injection wells into aquifers for which there is no water-quality data. A total dissolved-solids count above 1,000 may require treatment before use, either by blending it with fresher water or putting it through reverse osmosis, the process used in seawater desalination plants. But it is usable, for crops or people. ?There?s a cost to this water,? Blumenfeld said. ?But we want to make sure ? and the Safe Drinking Water Act requires us to make sure ? that it?s protected, because we may need it.? It?s unknown exactly how much water lies in the aquifers used for waste injection. A handful of those aquifers are already used for drinking and irrigation ? leading to the emergency closure of 11 injection wells in July. Three of those wells were allowed to resume operations after their owners proved that they hadn?t accessed a drinking-water aquifer after all. Officials have tested samples from nine nearby drinking wells and found elevated levels of arsenic and nitrates. But that?s common for this corner of the Central Valley, where arsenic often leaches into the water from the native rocks. The drinking wells may have been protected by distance, said Jonathan Bishop, chief deputy director of the State Water Resources Control Board. Even when the oil companies injected wastewater into an aquifer used for drinking and irrigation, the injection wells were drilled deeper than the drinking wells. ?The well will pull water horizontally before it pulls it vertically,? said Bishop, whose board is helping to determine whether the injection wells put any drinking water supplies at risk. He noted, however, that pollutants can migrate over time. ?We haven?t found any impact, but that doesn?t mean we aren?t concerned about it,? Bishop said. ?If that aquifer has drinking water, we don?t want them injecting into it.? Little rain Even in relatively wet years, little rain falls in the southern San Joaquin Valley, forcing its farmers to rely on irrigation. Any potential threat to groundwater matters. Mike Hopkins blames oil companies for tainting the aquifer that used to feed his cherry trees, not far from Bakersfield. In 2010, some of their leaves started curling up and turning brown, a problem that spread the following year. He tried giving them more water, but that seemed to make things worse. Replacing some of the trees didn?t work either, with the new plants quickly losing leaves to the same strange scorching. Tests of the water revealed high levels of salt and boron, both of which can damage trees. Hopkins eventually ripped out 3,500 dying trees. In September, he sued four companies that had been injecting wastewater near his orchard. The wells closest to his property do not appear to be among the injection wells being reviewed by the EPA and the state. ?That?s what we do for a living ? we?re farmers, we grow things,? said Hopkins, 67, managing partner of Palla Farms. ?If we don?t have water, your property?s worth zero.? David R. Baker is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: dbaker at sfchronicle.com Twitter: @DavidBakerSF Running dry Throughout 2015, The Chronicle will report stories about water growing scarce in California. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Feb 2 07:46:04 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 07:46:04 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com editorial: Editorial: Another downside to raising Shasta Dam Message-ID: <1422891964.88452.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-another-downside-to-raising-shasta-dam_19212416 Editorial: Another downside to raising Shasta Dam 6:02 PM, Jan 31, 2015 editorials A report from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, guardians of the Endangered Species Act, is raising blood pressures throughout another federal agency that?s been working for years on a controversial plan to raise Shasta Dam 18 ? feet, increasing water storage by 14 percent. As the $1.1 billion plan has progressed it?s been bolstered by claims that the taller dam of the future will mean regular releases of more cold water into the Sacramento River, which will improve habitat and help increase the numbers of endangered Chinook salmon on the Sacramento River. That point has been important in the Bureau of Reclamation?s campaign to convince the public ? especially in the North State ? that raising the dam is more than just a water grab pushed by thirsty and politically powerful farmers in the Westlands Water District south of the Delta. That?s a fish tale, say Fish and Wildlife biologists, whose draft report was completed two months ago and had been circulating quietly through the federal bureaucracy until environmentalists popped it into public view with a Freedom of Information Act request. In fact, the report says, increased flows would destroy salmon habitat in one of the world?s most renowned fly fishing rivers. There would be no net benefits to the fish and the negative impacts cannot be mitigated. This page has not taken a position on whether or not the state?s largest dam should be raised. Those southern farms, large and small, are certainly important to the state and national economy. Any local jobs generated by dam expansion construction would be welcome, but purely temporary. There are plenty of negatives. The Wintu lost almost 5,000 acres of their traditional territory, some of it considered sacred ground, when the dam was completed and the reservoir filled in 1945. They stand to lose more sacred sites along the McCloud River if the dam is raised. Raising Shasta?s high water mark would obliterate magnificent scenery, treasured campgrounds, vacation destinations and fishing sites. Bridges, roads, trails and railroad tracks would have to be relocated. And the Reclamation Bureau?s own environmental report says the rising waters would force it to buy out up to 209 parcels, many of them in Lakehead, much of which also would be inundated. Property values there already are in the tank after years of uncertainty about raising the dam. The Sacramento River is at the heart of our community ? our trails, our bridges, our vistas, revolve around the river. Its salmon are a major component. Anything that threatens those salmon threatens us, our lifestyle and, in many cases, our livelihoods. Now the Fish and Wildlife biologists tell us that higher lake levels, new construction and relocating roads and campgrounds would do irreparable harm to rare plants and animals around the lake. Tom Stokely, a water policy analyst for the California Water Impact Network ? the environmental group that won release of the report ? says it ?cuts the legs out of the economic justification for the project.? Taxpayers would pay about $655 million for the project, primarily for ?benefits? to the salmon, benefits biologists say are all but nonexistent. The remainder of the funding would come from Valley farm water interests. He has a point. Now that the report is public, Bureau of Reclamation and Fish and Wildlife spokespersons alike are stressing the report is just a draft. Concerns are being ?addressed? and the report could change. Environmentalists worry that the pressure is on behind the scenes ? powerful interests are at work to alter the findings. But if any changes are made to the 349-page report, if the biologists suddenly decide to change their findings, those who wield the editors? pens had better be prepared to justify them down to the tiniest detail. Environmentalists ? and all who cherish the Lake Shasta and her rivers ? have what they need to mount a tough legal battle. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Feb 2 15:20:37 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 15:20:37 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: 2015 Klamath River Fish Health Workshop set for Tuesday, March 24th in Yreka, CA In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1422919237.70470.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> On Monday, February 2, 2015 2:17 PM, "Hetrick, Nick" wrote: Mark your calendars! The 2015 Klamath River Fish Health Workshop will be held on Tuesday, March 24th beginning at 8:30 am at the Karuk Community Center in Yreka, CA. Directions to the Center will be posted online with the final agenda. To continue with the informal nature of the meeting and to promote an open exchange of ideas, the workshop will be open to the public and is free to attend. At this time, we are requesting abstracts from potential speakers. Selected talks will be incorporated into the workshop agenda that will be posted online with the abstracts in mid March. We anticipate specific sessions on: Ceratomyxa shasta monitoring; invertebrate and vertebrate host research, disease modeling and other fish disease-related issues of concern in the basin. Please submit talk titles and 1-page abstracts to Sasha Hallett halletts at science.oregonstate.edu by March 6, 2015 Looking forward to seeing you all at this, our 11th annual gathering of fish health experts in the Klamath Basin. nicholas j hetrick -- Nicholas J. Hetrick Fish Program Lead Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office Arcata, CA 95521 office (707) 822-7201 fax (707) 822-8411 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vina_frye at fws.gov Wed Feb 4 08:54:46 2015 From: vina_frye at fws.gov (Frye, Vina) Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 08:54:46 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Charter renewal notice Message-ID: Hi Folks, I have attached the Charter renewal notice. The notice was published in the Federal Register today. Best regards, Vina Vina Frye Fish Biologist 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: 2015 Signed Trinity FR Notice.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 174067 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Wed Feb 4 13:05:13 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 21:05:13 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping summary Jweek 4&5 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C4D579A@057-SN2MPN1-043.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hi All, Please see attachment for the Jweek 4 & 5 (Jan 22 - Feb 4) update to the Trinity River trapping summary. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2014 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW5xlsx.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 60354 bytes Desc: 2014 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW5xlsx.xlsx URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Thu Feb 5 10:54:53 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (danielbacher at fishsniffer.com) Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 10:54:53 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Article submission: Oil lobby group tops spending list with record $8.9 million in 2014! Message-ID: <889bd326d2ca8667c0044843e13d2fc8@fishsniffer.com> http://www.calitics.com/diary/15695/oil-lobby-group-tops-list-with-89-million-spent-in-2014 http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/02/04/18768050.php Oil lobby group tops spending list with $8.9 million in 2014 by Dan Bacher The oil industry continued its long reign as the top spender on lobbying in California in 2014, according to data just released by the California Secretary of State. The Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) led the list with $8.9 million spent on lobbying in 2014, nearly double what it spent in the previous year. WSPA spent $4.67 million in 2013. WSPA apparently spent much of its money on stopping a fracking moratorium bill in the Legislature and trying to undermine California?s law to lower greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Catherine Reheis-Boyd, President of WSPA and the former Chair of the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative Blue Ribbon Task Force to create questionable ?marine protected areas? in Southern California, also successfully opposed legislation by Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson to protect the Vandenberg State Marine Reserve and the Tranquillon Ridge from offshore oil drilling plans. ?The winners of the 2014 lobbying competition are in ? and the winner is... BIG OIL!?" said Stop Fooling California, an online and social media public education and awareness campaign that highlights oil companies? efforts to mislead and confuse Californians. ?Congratulations, Western States Petroleum Association and Chevron! No one has spent more on evil in California than you!" The association spent a total of 4,009,178 lobbying state officials in the third quarter of 2014, a new quarterly record by WSPA. (http://calaccess.sos.ca.gov/Lobbying/Employers/Detail.aspx?id=1147195&session=2013&view=activity) During that quarter, the association paid $375,800 to KP Public Affairs, a prominent Sacramento lobbying and public relations firm that represents clients in health care, aerospace manufacturing and other industries. WSPA also paid $77,576 to Pillsbury Winthrup Shaw Pittman LLP. WSPA spent $1,456,785 in the first quarter, $1,725,180 in the second quarter and $1,692,391 in the fourth quarter of 2014. Along with KP Public Affairs and Pillsbury Winthrup Shaw Pittman LLP, the association hired two other firms, California Resource Strategies and Alcantar & Kahl, to lobby for Big Oil. The Sacramento Bee pointed out that the "vast majority of the petroleum association?s spending on lobbying last year ? about $7.2 million ? was reported under a catch-all 'other' category that requires no detailed disclosure showing who benefited or how the money was spent." (http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article9261986.html#storylink=cpy) The San Ramon-based Chevron and its subsidiaries placed third on the list with $4,282,216 spent on lobbying in 2014, including $2,198,209 paid in the fourth quarter. The California State Council of Service Employees placed second with $5.9 million, while the California Chamber of Commerce finished fourth on the list with $3.9 million and the California Hospital Association and California Association of Hospitals and Health Systems finished fifth with $3 million The oil industry has spent over $70 million on lobbyists in California since January 2009, according to a 2014 report written by Will Barrett, the Senior Policy Analyst for the American Lung Association in California. (http://www.lung.org/associations/states/california/advocacy/climate-change/oil-industy-lobbying-report.pdf) The Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) topped the oil industry spending with a total of $31,179,039 spent on lobbying since January 1, 2009 at the time of Barrett?s report. Chevron was second in lobbying expenses with a total of $15,542,565 spent during the same period. From July 1 to September 30 alone, the oil industry spent an unprecedented $7.1 million lobbying elected officials in California ?with a major focus on getting oil companies out of a major clean air regulation,? said Barrett. Big Oil also exerts its power and influence by spending many millions of dollars every election season on candidates and ballot measures. For example, the oil industry dumped $7.6 million into defeating a measure calling for a fracking ban in Santa Barbara County and nearly $2 million into an unsuccessful campaign to defeat a measure banning fracking and other extreme oil extraction techniques in San Benito County during the November 2014 election. Chevron also spent $3 million (unsuccessfully) to elect ?their? candidates to the Richmond City Council. Not only does Big Oil spend millions every year on lobbying and campaign contributions, but it funds "Astroturf" campaigns to eviscerate environmental laws. Leaked documents provided to Northwest Public Radio, Business Week and other media outlets last year exposed a campaign by the Western States Petroleum Association to fund and coordinate a network of ?Astroturf? groups to oppose environmental laws and local campaigns against fracking in California, Washington and Oregon. This network was revealed in a PowerPoint presentation from a Nov. 11 presentation to the Washington Research Council, given by Catherine Reheis-Boyd, WSPA President. (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2014/12/12/18765457.php) ?The Powerpoint deck details a plan to throttle AB 32 (also known as the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006) and steps to thwart low carbon fuel standards (known as LCFS) in California, Oregon, and Washington State,? revealed Stop Fooling California. (http://www.stopfoolingca.org/2014/12/leaked-the-oil-lobbys-conspiracy-to-kill-off-californias-climate-law/) Oil and chemical industry representatives also further exert their power and influence by serving on state and federal regulatory panels. In one of the most overt conflicts of interest in recent California history, WSPA President Catherine Reheis-Boyd served as the Chair of the Marine Life Protection Act Blue Ribbon Task Force to create fake "marine protected areas" in Southern California. (http://www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/mpa/brtf_bios_sc.asp) She also served on the task forces for the Central Coast, North Central Coast and North Coast. Reheis-Boyd also on a NOAA federal marine protected areas panel from 2003 to 2014. The so-called "marine protected areas" created under the MLPA Initiative fail to protect the ocean from fracking, offshore oil drilling, pollution, military testing, corporate aquaculture and all human impacts on the ocean other than fishing and gathering. Not only did these alleged "Yosemites of the Sea" fail to protect the ocean, but they violate the traditional fishing and gathering rights of the Yurok Tribe and other Indian Nations and are based on terminally flawed and incomplete science. In fact, Ron LeValley, the Co-Chair of the MLPA Initiative Science Advisory Team for the North Coast, is currently in federal prison for conspiracy to embezzle $852,000 from the Yurok Tribe. The millions Chevron and other oil companies have spent on lobbying, campaign contributions and setting up ?Astroturf? groups promoting the oil industry agenda are just chump change to Big Oil. The five big oil companies ? BP, Chevron, Conoco-Phillips, Exxon Mobil and Shell ? made a combined total of $93 billion in 2013. Even with sliding oil prices, the big five oil companies?BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Exxon Mobil, and Shell? made $16.4 billion in the last quarter of 2014 and $89.7 billion for the entire year, according to the Center for American Progress. (http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/news/2015/02/03/105935/sliding-oil-prices-still-yield-90-billion-2014-for-big-oil/) Photo of press conference by Californians Against Fracking at the State Capitol on January 28 by Dan Bacher. On February 7 thousands of Californians will converge in Oakland ? Brown?s home town ? for the "March for Real Climate Leadership." For more information, go to:http://marchforclimateleadership.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_californians_against_fracking-1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 405572 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Feb 7 09:17:46 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2015 09:17:46 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] RTD: Will the SWRCB Tear Up Paper Water?/ Dr. Jeff Michael Tears Apart Blue Sky Tunnels Report: Not Convincing Message-ID: <1423329466.48971.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://restorethedelta.org/blog/ Will the State Water Board Tear Up Paper Water?Stina February 5, 2015 000000 Will the State Water Board Tear Up Paper Water? Unprecedented Demand on Senior Water Rights Holders Ignores State has Overpromised Water 5.5 Times Over; Westlands & Kern Mega-Growers Continue Overpumping Stockton, CA ? Restore the Delta (RTD), opponents of Gov. Brown?s rush to build Twin Tunnels that would drain the Delta and doom salmon and other Pacific fisheries, today responded to the State Water Resources Control Board?s (SWRCB) draft order issued Wednesday night demanding water diversion data from every riparian and pre-1914 water right holder in the Delta?s Central Valley watershed, starting March 1st until, well, whenever. ?This is an unprecedented move by the Board?s Division of Water Rights,? said Restore the Delta Executive Director Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla. ?The Board has never issued such a large-scale demand for water rights information before.? RTD has urged the Board to adjudicate all water rights, as the State has granted 5.5 times more water rights than actual water exists in a normal year. Rather than adjudicate the entire system, and face their own fatally flawed math, the Board has chosen to focus on senior water rights holders. ?The scourge of paper water is haunting California during this drought,? said Barrigan-Parrilla. ?While the Board probably won?t act quickly to tear up paper water, and make the priority system better and more responsive, they?re taking an important step by requiring everyone in the Central Valley of the Delta to disclose their diversion and use of water. You can?t manage what you don?t measure.? The move comes after the US Bureau of Reclamation and California Department of Water Resources charged last July 23rd that Delta water right holders were illegally diverting water reaching the Delta from state and federal reservoirs, a charge thoroughly rejected by Delta interests at the time. Their diversion and use data are due to the Board on the fifth of each month, apparently starting with March. The Board also threatened to use its ?authority to bring enforcement against diverters for unauthorized diversion or use in violation? of the state?s water code. In 2012, Restore the Delta?s Policy Analyst Tim Stroshane, then a researcher with the California Water Impact Network, warned the Board that in dry times the Delta watershed would be way short of water to supply, compared to what water right holders claimed they had. ?I found that in years of average flow, there were 5.5 times more claims to water than there was natural flow to support them. It?s called paper water,? said Stroshane. ?During this drought, the claims exceed the meager river flows even more. So people are frustrated and looking for answers.? In response to a demand for Delta diversion and water rights information, Bill Jennings, RTD board member and Executive Director of California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, told the Board in September 2014 that they could only make sense of Delta water rights and state and federal exports if they investigated the whole Central Valley watershed of the Delta. ?If the Board wants to pursue allegations that Delta farmers are illegally taking water belonging to the state and federal projects, it needs to first determine whether the water the projects claim is being taken actually reaches the Delta, and whether the projects have legal rights to it,? wrote Jennings last September. It appears that is what the Board intends to do in 2015. No stream draining to the Delta is spared in the Board?s call for diversion data. The Board?s action snags in its web water right holders from the far northern Sacramento River to upstream along the San Joaquin, and up each major tributary stream in the Central Valley, from the Feather River to the Merced. From the Anderson Cottonwood Irrigation District near Redding to the Central California Irrigation District near Fresno, all the mom and pop water right holders, and everyone else in between is subject to the Board?s order. The Board does not directly regulate these water rights, but state law does authorize the Board to investigate any type of water right to ensure that the holder is diverting water within the limits of that right. US Bureau of Reclamation and California Department of Water Resources operators told the State Water Board back on January 20th that ?Sacramento Valley depletions are like a big black box? of diversions by Sacramento water right holders as well as the dry conditions and groundwater pumping there during the drought. That ?black box? is the lack of data plaguing not only the State Water Board, but also the ability of state and federal engineers to operate the State Water Project and the Central Valley Project safely and effectively. (Their discussion with Board members Felicia Marcus, Dorene D?Adamo, and Fran Spivy-Weber may be viewed at the State Water Board web site (between 17:45 and 29:36) http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/board_info/media/jan2015/swrcb_mtg012015_5.shtml). CSPA?s Bill Jennings and State Water Board Chair Felicia Marcus have in recent months spoken independently of the benefits of adjudicating water rights throughout the Delta?s watershed. Jennings threw down the gauntlet last August 13th, filing a formal complaint with the State Water Board ?against unauthorized and illegal diversion of water by DWR and USBR at their Delta pumping facilities, and against USBR and others for unauthorized and illegal diversion of San Joaquin River riparian flow.? He was, in short, petitioning the State Water Board ?to initiate, on its own motion, an adjudication of Central Valley water rights.? By law the Board has 270 days (which lapses in May) to decide how it wants to proceed on Jennings? complaint. ?Unfortunately, the Board has a track record of rejecting complaints like this out of an abundance of procrastination,? said Stroshane. Board Chair Marcus mentioned adjudication as a source of good data for managing water, in remarks she made to the Public Policy Institute of California?s ?Managing Drought? event in Sacramento January 12th. ?In the absence of data, everybody thinks someone else is pulling the wool over someone?s eyes. This year,? she said, ?I would like more light than heat.? (Her remarks can be viewed (between 37:53 and 40:40) at, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3cPnr9ggss&list=PL0dHqeDiHCDVKDWOOTgYwFkZ0nZVsl-kJ). FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Thursday, February 5, 2015 Contact: Steve Hopcraft 916/457-5546; steve at hopcraft.com; Twitter: @shopcraft Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla 209/479-2053 barbara at restorethedelta.org; Twitter: @RestoretheDelta0 comments Dr. Jeff Michael Tears Apart Blue Sky Tunnels Report: Not Convincing, Not Very Reassuring, Misrepresented by Tunnels BackersStina February 4, 2015 310000 Dr. Jeff Michael Tears Apart Blue Sky Tunnels Report: Not Convincing, Not Very Reassuring, Misrepresented by Tunnels Backers, Fails to Count ?Rate Stabilization Fund? Costs Farmers Do Not Have Capacity To Pay For Tunnels & Make a Profit; Conclusion: ?Tunnels are not a doable deal? Stockton, CA ? Restore the Delta (RTD), opponents of Gov. Brown?s rush to build massive Tunnels that would drain the Delta and doom salmon and other Pacific fisheries, today noted Dr. Jeff Michael, of the University of the Pacific?s Business Forecasting Center, has torn apart a State-sponsored Report on Affordability and Financing for the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP). ?The Brown Administration plans to stick families and businesses with the bill for water to mega-growers to export almonds and pistachios,? said RTD Executive Director Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla. ?Independent, unbiased analysis shows that ? contrary to state-sponsored incomplete and biased reports by paid consultants ? farmers will NOT be able to pay for the tunnels and make a profit.? Dr. Michael finds three key problems in the report. * The costs per acre-foot of water are too high, and the report fails to include the cost of a large rate stabilization fund that would be necessary. * The capacity of farmers to pay is overestimated and the return on investment ?implausibly low? * Costs are likely underestimated, relying on optimistic assumptions about ratings and bond covenants. ?The tunnels are really only affordable if property taxpayers who get no benefit are on the hook to pay for them,? said Barrigan-Parrilla. ?Farmers can?t pay $300 an acre-foot for Tunnels water. It?s time for the governor to abandon this collapsing project.? The Valley Economy blog is here. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Wednesday, February 4, 2015 Contact: Steve Hopcraft 916/457-5546; steve at hopcraft.com; Twitter: @shopcraft; Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla 209/479-2053 barbara at restorethedelta.org; Twitter: @RestoretheDelta0 comments -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Feb 8 10:54:43 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2015 10:54:43 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] (no subject) Message-ID: <1423421683.29233.YahooMailNeo@web120303.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20150205/NEWS/sthash.uSefeGcH.dpuf State reviews dry year response, warns of curtailments in 2015 * Despite the state?s heavy rains in December, California is once again gearing up for a dry year and the effect it will have on water users. - See more at: http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20150205/NEWS/sthash.uSefeGcH.dpuf#sthash.F0wmDr9J.dpuf By David Smith dsmith at siskiyoudaily.com Posted Feb. 5, 2015 at 10:46 AM Despite the state?s heavy rains in December, California is once again gearing up for a dry year and the effect it will have on water users. Late in January, the State Water Resources Control Board issued notice of a surface water shortage and the potential for curtailment of water right diversions this year. In 2014, 5,603 state water rights holders had their rights curtailed, disallowing their ability to divert water. The notice states that water rights will once again be curtailed this year if precipitation does not increase significantly over the next couple of months. The curtailments begin with junior water rights holders, whose rights have been established the latest. Should those curtailments not be enough, they can extend to holders of more senior rights. The SWRCB also recently released its review of last year?s efforts to conserve water during the dry year, identifying a number of issues the state had and potential solutions. The report reviews the response to the 2014 dry year and the response that was initiated in 1978 during that decade?s major drought. The report recommends that the state board improve the accuracy and timeliness of water demand and supply data; increase the spread of information to involved parties, such as supply forecasts and expected dates of curtailment; and develop additional tools for analysis and enforcement of the water rights system. The report also identifies what the board believes would be the ?ideal? water rights system for the state, based on comments received after last year?s curtailment effort. That list includes adjudication that accounts for all water rights, including the most senior riparian and pre-1914 rights, and extinguishes unexercised rights for all streams. The report also suggests that there should be an establishment of minimum in-stream flow for all streams and real-time management of flows and diversions ?that accurately tracks water availability and the need for curtailment based on the accounting of water rights, hydrology, and by ensuring that minimum in-stream flow levels are met.? The Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors in the past has expressed alarm at the idea of the state using minimum stream flows as a benchmark for determining water use, but the report does not detail how the state would accomplish the real-time system, other than investing in the proper technology. The whole report, with all of the board?s recommendations, can be found at http://goo.gl/cecG5u. - See more at: http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20150205/NEWS/sthash.uSefeGcH.dpuf#sthash.F0wmDr9J.dpuf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Wed Feb 11 15:21:19 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2015 15:21:19 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Will drought relief money be used to support overpumping Delta water? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/02/11/1363800/-Will-drought-relief-money-be-used-to-support-overpumping-Delta-water Will drought relief money be used to support overpumping Delta water? by Dan Bacher Sacramento - Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell announced at a press conference on Friday, February 6, that the Bureau of Reclamation is making $50 million in funds available immediately for controversial "drought relief" projects throughout the West ?including nearly $20 million for California?s Central Valley Project (CVP). The announcement drew criticism from Delta Tunnels opponents, who questioned whether $5.37 million in federal funds for alleged ?Delta needs? will support the overpumping of Delta water that threatens Central Valley salmon and other fish species with extinction. Jewell claimed the "funding will help stretch water supplies in California?s Central Valley and throughout West during time of historic drought." ?California?s ongoing drought is wreaking havoc on farmers, ranchers, municipalities, tribes and the environment,? said Secretary Jewell. ?With climate change, droughts are projected to become more intense and frequent in many parts of the West, so we need to pursue every measure to provide relief and support to communities who are feeling the impacts.? ?Today?s funding will help boost immediate and long-term efforts to improve water efficiencies and increase resilience in high-risk communities, including in California?s Central Valley,? claimed Jewell. ?I appreciate the support of Congress, especially that of Senator Feinstein and the California delegation, in helping make these much needed funds available." Secretary Jewell made the announcement after a meeting with Governor Jerry Brown to discuss the Obama Administration?s "all-in"approach to the drought in California. These efforts include "strategic investments in science and monitoring, operational flexibility to help manage limited water supplies and other efforts to ensure that public health and safety are not compromised." "This important investment will help us improve how we save and move water, while continuing to protect sensitive habitat and wildlife," claimed Governor Brown, who continues to support the expansion of fracking in California and the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to build the peripheral tunnels, the most environmentally destructive public works project in California history. "Even with recent storms, we have a long, dry trek ahead and a close partnership with the federal government is crucial." The $50 million for Western Drought Response was made available through the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act of 2015, according to Secretary Jewell's office. The funding enables Reclamation to "work with water districts and other water users to increase efficiency and conservation of available water." Highlights include: ? $19.9 million for California?s Central Valley Project. This includes: $5.37 million for Delta needs, including drought monitoring for endangered species and mechanisms to increase flexibility in water operations; $2.38 million for the Friant-Kern Canal Reverse Flow Pumping Project to bank groundwater for the southern portion of the Friant Division; $3.65 million for Water and Power Operations to facilitate water transfers in the summer months; $1 million to continue the Battle Creek habitat conservation work; $1.5 million to support the Livingston Stone Hatchery; and $6 million for refuges, including acquisition, conveyance and diversification of water supplies. ? $9 million for WaterSMART and Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program grants. The competitive grants programs support water conservation initiatives and technological breakthroughs that promote water reuse, recycling and conservation in partnership with states, tribes and other partners. ? $5 million for Drought Response and Comprehensive Drought Plans. This new program is helping states, tribes and local governments prepare for and address drought in advance of a crisis with 50/50 percent federal/non-federal funding. ? $8.6 million for the Lower Colorado River Basin Drought Response Action Plan. Funding will be used to generate up to 10,000 acre-feet of water annually in the Colorado River system storage. In addition to the Western Drought Response funding, Reclamation is also dedicating an additional $8.8 million for the Central Valley Project made available through the Act. "The funding will support operations and maintenance, fish passage and fish screens and supplement the Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS) water conservation partnerships to improve efficiency of agricultural water use in the state," according to Interior. Restore the Delta (RTD), opponents of Governor Jerry Brown?s rush to build Twin Tunnels that would drain the Delta and doom salmon and other Pacific fisheries, responded to U.S. Interior Secretary Sally Jewell?s Friday announcement by questioning whether $5.37 million earmarked for "Delta needs" will actually be used to drive Central Valley salmon and other fish closer to extinction. "Secretary Jewell's announcement mentions that $5.37 million will be available for Delta needs for drought monitoring of endangered species, and to increase flexibility in water operations,? said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta. ?What we fear is that this spending plan will translate into funding to manage the system so that the greatest amount of water is exported to big agribusiness growers on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley." "We are on the verge of losing Delta smelt; and salmon are at great risk during this drought," said Barrigan-Parrilla. "Where is the concern about water quality for our fisheries and for the farms and municipalities of the Delta?" She also asked, "When is Secretary Jewell going to meet with the protectors of the San Francisco Bay-Delta estuary?" For more information, go to: www.restorethedelta.org On February 2, President Obama released his proposed budget for fiscal year 2015 that includes $37 million for "Bay-Delta Restoration to develop a comprehensive long-term plan to achieve the co-equal goals for securing California?s water supply and restoring the Sacramento- San Joaquin Delta ecosystem" - in other words, the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to build the twin tunnels. Obama's budget also includes: ? $89 million for Interior?s WaterSMART program, which promotes water conservation initiatives. ? $123 million for the Central Valley Project to fund operations, management and improvements within the project, as well as for the Trinity River Restoration Program. ? $35 million for the San Joaquin River Restoration Program to restore and maintain fish populations along the river, and improve water management to avoid impacts to supplies for water contractors. For more information: http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/secretary-jewell-announces-50-million-for-western-drought-response.cfm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Feb 12 07:40:15 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 07:40:15 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Court rules in favor of fish hatcheries Message-ID: <1423755615.47442.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/court-rules-in-favor-of-fish-hatcheries_45514906 Court rules in favor of fish hatcheries Damon Arthur 5:56 PM, Feb 11, 2015 9:46 PM, Feb 11, 2015 REDDING, California - A state appeals court issued a ruling this week in favor of public and private fish hatcheries and fish stocking programs. Officials said the ruling was a ?huge win? that allows the state to continue to operate its fish hatcheries and continue to plant fish in streams and lakes statewide. ?This victory means we?ll get to continue our hatchery and stocking program and provide recreational opportunities for anglers throughout the state,? said Jordan Traverso, a spokeswoman for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. An adverse ruling would have meant the department would have had to perform more fish-stocking studies. It also would?ve put the fish-stocking program at risk, Traverso said. While state officials were happy with the court?s decision, a group representing private fish hatcheries and fish farmers also celebrated the ruling because it required Fish and Wildlife to re-do the process of writing regulations covering the aquaculture industry. Private fish hatcheries and fish farmers said the cost of complying with Fish and Wildlife regulations would have driven many private fish hatcheries out of business. The state 3rd District Court of Appeal ruled the Department of Fish and Wildlife did not follow state laws requiring it to provide public notice and hold hearings on the regulations before they were enacted. ?This court ruling is a powerful victory for everyone who values recreational fishing opportunities and for everyone who values openness and accountability in government,? said Joshua Thompson, an attorney for the Pacific Legal Foundation, which handled the case against Fish and Wildlife for the California Association for Recreational Fishing. There are more than 20 private fish hatcheries in California, raising such species as trout, catfish and bass, said Craig Elliott, president of CARF. He said the expensive environmental reports and monitoring the state wanted to impose would have been financially crippling. The North State is home to at least one private fish hatchery, Mt. Lassen Trout Farm near Manton. Environmental groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity, sued the state in 2006, claiming it did not adequately assess the environmental impacts of its fish stocking programs. Then in 2010, when the state finished its environmental assessments, the center, CARF and other groups sued the state again. The center said the reports were not thorough enough, while CARF said the state illegally required private fish farms and hatcheries to write expensive, in-depth environmental reports. CARF also argued the state did not adequately involve the public in writing up the new regulations. On Wednesday, a Center for Biological Diversity official said he disagreed with the court?s decision. ?We?re disappointed with the court?s decision. We feel like the court got it wrong,? said Noah Greenwald, endangered species coordinator for the Center for Biological Diversity. He said the center did not plan to appeal the decision to the state Supreme Court. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Feb 13 15:01:45 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 15:01:45 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Youtube: "Eye of the Salmon" Message-ID: <1423868505.66614.YahooMailNeo@web120303.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> I like it! > > >TS >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >From: daniel at publictrustwater.org >Date: Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 1:45 PM >Subject: California Water- A Song/Video >To: daniel at publictrustwater.org > > > >This song/video was just produced out of the Gold Hills of Placer County. I think you might get a kick out of it. Please forward at will. Thanks > >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIww0RxGxgA&feature=youtu.be > > >www.publictrustwater.org > > > >Daniel D. Heagerty >ddheagerty at gmail.com >503-720-5506 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Fri Feb 13 12:57:14 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 20:57:14 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Jweek 6 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C4EDF75@057-SN2MPN1-042.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hi All, Please see attachment for the Jweek 6 (Feb. 5-11) update to the Trinity River trapping summary. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2014 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW6xlsx.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 60384 bytes Desc: 2014 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW6xlsx.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Feb 16 10:48:53 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 10:48:53 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Action Alert - Stop Westlands from Draining the Delta! In-Reply-To: <8E3D53B0-6553-4C63-992D-F75389FE4404@fishsniffer.com> References: <49486-332a-54e2078e@list.credoaction.com> <64F8CF53-B18D-4F4C-88FD-80EFF90D6CA8@fishsniffer.com> <27E0ADDE-9AE0-4A1D-A672-533DA3458C5C@fishsniffer.com> <8E3D53B0-6553-4C63-992D-F75389FE4404@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <1424112533.6816.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> On Monday, February 16, 2015 10:41 AM, Dan Bacher wrote: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/02/16/1364760/-Action-Alert-Stop-Westlands-from-Draining-the-Delta Action Alert: Stop Westlands from Draining the Delta! by Dan Bacher Don't let the corporate welfare crybaby growers from the Westlands Water District pressure the water board to eviscerate environmental protections for California fisheries! Restore the Delta has issued an urgent action alert calling everybody who cares about the Bay-Delta Estuary and the public trust to show up at the State Water Resources Control Board meeting at the Cal/EPA Building, 1001 I Street, Sacramento, at 8 am to oppose the efforts by corporate agribusiness to override protections for California fisheries and to pump more Delta water for export. "We understand that the Westlands Water District is organizing busloads of farmers and farmworkers to attend the State Water Resources Control Board Meeting on Wednesday, February 18, 2015," according to the action alert. "They intend to demand that the State Water Resources Control Board abandons the few protections left in place to stop over pumping of the Delta during the drought." "What?s at stake? We are on the verge of losing Delta smelt, winter-run Chinook salmon, steelhead, and other Delta and coastal species. In addition, if any more pumping takes place beyond current minimal protection levels in the drought, water quality will deteriorate even more, which is bad news for Delta municipalities and farming communities. "It is important that the State Water Resources Control Board understand that the commercial salmon, Delta farming, and Bay-Delta recreational economies worth many billions of dollars annually are at stake if the estuary collapses. We must tell them while the current standards (which are called D1641) have never been fully adequate for the health of the estuary, but setting them aside so that three of California?s 58 counties can have any and all water during this prolonged drought is wrong. The Delta is always doing without, and now Westlands is demanding what little water is left, even though their water rights are junior. King, Fresno and Kern Counties are not the only counties suffering in the drought. The estuary is in peril!" Here is where we need you to be: Joe Serna Jr. ? Cal/EPA Building, 1001 I Street, Sacramento As close to 8 a.m. as possible. The meeting begins at 9 a.m. Be ready to remind the board of the Delta?s right to water that meets water quality standards that are set by law! On the same day, Delta fishing, community leaders, and state water experts will hold a news conference outside the scheduled State Water Resources Control Board meeting to protest a push by Westlands Water District, other Federal and State Water Contractors, and their political allies to further overpump the Delta for export water. "Thus far, the SWRCB has enforced an inadequate standard that fails to protect Salmon, Delta smelt and other fisheries, yet Federal and State water contractors are seeking additional waivers from meeting this less than ideal standard which would result in the permanent destruction of Winter-run Chinook salmon, Delta smelt, and other fisheries," according to a media advisory from Restore the Delta. "The SWRCB needs to at least hold the line on this less than ideal standard because fishery agencies are failing to stop the permanent loss of these species." Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta said, ?The latest push by Sen. Feinstein on behalf of Westlands Water District would exterminate Winter-run Chinook salmon, Delta smelt and steelhead, mainly to benefit a small number of huge corporate agribusinesses on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. If there are no fish, then there are no protections for fish needed, and the greedy mega-growers can grab all the water for three of California?s drought stricken counties.? Who: Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Ex. Dir., Restore the Delta Mike Jackson, Water Law Attorney, California Water Impact Network Bill Jennings, Ex. Dir., California Sportfishing Protection Alliance Fishers, Farmers, and additional policy experts available for questions When: 1:00 pm, Tuesday, February 17, 2015 Where: Outside Cal EPA, 1001 I Street, Sacramento Contact: Steve Hopcraft 916/457-5546; 916/956-4592-cell; steve at hopcraft.com Twitter: @shopcraft Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla 209/479-2053 barbara at restorethedelta.org; Twitter: @RestoretheDelta -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Feb 16 21:36:55 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 21:36:55 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries Dept Draft 2015 Coho Management Plan Message-ID: <1424151415.27763.YahooMailNeo@web120302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> "The HVT will conduct a selective fishery using a weir and targeting Trinity River Hatchery (TRH) Coho salmon commencing in mid-October through November of 2015. The selective fishery will occur within the exterior boundaries of the Hoopa Valley Reservation with an overall harvest impact of no more than 10,000 adult hatchery Coho salmon identified by the absence of the right maxillary bone1. The fish harvest weir shall be deployed in the main-stem Trinity River at or near the southern boundary of the Hoopa Valley Reservation (HVR). The HVT will determine how harvested fish will be allocated among ceremonial, commercial, and subsistence uses. " https://www.hoopa-nsn.gov/news/fisheries-dept-releases-draft-2015-coho-management-plan Welcome to the Hoopa Valley Tribe ? Fisheries Dept releases Draft 2015 Coho Management Plan Fisheries Dept releases Draft 2015 Coho Management Plan February 11, 2015 HVT Coho Harvest Management Plan 2015 for LPA Meeting link: https://www.hoopa-nsn.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/HVT-Coho-Harvest-Management-Plan-2015-for-LPA-Meeting.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Feb 18 08:01:44 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 08:01:44 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal Opinion, Tom Stokely: TRRP needs to show results, including being a good neighbor Message-ID: <1424275304.61679.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/opinion/letters_to_editor/article_ee8757aa-b70d-11e4-b845-474c24fca2ab.html?_dc=35741853062.06345 TRRP needs to show results, including being a good neighbor Posted: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 6:15 am From Tom Stokely Mt. Shasta It is with great sadness that I have watched the Trinity River Restoration Program go from being a good neighbor to a bad one. The TRRP spent approximately $1.8 million to replace and repair domestic water systems affected by higher flows, bridge replacements and restoration actions. But for unknown reasons, the TRRP refuses to replace a ruined agricultural water system used by longtime Lewiston residents Dave and Peggy Wellock. According to a report by the TRRP, gravel injections at the Lowden Ranch site in 2010 immediately upstream of the Wellock Pool resulted in an 81 percent decrease in the median depth of the pool. There is no question that the inability of the Wellocks to maintain their water diversion in an efficient, reliable and environmentally sound manner is a direct result of the Trinity River Restoration Program?s upstream gravel injections. The Wellocks filed a tort claim with the Bureau of Reclamation that was denied. The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group, the federal advisory committee for the TRRP, recommended that the program consider acceptance of their claim ?to help assure good relations with river landowners and residents.? This advisory went unheeded by the TRRP. I am astounded that a major federal program with a $13 million to $15 million budget would be so parsimonious as to deny the Wellocks the funding needed to mitigate the impacts caused by the program?s projects! When I worked for Trinity County and helped raise millions of dollars for bridge replacements and other TRRP projects, there would have been no question about fixing the problems that the program created for river landowners. Now, many of the TRRP?s leaders, particularly the executive director, are openly hostile to public concerns about the project?s effects and lack of benefits. Even worse, the costly and disruptive channel rehabilitation projects of this ?Grand Experiment? do not appear to be creating the habitat necessary for improving fish production. Instead of investigating, tributaries and watersheds as a more productive means of meeting restoration goals, some program participants think that simply dumping huge amounts of spawning gravel in the river will make up for the TRRP?s shortcomings. They are wrong. Spawning habitat has never been demonstrated as a limiting factor for the restoration of the Trinity River?s salmon and steelhead. The increased flows have been beneficial, but it?s clear that doing more work in the tributaries and watersheds of the river would help fish populations. However, despite years of recommendations from the federal advisory committee to pursue such a course, the TRRP is providing scant funding for such projects. It?s wonderful that the TRRP is spending millions of dollars in Trinity County, and we?re all impressed with the program?s nice office next to Tops Super Foods; but there should be more to show for all the money spent. That includes being a good neighbor. n n n Tom Stokely is a water policy analyst for the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN, online at www.c-win.org). He is a former Trinity County Natural Resources Planner who spent most of his 23 years in the Planning Department working to restore the Trinity River?s fisheries. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Feb 18 07:58:14 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 07:58:14 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal: Trinity wants seat in water talks Message-ID: <1424275094.55063.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> The letter is attached. http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_4a330afc-b710-11e4-b4dd-37bcbd5032ed.html?_dc=20939703565.090897 Trinity wants seat in water talks By Sally Morris The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 6:15 am Goosey about federal drought legislation talks last November that several Northern California representatives claimed were held in secret without them, the Trinity County Board of Supervisors has raised its hand for a seat at the table when further water talks resume in the new 114th Congress. ?Since 1964, Trinity County has contributed more than 46 million acre feet of water from the Trinity River basin to the Central Valley. Simply put, to the Central Valley Project and other water recipients like the San Luis Unit, we are a water donor county. Likewise, any decision on allocation of water from Trinity Reservoir must carefully consider Trinity County?s preferential right as the County of Origin,? the board said in a Feb. 3 letter to California Sens. Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein. A delegation of Democratic Northern California representatives including Rep. Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael) of the North Coast District 2 issued a joint statement last November condemning what they said was a House Republican water bill of sweeping changes and misstatements of current law developed without public input or legislative oversight and calling it divisive, dishonest and potentially devastating. After Sen. Feinstein announced she would not be pursuing a federal water bill dealing with California?s drought during the remainder of last year?s lame duck session, the Northern California representatives said they were pleased to hear the legislation ?secretly negotiated by her and House Republicans? would not move forward. Their statement said the draft legislation ?would have eviscerated environmental laws protecting fisheries, California watersheds, local water supplies, tribal and local economies in order to benefit a few powerful Delta water exporters. We applaud the Senator for stepping away from this deeply flawed legislation and realizing that a bill of this magnitude requires public hearings and regular committee process.? They said that in the new year, they would continue to demand that any water legislation responding to California?s severe drought be balanced and take into consideration the array of stakeholders in California. Along with Huffman, that delegation included Democratic Reps. George Miller, Mike Thompson, Doris Matsui, Jerry McNerney, John Garamendi and Ami Bera. ?Some of the things that came up in November were frightful and our representative (Huffman) was not included in those tightly closed hearings, but others in the state were, so there?s a big push to include a lot of other people in talks because the drought affects everyone in the state, not just certain areas,? said Sup. Judy Morris in presenting the Trinity County letter to other board members for approval. She added that she wants to remind everyone about county of origin rights ?that were not mentioned in the November talks.? With unanimous approval, the board?s letter requests that the many voices and interests in Trinity County and the North Coast region, including counties, tribes, commercial/sport fisheries and water-dependent industries, be invited to participate fully and openly in all future water talks and deliberations. The county also requests that any federal drought or water legislation expressly states that if water diverted from the Trinity Basin is resold by any water entity, the revenues will be remanded to Trinity County (something that?s never been done); that any federal legislation include full ratepayer protection for the Trinity Public Utilities District; and that all draft language and justifications for any legislation be publicly released to ensure meaningful participation in the process is possible. In conclusion, the board?s letter requests ?full participation in Congressional drought talks to address the impacts caused by massive export of Trinity Basin water supplies. There are additional Trinity Basin management and operational issues that also could be impacted by Congressional action directing how the Central Valley Project will be operated. We look forward to following up with you regarding these important drought related operational and management issues that impact the health and financial well-being of our communities.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 02-03-15 Senator Boxer RE Drought Legislation(2).pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 171439 bytes Desc: not available URL: From pcatanese at dhscott.com Wed Feb 18 16:10:13 2015 From: pcatanese at dhscott.com (Paul Catanese) Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 00:10:13 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal Opinion, Tom Stokely: TRRP needs to show results, including being a good neighbor In-Reply-To: <1424275304.61679.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1424275304.61679.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Tom: great article and spot on. This program should farmed out to the private sector who are accountable for results.program has great intentions to begin with and staffed with good hearted people who are unfortunately hamstrung by an ineffective structure run by committee.too many cooks in the decision making kitchen who more often than not put their self interests above the the good of the whole. Paul From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 8:02 AM To: Env-trinity Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal Opinion, Tom Stokely: TRRP needs to show results, including being a good neighbor http://www.trinityjournal.com/opinion/letters_to_editor/article_ee8757aa-b70d-11e4-b845-474c24fca2ab.html?_dc=35741853062.06345 TRRP needs to show results, including being a good neighbor Posted: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 6:15 am From Tom Stokely Mt. Shasta It is with great sadness that I have watched the Trinity River Restoration Program go from being a good neighbor to a bad one. The TRRP spent approximately $1.8 million to replace and repair domestic water systems affected by higher flows, bridge replacements and restoration actions. But for unknown reasons, the TRRP refuses to replace a ruined agricultural water system used by longtime Lewiston residents Dave and Peggy Wellock. According to a report by the TRRP, gravel injections at the Lowden Ranch site in 2010 immediately upstream of the Wellock Pool resulted in an 81 percent decrease in the median depth of the pool. There is no question that the inability of the Wellocks to maintain their water diversion in an efficient, reliable and environmentally sound manner is a direct result of the Trinity River Restoration Program?s upstream gravel injections. The Wellocks filed a tort claim with the Bureau of Reclamation that was denied. The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group, the federal advisory committee for the TRRP, recommended that the program consider acceptance of their claim ?to help assure good relations with river landowners and residents.? This advisory went unheeded by the TRRP. I am astounded that a major federal program with a $13 million to $15 million budget would be so parsimonious as to deny the Wellocks the funding needed to mitigate the impacts caused by the program?s projects! When I worked for Trinity County and helped raise millions of dollars for bridge replacements and other TRRP projects, there would have been no question about fixing the problems that the program created for river landowners. Now, many of the TRRP?s leaders, particularly the executive director, are openly hostile to public concerns about the project?s effects and lack of benefits. Even worse, the costly and disruptive channel rehabilitation projects of this ?Grand Experiment? do not appear to be creating the habitat necessary for improving fish production. Instead of investigating, tributaries and watersheds as a more productive means of meeting restoration goals, some program participants think that simply dumping huge amounts of spawning gravel in the river will make up for the TRRP?s shortcomings. They are wrong. Spawning habitat has never been demonstrated as a limiting factor for the restoration of the Trinity River?s salmon and steelhead. The increased flows have been beneficial, but it?s clear that doing more work in the tributaries and watersheds of the river would help fish populations. However, despite years of recommendations from the federal advisory committee to pursue such a course, the TRRP is providing scant funding for such projects. It?s wonderful that the TRRP is spending millions of dollars in Trinity County, and we?re all impressed with the program?s nice office next to Tops Super Foods; but there should be more to show for all the money spent. That includes being a good neighbor. n n n Tom Stokely is a water policy analyst for the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN, online at www.c-win.org). He is a former Trinity County Natural Resources Planner who spent most of his 23 years in the Planning Department working to restore the Trinity River?s fisheries. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rukim1259 at sbcglobal.net Wed Feb 18 16:47:26 2015 From: rukim1259 at sbcglobal.net (Russ Giuntini) Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:47:26 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal Opinion, Tom Stokely: TRRP needs to show results, including being a good neighbor In-Reply-To: <1424275304.61679.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1424275304.61679.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7B06EF5B-09CE-4403-B423-BE896EA60E34@sbcglobal.net> Great piece Tom. Russ Giuntini > On Feb 18, 2015, at 8:01 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > > http://www.trinityjournal.com/opinion/letters_to_editor/article_ee8757aa-b70d-11e4-b845-474c24fca2ab.html?_dc=35741853062.06345 > > TRRP needs to show results, including being a good neighbor > Posted: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 6:15 am > From Tom Stokely > Mt. Shasta > It is with great sadness that I have watched the Trinity River Restoration Program go from being a good neighbor to a bad one. > The TRRP spent approximately $1.8 million to replace and repair domestic water systems affected by higher flows, bridge replacements and restoration actions. But for unknown reasons, the TRRP refuses to replace a ruined agricultural water system used by longtime Lewiston residents Dave and Peggy Wellock. > According to a report by the TRRP, gravel injections at the Lowden Ranch site in 2010 immediately upstream of the Wellock Pool resulted in an 81 percent decrease in the median depth of the pool. There is no question that the inability of the Wellocks to maintain their water diversion in an efficient, reliable and environmentally sound manner is a direct result of the Trinity River Restoration Program?s upstream gravel injections. > The Wellocks filed a tort claim with the Bureau of Reclamation that was denied. The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group, the federal advisory committee for the TRRP, recommended that the program consider acceptance of their claim ?to help assure good relations with river landowners and residents.? This advisory went unheeded by the TRRP. > I am astounded that a major federal program with a $13 million to $15 million budget would be so parsimonious as to deny the Wellocks the funding needed to mitigate the impacts caused by the program?s projects! When I worked for Trinity County and helped raise millions of dollars for bridge replacements and other TRRP projects, there would have been no question about fixing the problems that the program created for river landowners. Now, many of the TRRP?s leaders, particularly the executive director, are openly hostile to public concerns about the project?s effects and lack of benefits. > Even worse, the costly and disruptive channel rehabilitation projects of this ?Grand Experiment? do not appear to be creating the habitat necessary for improving fish production. Instead of investigating, tributaries and watersheds as a more productive means of meeting restoration goals, some program participants think that simply dumping huge amounts of spawning gravel in the river will make up for the TRRP?s shortcomings. They are wrong. > Spawning habitat has never been demonstrated as a limiting factor for the restoration of the Trinity River?s salmon and steelhead. The increased flows have been beneficial, but it?s clear that doing more work in the tributaries and watersheds of the river would help fish populations. However, despite years of recommendations from the federal advisory committee to pursue such a course, the TRRP is providing scant funding for such projects. > It?s wonderful that the TRRP is spending millions of dollars in Trinity County, and we?re all impressed with the program?s nice office next to Tops Super Foods; but there should be more to show for all the money spent. That includes being a good neighbor. > n n n > Tom Stokely is a water policy analyst for the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN, online at www.c-win.org). He is a former Trinity County Natural Resources Planner who spent most of his 23 years in the Planning Department working to restore the Trinity River?s fisheries. > _______________________________________________ > 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 Feb 20 08:34:05 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 08:34:05 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Klamath Tribes react to land purchase in former reservation Message-ID: <1424450045.13536.YahooMailNeo@web120302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.heraldandnews.com/breaking/klamath-tribes-react-to-land-purchase-in-former-reservation/article_6819d6e0-b878-11e4-ac9a-33bdf4300d9a.html Klamath Tribes react to land purchase in former reservation By SAMANTHA TIPLER H&N Staff Reporter | Posted: Thursday, February 19, 2015 2:15 pm A Singapore-based company purchased 197,000 acres of land in Klamath and Deschutes counties this week, including the Mazama Forest, which was promised to the Klamath Tribes in the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement. The announcement Wednesday spurred a strong response from the Klamath Tribes today. ?This is obviously a disappointment,? Don Gentry, chairman of the Klamath Tribes said in a released statement. He spoke about how important it is for the Tribes to reacquire land included in the Klamath Reservation boundaries from the Treaty of 1864. The Mazama Forest was a key component of that, and for the KBRA. ?Land recovery is an essential bargained-for benefit of the KBRA,? Gentry said. ?Nothing less than significant land recovery will work for the Klamath Tribes. We are committed to securing land base that will provide balance in the Agreement and economic opportunity for our people. Without land recovery, the Agreement simply will not work for the Klamath Tribes.? The purchase The company buying the land is Whitefish Cascade Forest Resources, according to the Portland Business Journal. The company has a Salem address and is registered as an Oregon company, but has a principal address in Singapore and a mailing address in Seattle. The company bought the land from Fidelity National Financial Ventures, the Portland Business Journal reported. The original article listed a price for the land, but since redacted it pending verification. Fidelity National Financial Ventures ?said it covered all of the assets of its portfolio company, Cascade Timberlands LLC. FNFW received a cash distribution of approximately $63 million,? the business journal article reads. ?We are excited to monetize the value of Cascade for our shareholders,? Fidelity National Financial Chairman William P. Foley, II, said in the Portland Business Journal article. ?We have been owners of Cascade for approximately eight years and believe it is in the best interest of our shareholders to monetize the value of this land at this time and seek another use for this cash in the hopes of maximizing the value of our FNFV assets.? Klamath Tribes' reaction For more than a decade, the Klamath Tribes have planned on purchasing the Mazama Forest, the Tribes said in the released statement. The Mazama Forest is one of only two privately owned land parcels within the 1.2 million acres of Klamath Reservation from the Treaty of 1864. ?Earlier attempts to reacquire reservation lands that had been converted to national forest land met with intense opposition,? the release said. Acquiring the forest was also a ?cornerstone element for the Klamath Tribes in the KBRA,? the release said. The Tribes plans to fully discuss the purchase during the next General Council meeting on Feb. 28. ?The loss of the opportunity to purchase the Mazama Forest certainly challenges the viability of the Agreement for the Klamath Tribes,? Gentry said. stipler at heraldandnews.com @TiplerHN -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Feb 20 09:56:59 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 09:56:59 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard: Hoopa proposes weir fishery targeting Trinity hatchery coho Message-ID: <1424455019.26016.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.times-standard.com/sports/20150218/fishing-the-north-coast-hoopa-proposes-weir-fishery-targeting-trinity-hatchery-coho Fishing the North Coast: Hoopa proposes weir fishery targeting Trinity hatchery coho By Kenny Priest, kenny at fishingthenorthcoast.com POSTED: 02/18/15, 11:40 PM PST |0 COMMENTS In a draft proposal published on their website, the Hoopa Valley Tribe is planning to conduct a selective fishery using a weir and targeting Trinity River Hatchery Coho salmon beginning in mid-October and running through November of 2015. The selective fishery will occur within the exterior boundaries of the Hoopa Valley Reservation with an overall harvest impact of no more than 10,000 adult hatchery Coho salmon identified by the absence of the right maxillary bone. The plan anticipates full mitigation at Trinity River Hatchery (TRH) and near full exploitation of hatchery Coho salmon. Conservation of non-hatchery-origin (?natural?) Coho is affected through (1) selective removal of hatchery adults while passing natural Coho salmon upstream, and (2) a sorting weir in vicinity of Lewiston for regulating presence of hatchery spawners and collecting natural brood stock for use at TRH. The need for mitigation at TRH arose with creation of the Trinity River Division of the Central Valley Project in California including construction of the Trinity and Lewiston dams that divert a substantial portion of the river?s flow to the Central Valley of California for agricultural, and municipal and industrial uses. Lewiston Dam, completed in 1963, is the upstream limit of anadromy, blocking access to 109 miles of salmon and steelhead spawning and rearing habitat in the upper river (including significant reaches of Coho salmon habitat rated with high intrinsic potential by NOAA 2012). The Trinity River Hatchery was constructed at the base of Lewiston Dam to mitigate for the loss of anadromous fish habitat above TRD. The hatchery is located at river mile 110 near the town of Lewiston in Trinity County. The logistics of the plan include: 1. Weir would be deployed at a point nearest the Hoopa South boundary to avoid interactions with the gill net fishery. This reach also has favorable characteristics for weir deployment such as minimal valley constraint, relatively shallow contour and gravel substrate 2. Dates for operation are approximately Oct. 20 through Nov. 30. Installation date could vary to minimize conflict with the tribal member gill net fishery. 3. Hours of weir operation are 24 hours each day. 4. The weir will be operated by Hoopa Valley Tribal Members engaged in private contract with the HVTC ? nine weeks total, which includes one week for installing, six weeks of fishing and one week for removal and storage. Contract fishers will observe a rotation of three-8-hour shifts with 4 fishers per shift. 5. Hoopa Tribal Fisheries Department staff will monitor and provide scientific support only during harvest and possible weir installation. 6. Fish will be captured in the weir ?corral,? marked fish will be removed to totes on trailers and unmarked fish will be delivered back to the river for upstream migration. To view the entire plan, visit https://www.hoopa-nsn.gov/news/fisheries-dept-releases-draft-2015-coho-management-plan. WEATHER UPDATE According to Reginald Kennedy of Eureka?s National Weather Service, expect to see dry conditions until at least next Friday along the North Coast. ?The ridge of high pressure has settled in, but it looks like we may have a change in the pattern on the 27th,? Kennedy added. CDFW TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETING ON OCEAN SALMON FISHERIES The Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) invites the public to attend its upcoming annual ocean salmon information meeting. A review of last year?s ocean salmon fisheries and spawning escapement will be presented, in addition to the outlook for this year?s sport and commercial ocean salmon fisheries. The meeting is scheduled for Thursday, Feb. 26 from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the Sonoma County Water Agency, 404 Aviation Blvd. in Santa Rosa. For more information, visit www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/salmonpreseason.asp or contact Kandice Morgenstern at 707-576-2879 or kandice.morgenstern at wildlife.ca.gov. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Fri Feb 20 10:13:36 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 10:13:36 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Article Submission: Californians Against Fracking slams hearing process, calls for fracking ban In-Reply-To: <1424455019.26016.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1424455019.26016.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <98B07326-0927-4869-8371-B4BDD5BA296B@fishsniffer.com> http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/02/19/18768753.php Photo of anti-fracking march in Oakland on February 7 by Dan Bacher. 800_pacific_islanders.jpg Californians Against Fracking slams hearing process, calls for fracking ban by Dan Bacher Two weeks after the largest anti-fracking protest in U.S. history took place in Oakland, a broad coalition of environmental groups renewed their call on Governor Jerry Brown to ban fracking and other unconventional oil drilling following reports of illegal wastewater injection into protected aquifers. Amid new investigative reports into the state?s mismanagement of oil industry wastewater wells and following a total fracking ban in the state of New York, community members concerned with the health and environmental risks of fracking and other unconventional oil extraction methods are calling on Brown, who constantly tries to portray himself as a "climate leader" and "green governor" at press conferences and other events, to take immediate action to protect Californians. Residents and representatives from an array of environmental groups voiced concerns at a hearing in Oakland Wednesday evening, according to a news release from Californians Against Fracking. The event is one in a series of hearings hosted by the California state agency responsible for oil development, intended to allow the public to comment on a report on the impacts of fracking on communities? health and the environment. The hearing comes after the agency?the Conservation Department?s Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR)?issued fracking regulations at the beginning of this year, before the environmental impact report is complete. ?Governor Brown?s oil regulators have issued rules for fracking before they?ve even finished studying it, putting the cart before the horse and endangering lives," said David Braun in a statement before the hearing on behalf of Californians Against Fracking. "Unsurprisingly, this is the same agency responsible for issuing hundreds of illegal permits for the disposal of oil industry wastewater into multiple protected drinking water aquifers." "DOGGR?s records also show that fracking flowback fluid, which ends up in wastewater disposal wells, contains high levels of benzene and other harmful chemicals. Clearly, the problems associated with fracking are a five alarm fire, but Jerry Brown and his Department of Conservation are treating it like business as usual. If Jerry Brown is truly serious about protecting the people of California and our communities? health, air and water, he will immediately halt fracking and order his health department to study the issue. We?re confident his findings will be the same as New York?s: A total ban on fracking," said Braun. The hearing comes shortly after 8,000 Californians concerned with dangerous oil industry practices rallied in Oakland this month to call on Gov. Brown to ban fracking and transition California to 100 percent renewable energy, according to the group. Californians Against Fracking is a coalition of about 200 environmental business, health, agriculture, labor, political and environmental justice organizations working to win a statewide ban on fracking and other dangerous extraction techniques in California. Follow @CAagainstFrack on Twitter. Want to take action? Tell Governor Brown: "You allowed the oil industry to illegally inject fracking wastewater into federally protected aquifers used for drinking water and irrigation during our historic drought. Immediately shut down all illegal oil waste injection wells, then place an emergency moratorium on fracking in California." Go to:http://act.credoaction.com/sign/ca_illegal_fracking_waste?t=3&akid=13146.300166.igThi6 Governor Jerry Brown's support of fracking takes place in the context of his administration's war on fish, water, the environment and the people of California. Brown has constantly gushed about his "green energy" and carbon trading policies at press conferences and photo opportunities while he is rushing the most environmentally destructive public works project in California history, the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the twin tunnels. While the mainstream media and Brown's collaborators continue to greenwash the Governor's neo-liberal carbon trading policies, he has in fact continued and expanded the worst environmental policies of the Schwarzenegger administration, including exporting massive quantities of northern California to corporate agribusiness interests on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley and Southern California water agencies and implementing the corrupt Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative to create questionable "marine protected areas." The illegitimacy and corruption of the MLPA Initiative process was evidenced by the alarming fact that Catherine Reheis-Boyd, the President of the Western States Petroleum Association who is leading the campaign to expand fracking in California, CHAIRED the Marine Life Protection Act Initiative Blue Ribbon Task Force to create alleged "marine protected areas" in Southern California. She also served on the task forces to create so-called "marine protected areas" on the Central Coast, North Central Coast and North Coast. If that wasn?t bad enough, the Brown administration, in collaboration with the Obama administration, has presided over the near-extinction of Delta smelt, as well as driving the American River steelhead run to its lowest-ever recorded population level and killing off 95% of the endangered Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon last year. In recent California history, it is hard to find a Governor that has overseen more destruction of California's fish, waterways and environment than Jerry Brown, yet the mainstream media and some corporate "environmental" NGOs continue to falsely portray Brown as a "green" Governor. (http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/10/21/is-jerry-brown-running-scared/ ) For more information about how Brown and his collaborators are the biggest threats to California's environment, go to:http://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/archives/2015/02/16/meet-the-biggest-threats-to-californias-environment-the-winners-of-the-annual-cold-dead-fish-awards -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_pacific_islanders.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 407594 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Feb 22 09:22:35 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 09:22:35 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Klamath Herald and News: BOR accused of misusing water funds Message-ID: <1424625755.69161.YahooMailNeo@web120304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.heraldandnews.com/email_blast/bor-accused-of-misusing-water-funds/article_668d5078-b8cc-11e4-bcae-5be52329eee5.html BOR accused of misusing water funds By LACEY JARRELL H&N Staff Reporter | Posted: Friday, February 20, 2015 12:00 am A whistleblower?s claim lodged against the Bureau of Reclamation says the agency has mismanaged several million dollars and lost sight of its goals in recent years. The claim, filed Wednesday by the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), asserts that a federal program meant to help Klamath Basin fish has been hijacked for the sole benefit of Klamath Project irrigators. PEER filed the whistleblower disclosure on behalf of Todd Pederson, a current Bureau natural resources specialist, and Keith Schultz, a former Bureau fisheries biologist. The disclosure was filed with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC), an independent federal investigative and prosecutorial agency. The OSC is charged with reviewing the scientists? disclosure and deciding within 15 days whether it evidences a ?substantial likelihood of validity,? according to a news release. PEER Senior Counsel Diana Dinerstein said the OSC does not decide whether claims in the complaint are true, but whether the claims are valid enough to be referred back to the Department of Interior for comment. ?Reclamation takes these complaints seriously, and if this matter is referred to the Secretary for investigation, we will conduct a full investigation and cooperate fully with the Office of Special Counsel,? Erin Curtis, a Bureau public affairs specialist, said in an email. According to the claim, the Bureau has spent nearly $70 million dollars without legal authority to do so. Claimant Schultz, who left the Bureau in 2007, said he and Pederson have concerns about the authority the agency is citing to fund the Klamath Power and Water Agency (KWAPA), a joint powers/inter-governmental agency whose members are water agencies within the Klamath Project. He said the Bureau can only disburse funds to KWAPA for developing a water management feasibility study and if its activities benefit fish and wildlife. ?Neither of those are happening,? Schultz said. Cross-benefits claimed Schultz?s and Pederson?s PEER claim asserts that the Water Use Mitigation Plan (WUMP) administered by KWAPA does not adhere to funding guidelines. In past years, irrigators participating in WUMP ?bid? their application by providing a dollar amount per acre they would like to be paid in return for not diverting surface water to grow crops. KWAPA Executive Director Hollie Cannon told the Herald and News the WUMP program has provided a tremendous benefit to fish and wildlife habitat. He pointed out that waterfowl often look to private farmland for habitat and food. If fields aren?t irrigated, no resources are available for birds. ?There is no question that the programs the Bureau has funded have kept the Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge whole,? Cannon said, referring irrigators? ability to lease refuge land to grow grains. Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge received water in 2010, ?12 and ?13 ? years the refuge was not slated to receive anything ? in conjunction with water management under the WUMP program, according to Cannon. Pederson said the program is ?a waste of money.? According to Curtis, the cooperative agreement between the Bureau and KWAPA to administer and implement the WUMP will terminate Dec. 31, 2015. She said by that time KWAPA will have completed its analysis of WUMP?s performance. Cannon said as KWAPA?s executive director, he has administered funds in accordance with Bureau requirements and other federal guidelines. He said KWAPA undergoes an audit every year and that it has undergone a procedural review by the Bureau. ?We passed everything with flying colors,? Cannon said. Past complaints Pederson said he hopes the PEER claim will resolve some of the long-standing resource issues in the Klamath Basin. Pederson has been employed by the Bureau for 13 years and he is also union president of the National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 0951. Schultz said he and Pederson filed an earlier integrity complaint against the Bureau, also through PEER, in 2012. He said the complaint was filed after managers at the Klamath Basin Area Office proposed disbanding the fisheries branch due to budgetary constraints. That was eventually settled. Cannon called Schultz a ?disgruntled past employee.? ljarrell at heraldandnews.com; @LMJatHandN -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cltuts at att.net Sun Feb 22 10:22:02 2015 From: cltuts at att.net (Clark Tuthill) Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 10:22:02 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Klamath Herald and News: BOR accused of misusing water funds In-Reply-To: <1424625755.69161.YahooMailNeo@web120304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1424625755.69161.YahooMailNeo@web120304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <79AB9423-A9FE-497D-ADCF-EA79B0FFC249@att.net> Perhaps the TRRP should also be held accountable for the millions spent in accordance with results. Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 22, 2015, at 9:22 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > > http://www.heraldandnews.com/email_blast/bor-accused-of-misusing-water-funds/article_668d5078-b8cc-11e4-bcae-5be52329eee5.html > BOR accused of misusing water funds > By LACEY JARRELL H&N Staff Reporter | Posted: Friday, February 20, 2015 12:00 am > A whistleblower?s claim lodged against the Bureau of Reclamation says the agency has mismanaged several million dollars and lost sight of its goals in recent years. > The claim, filed Wednesday by the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), asserts that a federal program meant to help Klamath Basin fish has been hijacked for the sole benefit of Klamath Project irrigators. > PEER filed the whistleblower disclosure on behalf of Todd Pederson, a current Bureau natural resources specialist, and Keith Schultz, a former Bureau fisheries biologist. The disclosure was filed with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC), an independent federal investigative and prosecutorial agency. > The OSC is charged with reviewing the scientists? disclosure and deciding within 15 days whether it evidences a ?substantial likelihood of validity,? according to a news release. > PEER Senior Counsel Diana Dinerstein said the OSC does not decide whether claims in the complaint are true, but whether the claims are valid enough to be referred back to the Department of Interior for comment. > ?Reclamation takes these complaints seriously, and if this matter is referred to the Secretary for investigation, we will conduct a full investigation and cooperate fully with the Office of Special Counsel,? Erin Curtis, a Bureau public affairs specialist, said in an email. > According to the claim, the Bureau has spent nearly $70 million dollars without legal authority to do so. > Claimant Schultz, who left the Bureau in 2007, said he and Pederson have concerns about the authority the agency is citing to fund the Klamath Power and Water Agency (KWAPA), a joint powers/inter-governmental agency whose members are water agencies within the Klamath Project. He said the Bureau can only disburse funds to KWAPA for developing a water management feasibility study and if its activities benefit fish and wildlife. > ?Neither of those are happening,? Schultz said. > Cross-benefits claimed > Schultz?s and Pederson?s PEER claim asserts that the Water Use Mitigation Plan (WUMP) administered by KWAPA does not adhere to funding guidelines. In past years, irrigators participating in WUMP ?bid? their application by providing a dollar amount per acre they would like to be paid in return for not diverting surface water to grow crops. > KWAPA Executive Director Hollie Cannon told the Herald and News the WUMP program has provided a tremendous benefit to fish and wildlife habitat. He pointed out that waterfowl often look to private farmland for habitat and food. If fields aren?t irrigated, no resources are available for birds. > ?There is no question that the programs the Bureau has funded have kept the Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge whole,? Cannon said, referring irrigators? ability to lease refuge land to grow grains. > Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge received water in 2010, ?12 and ?13 ? years the refuge was not slated to receive anything ? in conjunction with water management under the WUMP program, according to Cannon. > Pederson said the program is ?a waste of money.? > According to Curtis, the cooperative agreement between the Bureau and KWAPA to administer and implement the WUMP will terminate Dec. 31, 2015. She said by that time KWAPA will have completed its analysis of WUMP?s performance. > Cannon said as KWAPA?s executive director, he has administered funds in accordance with Bureau requirements and other federal guidelines. He said KWAPA undergoes an audit every year and that it has undergone a procedural review by the Bureau. > ?We passed everything with flying colors,? Cannon said. > Past complaints > Pederson said he hopes the PEER claim will resolve some of the long-standing resource issues in the Klamath Basin. Pederson has been employed by the Bureau for 13 years and he is also union president of the National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 0951. > Schultz said he and Pederson filed an earlier integrity complaint against the Bureau, also through PEER, in 2012. He said the complaint was filed after managers at the Klamath Basin Area Office proposed disbanding the fisheries branch due to budgetary constraints. That was eventually settled. > Cannon called Schultz a ?disgruntled past employee.? > ljarrell at heraldandnews.com; @LMJatHandN > _______________________________________________ > 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 sari at sisqtel.net Mon Feb 23 10:58:34 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 10:58:34 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] CBB: California Study Indicates Early Coho Salmon Migrants Missing From Population Estimates Message-ID: <00d401d04f9a$ba04d0a0$2e0e71e0$@sisqtel.net> California Study Indicates Early Coho Salmon Migrants Missing From Population Estimates Coho salmon early life history is more complex and varied than thought and sampling methods often used by biologists to estimate the number of smolts leaving freshwater for the sea have missed the mark by almost 10 percent to 31 percent, according to a recent study in northern California. Juvenile coho salmon in California coastal streams generally remain in a watershed for one year prior to migrating to sea as smolts. However, researchers have discovered that many of the migrants actually leave the watershed earlier, so, when scientists measure the size of the outmigration, they will often miss these fish, which can be a considerable proportion of the juveniles. The undercounting could affect management of salmon, resulting in estimates for juvenile production and overwinter survival that are biased low and estimates of marine survival that are biased high, according to the study. In addition, it could cause salmon managers to unknowingly ignore important habitat in restoration efforts, generally in a stream's estuary where many of the early migrants overwinter. "We knew that some fish were outmigrating from our study watershed before smolt trapping started in the spring, so they were not included in the smolt population estimate," said Darren Ward, professor of fisheries biology at Humboldt State University in California. "We found that early emigration varied substantially across locations and years, but early emigrants were common, often the same proportion or higher than regular smolts." The study, "Early emigration of Juvenile Coho Salmon: Implications for Population Monitoring," http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00028487.2014.982258?journalCode= utaf20#.VOdnXvnF9qU was published online Jan. 8 in the Transactions of the American Fisheries Society. In addition to Ward, researchers were Seth Ricker, Colin Anderson, and Mike Wallace, fisheries biologists with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Jennifer Rebenak, at the time of the study a Humboldt State University graduate student in fisheries biology, and now an environmental scientist with the National Park Service in Colorado. Without a correct accounting of coho juveniles that includes early migrants "it is impossible to evaluate the population consequences of habitat loss or habitat restoration in the lower-basin and estuarine overwintering areas required by the early emigrant life history," the report says. Traditional sampling designs - in this case sampling traps placed in the stream downstream of rearing areas during two to four months in the spring - can have unexpected biases, Ward said. Some emigrants, according to other studies, "move into marine habitats in the fall and winter," the report says. That is months before scientists employ sampling traps the following spring. "In addition to messing up our estimates of vital rates, this is important, because it may keep us from identifying important habitats that the fish we miss in our traps are using, like winter habitat in the estuary," he said. High rates of early emigration by coho salmon have also been documented in Oregon and Washington in studies by Miller and Sadro (2003), Roni et al (2012), and Jones et al (2014). However, until now, no studies had documented the phenomenon in California streams. Ward said they conducted the study to find out what proportion of fish rearing in the Freshwater Creek watershed (Humboldt County) in the fall ended up being early emigrants. He was surprised by some of the study's results. "In addition to the high proportion of early emigrants, I found the variation surprising," he said. "Within the same watershed and year, there were sites where 30 percent left early and sites where less than 10 percent left early." Whether adding the early migrants to the actual number of smolts emigrating to the sea will change the smolt to adult return ratio is unknown, but there should be a corresponding change, according to Ward. In fact, there have been studies documenting early emigrants that survive to return as adults, he said. "We don't know how many of the fish that emigrate early survive to become smolts. That's a tough number to get, because the main-stem habitat in the estuary isn't amenable to smolt traps or PIT tag antennas," Ward said. "So, it's hard to count the early emigrants that make it through the rest of the winter and complete their journey to the ocean." The information to establish whether there is a change to SAR is forthcoming. The researchers are continuing the marking study and now have the first couple of years with marked fish that have returned as adults. "Now, we're starting an analysis to evaluate differences in return rate for early emigrants and regular smolts," Ward said. THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN: Weekly Fish and Wildlife News www.cbbulletin.com February 20, 2015 Issue No. 739 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Mon Feb 23 15:22:24 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 15:22:24 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Article_submission=3A_Water_board_?= =?windows-1252?q?chief_admits_he_was_=27just_wrong=92?= In-Reply-To: <345AC4F6-48D2-4507-A719-E40483C0AA4E@fishsniffer.com> References: <8E0062BC-4919-409F-9DDD-29AE84A67339@fishsniffer.com> <38D6126B-F3CA-478C-A05C-BC51471363CE@fishsniffer.com> <55343B23-AA78-49E4-9165-0420AA5DDE89@fishsniffer.com> <9B582EDB-7205-494D-AA8B-1AE32F944442@fishsniffer.com> <9E4DBBB6-F3A4-4795-9BE5-D7AA1CA8D350@fishsniffer.com> <230806AF-C4C4-485F-A29B-374FB1D69DEE@fishsniffer.com> <4FA7BF19-C9A2-437C-ACBA-F8656B97A72A@fishsniffer.com> <8BF21348-95F6-4E8B-94E8-49DB785E6B9C@fishsniffer.com> <345AC4F6-48D2-4507-A719-E40483C0AA4E@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: "He admitted he was wrong last year in assessing the impacts to fish - and so now he is proposing to do it again," said Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA). cspa_jennings_tucp_presentation.pdf download PDF (353.0 KB) Water board chief admits he was 'just wrong? by Dan Bacher It is rare when a public official admits when he/she does something wrong. It's even rarer when a state water official serving the administration of Governor Jerry Brown admits they did something wrong. But that's exactly what happened in Sacramento on Wednesday, February 18, when Tom Howard, executive director of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the controversial agency overseeing California water, claimed he was ?mistaken? last year when he approved emergency actions that harmed imperiled Delta smelt, Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon and other fish species. "At a 12-hour hearing in Sacramento on Wednesday, Tom Howard, executive officer of the State Water Resources Control Board, made clear the impact of the severe drought on people," according to Alex Breitler in the Stockton Record on February 19. (http://www.recordnet.com/article/20150219/NEWS/150219563 ) "But he also said he was 'just wrong' when he concluded last year that temporarily changing the rules to keep more water in reservoirs would not cause unreasonable harm to the environment. Despite that admission, Howard approved many of the same emergency changes this year, such as reducing flows through the Delta to hold back more water in upstream reservoirs," Breitler said. "He denied, however, a request by state and federal water agencies to also increase water exports from the south Delta under certain conditions. Wednesday?s meeting was to gather comments on that decision and other aspects of the emergency rule changes," noted Breitler. Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA), responded to the water official's "mea culpa" by pointing out the hypocrisy of Howard making his admission while proposing to do the same thing again. "He admitted he was wrong last year in assessing the impacts to fish - and so now he is proposing to do it again," said Jennings. In his presentation to the water board, Jennings pointed out how the water board's decisions in 2013 and 2014 have brought Delta smelt and other fish species to the edge of extinction. (http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2015/02/21/cspa_jennings_tucp_presentation.pdf ) "In early 2013, we predicted what would happen if the Board failed to enforce standards," said Jennings. "The result? In the fall midwater trawl survey, Delta smelt abundance dropped by 57%, striped bass by 44%, and salmon were hammered." "In early 2014, we predicted what would happen if you adopted the TUCP (Temporary Urgency Change Petition)," Jennings told the board. "The result? Delta smelt dropped another 50% (and the spring Kodiak survey by 84%) longfin smelt dropped by 90%, and 95% percent of the winter- run Chinook salmon were killed." "Today, we're telling you that, if the TUCP is adopted, disaster is likely as species may be pushed over the brink into a death-spiral of extinction," Jennings warned. Environmentalists, fishermen, Delta residents, water agency officials, growers and farmworkers packed the hearing room into the evening. A public comment period followed reports by agency and water board staff, elected officials and panels made up of growers, the Friant Water Authority users, the water contractors, San Joaquin County and Delta interests, and environmental NGOs. Jennings spoke on the first environmental NGO panel including the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA), California Water Impact Network (C-WIN), AquaAlliance and Restore the Delta. Representatives from the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Bay Institute spoke on the second environmental NGO panel. The board made no decision at the hearing, since its purpose was to gather information and public comment to advise issuing an order. Board members indicated at the end of the hearing that they wanted more information before issuing an order, perhaps in March. For complete coverage of the hearing, go to: http://us3.campaign-archive2.com/?u=06887fa70084fef8e939fef63&id=9201e548e3&e=120d0c2b69 Fishermen, Delta leaders protest plan to exterminate salmon On Tuesday afternoon, Delta fishermen and community leaders held a news conference outside the State Water Resources Control Board meeting and announced they have filed protests against the Board for its January 27, 2015 Notice of Temporary Change Petitions (TUCP). They said granting the petitions will weaken Delta outflow and water quality standards to the point of extinction for Delta smelt and winter-run Chinook salmon this year. You can listen to an audio of the conference at: http://bit.ly/1L8cnyB Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta, said, ?The State Water Resources Control Board is in a difficult position. The Westlands Water District and other powerful agribusiness interests are pushing to press the Water Board into giving them every last drop of water during this drought." "Senator Feinstein and the usual list of Central Valley Congressional Reps are using their Federal positions to intrude on issues that are supposed to be settled at the State level ? all for the benefit of these growers in three of California?s 58 drought stricken counties. Yet, the TUCP as written by the Water Board is suspending standards that were too weak to begin with to protect fisheries, putting coastal, and Bay-Delta fisheries at immediate risk," she stated. According to Barrigan-Parrilla, the Board's action, "Lowered Delta outflow for purpose of managing the ecosystems and salinity control - bad for fish, good for invasive species, helps storage by reducing how much water the projects spend from upstream reservoirs to keep salt out of the Delta." RTD's protest focuses on the following: The public interest in this matter concerns the protection of fish species, salinity control in the Delta, water supplies, and ecosystem conditions that prioritize a Bay-Delta estuary that continues to be fishable, swimmable, drinkable, and farmable in drought years as well as wet. Droughts are recurrent and predictable weather patterns in California. Droughts are not emergencies, except when our water agencies fail to manage for their recurrence. Current water quality objectives give a green light to the Department of Water Resources and the Bureau of Reclamation to gamble that each water year will be normal to wet: they prioritize upstream storage for exports to south of Delta storage, resulting in a ?beggar-thy- neighbor? competition pitting against each other exports, salinity control, fish protection, and ecosystem-protective outflows. Dry-year south of Delta export demands put the Board in the difficult role of a veritable God Squad with immediate power over the Delta?s endangered fish. This situation is preventable and state and federal agencies failed to prevent it. Water rights attorney and C-WIN Board Member Mike Jackson warned of the tremendous environmental and economic damage that would result from approval of the Temporary Urgency Change Petitions. "Evidently after the Bureau of Reclamation?s killing of 95% of the endangered winter-run salmon last year, the Federal government has decided to propose a much worse water plan for 2015," said Jackson. "It?s a much more complicated plan, but if it is approved by the California Water Board it may send both the endangered salmon and Delta smelt to extinction. We will find out soon if the Governor?s office intervenes with the Water Board to help finish off the fish.? ?Once again, Senator Feinstein (D-Westlands) favors big agribusinesses on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley over the economic and environmental needs of the people who live in the Bay-Delta Estuary," said Jackson. "Commercial salmon fishing is a $1.5 billion economy, Delta farming a $5.2 billion economy, and of course there are the millions of people who live in communities surrounding the estuary. With this drought, we are poised to lose Delta smelt, Winter-run salmon, and steelhead as these fisheries are collapsing." "Where is Senator Feinstein's concern for the people of the estuary?? Jackson asked. Just blocks away, record low numbers of steelhead show... The board meeting took place as just blocks away, the worst-ever run of steelhead continued to trickle into the American River, Sacramento's imperiled urban jewel. The Nimbus Fish Hatchery in Rancho Cordova has trapped a total of only 111 fish to date. In a good year, the hatchery would have already trapped thousands of steelhead. The previous record low was 200 steelhead in the early 1990s, but this run looks like it will be well below that disastrous return. The peak of the run is over and increasingly fewer fish are expected to return to the hatchery while the ladder remains open. During 2013 and early 2014, the Bureau of Reclamation drained Folsom to a record low level of 17 percent of capacity in order to export water to corporate agribusiness, Southern California water agencies and big oil companies. The Bureau did this in spite of it being a record drought year. Nimbus Dam releases were reduced to 500 cfs during most of the steelhead season last year. ?The steelhead died for a noble cause - almonds," quipped CSPA Executive Director Bill Jennings. ?The reason why American River steelhead are in collapse is the same reason why Delta smelt, longfin smelt, striped bass and other fish are down to less than 1 percent of their historic levels ? overpumping of Delta water,? said Jennings. For more information about the collapse of American River steelhead, go to:http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/02/19/18768785.php ?A packed meeting by Dan Bacher Saturday Feb 21st, 2015 6:20 PM 800_packed_meeting.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) The water board meeting was packed with fishermen, Delta residents and family farmers,, corporate agribusiness representatives, farmworkers and water agency officials. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Senator Jean Fuller by Dan Bacher Saturday Feb 21st, 2015 6:20 PM 800_senator_fuller_1.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Senator Jean Fuller (R-Bakersfield) speaks up for Kern County corporate agribusiness interests at the water board meeting in Sacramento. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Water Board by Dan Bacher Saturday Feb 21st, 2015 6:20 PM 800_water_board_1.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) The State Water Resources Control Board hearing in Sacramento lasted for 12 hours. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Farmworkers from the west side by Dan Bacher Saturday Feb 21st, 2015 6:20 PM 800_farmworkers_get_visit... original image ( 5184x3456) The growers chartered buses filled with farmworkers from the west side of the San Joaquin Valley to attend the hearing. Here farmworkers with shirts proclaiming "Let Water Flow To People Not Fish" check in with Cal EPA building security. Photo by Dan Bacher. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: cspa_jennings_tucp_presentation.pdf_600_.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 65560 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_packed_meeting.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 348677 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_senator_fuller_1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 244175 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_water_board_1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 309560 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_farmworkers_get_visitors_badges_1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 282006 bytes Desc: not available URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Mon Feb 23 15:23:30 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 15:23:30 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fall 2014 Sacramento and Klamath salmon return numbers released In-Reply-To: <604BC0E6-5802-477A-A880-024EA330EF89@fishsniffer.com> References: <8E0062BC-4919-409F-9DDD-29AE84A67339@fishsniffer.com> <38D6126B-F3CA-478C-A05C-BC51471363CE@fishsniffer.com> <55343B23-AA78-49E4-9165-0420AA5DDE89@fishsniffer.com> <9B582EDB-7205-494D-AA8B-1AE32F944442@fishsniffer.com> <9E4DBBB6-F3A4-4795-9BE5-D7AA1CA8D350@fishsniffer.com> <230806AF-C4C4-485F-A29B-374FB1D69DEE@fishsniffer.com> <4FA7BF19-C9A2-437C-ACBA-F8656B97A72A@fishsniffer.com> <8BF21348-95F6-4E8B-94E8-49DB785E6B9C@fishsniffer.com> <32097515-FC57-41AA-AC34-D4042C0FBE8A@fishsniffer.com> <604BC0E6-5802-477A-A880-024EA330EF89@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: Photo: Protest by the Klamath Justice Coalition and members of the Hoopa Valley, Yurok, Karuk and Winnemem Wintu Tribes to pressure the Bureau of Reclamation to release cold water down the Trinity River last year to prevent a massive fish kill on the lower Klamath. Photo by Dan Bacher. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/02/23/1366249/-Sacramento-and-Klamath-salmon-returns-released http://www.fishsniffer.com/blogs/details/sacramento-and-klamath-salmon-return-numbers-for-2014-released/ Fall 2014 Sacramento and Klamath salmon return numbers released by Dan Bacher As anglers get ready for the upcoming ocean and river salmon seasons, the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) revealed that 212,000 adult fall-run Chinook salmon returned to spawn in the Sacramento River and its tributaries in 2014. About 10,000 adult salmon returned to the San Joaquin River system, including the Cosumnes, Mokelumne, Stanislaus, Tuolumne and Merced rivers. The 2014 adult salmon return, or escapement, exceeds the minimum conservation goal set by fishery managers of 122,000 to 180,000 fish. Representatives of fishing groups, including the Golden Gate Salmon Association (GGSA), are "cautiously optimistic" about the outlook for upcoming ocean and river salmon seasons. Another 25,359 two year olds, called "jacks" or "jills" by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, returned to the Sacramento Basin. These sub-adults are capable of spawning, just like the adults are. The state and federal scientists use the "jack" and "jill" return numbers to develop models of salmon abundance for upcoming fishing seasons. "Only a relatively small percentage of jacks come in from the ocean, with the rest staying out at sea one more year," said John McManus, Executive Director of the Golden Gate Salmon Association. "The number of returning jacks is multiplied to calculate the expected number of three year old adult fish out in the ocean." "The 2014 jack count is about 25 percent higher than the 2013 jack count," he explained. "Although the multiplier that?s applied changes slightly from year to year, a layman?s analysis suggests there could be about 25 percent more three-year-olds in the ocean now than the 600,000 estimated at this time last year. This suggests there could be close to 800,000 adult salmon forecast for 2015." The official 2015 forecast will be announced by state officials at a California Department of Fish and Wildlife informational meeting February 26 in Santa Rosa. This number will be used by the Pacific Fishery Management Council to propose times and areas where ocean salmon fishing will be allowed off the California coast, according to McManus. The Council will finalize setting the 2015 season by April. As of now, the sport salmon season is set to open on Saturday April 4 off the California coast south of Horse Mountain, near Shelter Cove in southern Humboldt County. "Things look relatively good on the Klamath River," noted McManus. "There, fishery managers were shooting for a minimum escapement of 40,700 natural adult spawners. Instead they ended up with more than twice that at 95,330. Another 31,000 adult salmon returned to the hatchery." The Klamath River barely avoided a massive fish kill like the one that took place September 2002, due to direct action and protests by the Klamath Justice Coalition and members of the Hoopa Valley, Yurok, Karuk and Winnemem Wintu Tribes, along with lobbying and litigation by the Tribes and fishing groups, to release cold water from Trinity River to cool down water temperatures on the Klamath last summer and fall. The release of the PFMC data took place as water rights attorney and California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) Board Member Mike Jackson warned of the tremendous environmental and economic damage that would result from approval of the Temporary Urgency Change Petitions to increase Delta water exports now before the State Water Resources Control Board. He said that 95 percent of endangered winter run Chinook salmon perished last year, due to poor management by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation - and another massive fish kill could take place this year if the state and federal water agencies mismanage Central Valley rivers and dams and the Delta pumps like they did last year. "Evidently after the Bureau of Reclamation?s killing of 95% of the endangered winter-run salmon last year, the Federal government has decided to propose a much worse water plan for 2015," said Jackson. "It?s a much more complicated plan, but if it is approved by the California Water Board it may send both the endangered salmon and Delta smelt to extinction. We will find out soon if the Governor?s office intervenes with the Water Board to help finish off the fish.? ?Once again, Senator Feinstein (D-Westlands) favors big agribusinesses on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley over the economic and environmental needs of the people who live in the Bay-Delta Estuary," said Jackson. "Commercial salmon fishing is a $1.5 billion economy, Delta farming a $5.2 billion economy, and of course there are the millions of people who live in communities surrounding the estuary. With this drought, we are poised to lose Delta smelt, Winter-run salmon, and steelhead as these fisheries are collapsing." How will the massive die of winter-run Chinook salmon impact this year's salmon seasons? "Although we now know that federally protected winter run largely failed to reproduce in the wild in 2014 due to elevated river temperatures, fishing restrictions to further protect them likely won?t kick in until next year when they?re big enough to bite a bait," said McManus. Complete information about the upcoming salmon seasons will be available at the CDFW salmon information meeting in Santa Rosa. The meeting is scheduled on Thursday, Feb. 26 from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the Sonoma County Water Agency, 404 Aviation Blvd. in Santa Rosa. "The public is encouraged to provide input on potential fishing seasons to a panel of California salmon scientists, managers and representatives who will be directly involved in the upcoming Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) meetings in March and April," according to the Department news release.(https://cdfgnews.wordpress.com/2015/02/05/cdfw-to-host-public-meeting-on-ocean-salmon-fisheries-2/ ) Meanwhile, Jerry Brown, the worst Governor for fish, water and the environment in recent California history, is rushing the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the peripheral tunnels, the most environmentally destructive public works project in California history. The tunnels would hasten the extinction of Sacramento River Chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, Delta and longfin smelt and green sturgeon, as well as imperil the salmon and steelhead populations on the Trinity and Klamath rivers. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_westlands_sucks_the_trinity_dry_1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 400568 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Feb 25 09:51:40 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 09:51:40 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] East Bay Express: Drowning California's History Message-ID: <1424886700.49197.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/one-night-stands/Content?oid=4203286 Drowning California's History The state's Water Resources Center and Archive has played a crucial role in documenting ? and shaping ? California water history. Longtime users say it has greatly declined since leaving Berkeley. By Will Parrish Email Print One of the defining issues of California's turbulent water history has been the draining of the creeks that feed into Mono Lake ? a unique saline soda lake that is historically home to an enormous abundance of wildlife ? by the City of Los Angeles. In 1983, the California Supreme Court took up the landmark case National Audubon Society v. Superior Court, which was to determine the fate of the creekwater diversions in light of new environmental laws. Years prior, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power had unceremoniously thrown away consultant reports from the 1920s that measured water flow in the Mono Lake creeks prior to the diversions. The lone place where these crucial documents were preserved was the California Water Resources Collection and Archives (WRCA), which for decades was located on the fourth floor of UC Berkeley's O'Brien Hall. Longtime users of the archive fondly recall the ramshackle feel of the WRCA, including the paint peeling off the walls and the dilapidated red couches that humorously recalled 1950s Soviet Russia. They were markers of a facility doing a lot with a little. In preparation for the Supreme Court case, lawyers from both sides hunkered down in the archives. Partially on the strength of information found by attorneys, the high court ruled that Los Angeles had to restore Mono Lake. The judge also ruled that state regulators have the power to protect "public trust" values, including environmental, recreation, and aesthetic ones. "That story really shows the importance of the archive, but it's only one of many of those stories," said Linda Vida, who served as director of the WRCA from 1993 to 2013. "It's had a key role in preserving the historical memory about water." But longtime users of the facility say it's only a shell of its former self, and they worry about its longterm viability. In 2010, the University of California's Division of Agricultural and Natural Resources (ANR) moved the archive from O'Brien Hall to the university system's most remote campus, UC Riverside. Staffing at the archive has since declined from four full-time employees to just one. Its digital archives have not been updated in four years. And its declining support from the University of California is all the more stark, critics say, given the urgency of California's multi-year drought. Since the state legislature authorized the creation of the WRCA in 1956, it has been the most comprehensive and renowned facility in its field, a repository for most major papers and publications concerning water in the American West. Nowhere else would one likely find under one roof promotional materials for the "Reber Plan" to build two giant dams across San Francisco Bay, old peripheral canal presentations, and original photos of the construction of the Los Angeles aqueduct and of the aftermath of the deadly 1928 collapse of St. Francis Dam near LA ? along with current material from all of the state's eight hundred or so water districts. While located in Berkeley, the facility was also an important gathering place for California's self-identified "water research community." "There was a community that grew up around the archives, and Linda Vida was the contemporary fulcrum of that community," said renowned land use attorney Tony Rossmann, a UC Berkeley law school instructor who has served as counsel in some of California's and the West's leading water and land-use proceedings. Rossmann originally intended to donate his own papers to the WRCA, but he will now donate them to Harvard instead, as a result of the archive's recent travails. The WRCA's removal from Berkeley was initiated by UC ANR Director Dan Dooley, who is also a longtime farm owner and water attorney. Unlike Rossmann, Dooley had been counsel for some of the San Joaquin Valley's largest agribusinesses. In justifying the decision to move the WRCA, Dooley cited a budget shortfall. The facility, though, required a comparatively paltry $350,000 a year to maintain ? roughly equivalent to Dooley's annual salary. Some observers speculate that UC Berkeley's internal politics had a strong hand in the decision. For several years, leaders of the campus' prestigious engineering school had made it known that they coveted the space occupied by the WRCA. Top officials at the engineering school are also well connected. For example, Cal's current engineering dean, S. Shankar Sastry, serves as faculty chair of UC Regent Richard Blum's $15 million institute, the Blum Center for Developing Economies (Blum is an investment banker and the husband of US Senator Dianne Feinstein). Blum oversaw the selection of Mark Yudof as UC president. Yudof, in turn, hired Dooley. By December 2010, only six months after Dooley first announced his decision to move the archive, it had already landed in Riverside. "They could have slowed down the whole process so we could have had time to investigate another funding and space option," Vida said. "But they couldn't wait to get it off the books. It was all done top-down, hush-hush." In a letter I obtained via a Public Records Act request, former ANR Associate Vice President Barbara Allen-Diaz, who worked directly under Dooley, declined a suggestion from a member of an advisory panel to make individual campuses' proposals to house the archives available for public review by faculty members and longtime users. Dooley's office did not respond to a request for comment on this story. Some critics say UC Berkeley administrators are at least partially to blame for the archive's demise. Rossmann called former Chancellor Robert Birgeneu's failure to fight to retain the archives at Berkeley while at the same time spearheading an expensive retrofit of Memorial Stadium, "a tragedy of Alexandrian proportions." While in Berkeley, the WRCA put out a newsletter and sponsored a well-attended colloquium, featuring several presentations annually by water policy experts and ecologists. None of these efforts to tailor the facility to water researchers has survived the transition to Riverside. UCR administrators insist, though, that they remain committed to the archive's well being. They cite a recent agreement to expand collaboration with the California State University San Bernardino, which co-manages the archives. "One thing I would say is that we have been doing a lot of work behind the scenes that isn't evident quite yet," said UC Riverside University Librarian Steve Mandeville-Gamble. He noted an effort by UCR library staff to develop new online aids for easier digital browsing of many collections. But before arriving in Riverside, the WRCA already had an impressive online presence. It operated the biggest and most-visited website on the UC Berkeley library server. The high-profile Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) rated it highly on a listing of libraries ? including the US Library of Congress ? with the largest collections of unique materials available online. Current WRCA librarian Jessica Green estimates that the facility directly supports research by eight to ten UC Riverside faculty. But the facility is no longer the hub it was in Berkeley. And its remoteness from Sacramento has diminished its accessibility by those who shape public policy. One of the most significant public intellectuals who specializes in global water policy is Peter Gleick, co-founder of the Pacific Institute in Oakland. One of the Institute's signature endeavors is the bi-annual book The World's Water. "When I was pulling together data for the early editions, I got California water data in the archive that I could find nowhere else," Gleick said. "Clearly, the costs of maintaining these kinds of archives are miniscule compared to their value to society." ________________________________ Contact the author of this piece, send a letter to the editor, like us on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Feb 25 09:59:22 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 09:59:22 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Mercury News editorial: Delta's health should take priority over pumping Message-ID: <1424887162.95732.YahooMailNeo@web120304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_27590905/mercury-news-editorial-deltas-health-should-take-priority Mercury News editorial: Delta's health should take priority over pumping Mercury News Editorial POSTED: 02/24/2015 02:46:10 PM PST5 COMMENTS| UPDATED: ABOUT 18 HOURS AGO California needs to get serious about protecting the health of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, one of Silicon Valley's most valuable water sources. The short-term needs of Central Valley farmers are significant. But they pale in comparison with preserving the long-term water quality of the estuary that provides water for two-thirds of the state's residents.California took a significant risk when it waived some environmental protections last year for the Delta in order to pump additional water south to save acres of almond orchards. The results were not pretty. Tom Howard, the executive director of the State Water Resources Control Board, admitted last week that he had erred in calculating how damaging the impact would be.The Delta smelt count dropped to the lowest level in recorded history. The impact on salmon was equally horrendous. The state reported that 95 percent of the juvenile Chinook salmon that spawned in the upper Sacramento River died because of the poor water conditions. Rising water temperatures and lower river levels also resulted in the growth of invasive plants that damage water quality.California can't let this degradation of the largest estuary west of the Mississippi continue. The state will determine in March how much water can be pumped from the Delta in the months ahead. Gov. Jerry Brown needs to demonstrate that he has his priorities straight when it comes to the Delta's delicate ecosystem. Advertisement Big Ag critics contend that limiting pumping of additional water from the Delta constitutes putting fish before people. It's a misleading argument. The Delta smelt is merely the canary in the coal mine when it comes to preserving the estuary's health. Further degradation to the Delta will ultimately threaten the quality of the drinking water for Northern California residents.Central Valley farmers, who suck up 80 percent of the water used in California, have proved that they have an unquenchable thirst for additional water to irrigate their crops. They've already sucked dry their own aquifers and irresponsibly planted thousands of acres of almond orchards without sufficient guarantees that water would be available during California's inevitable drought years.The public policy makers who will make the crucial decision on Delta pumping in March are the same ones who are also asking state residents to trust them to the care of the Delta with their plan to build two massive $25 billion tunnels to pump even more water south from the Delta.California's drought shows no signs of abating as the final weeks of the rainy season approaches. Central Valley farmers need to come up with an alternate plan that does not do further damage to the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at att.net Wed Feb 25 13:51:18 2015 From: kierassociates at att.net (Kier Associates) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 13:51:18 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Mercury News editorial: Delta's health should take priority over pumping Message-ID: <000501d05145$3009db50$901d91f0$@att.net> I think the Mercury-News is downright heroic, editorializing on behalf of protecting the SF Bay-Delta estuary when you consider that their readership is served by the Santa Clara Valley Water District, a Delta water-drawing, Delta Habitat Conservation and Conveyance Program (DHCCP is the consortium of water districts promoting construction of the Twin Delta Chunnels) dues-paying ally (at least in the DHCCP sense) of Westlands and Met. Let's hear it for the Merc-News! Bill Kier From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 9:59 AM To: Env-trinity Subject: [env-trinity] Mercury News editorial: Delta's health should take priority over pumping http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_27590905/mercury-news-editorial-deltas -health-should-take-priority Mercury News editorial: Delta's health should take priority over pumping Mercury News Editorial POSTED: 02/24/2015 02:46:10 PM PST 5 COMMENTS| UPDATED: ABOUT 18 HOURS AGO California needs to get serious about protecting the health of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, one of Silicon Valley's most valuable water sources. The short-term needs of Central Valley farmers are significant. But they pale in comparison with preserving the long-term water quality of the estuary that provides water for two-thirds of the state's residents. California took a significant risk when it waived some environmental protections last year for the Delta in order to pump additional water south to save acres of almond orchards. The results were not pretty. Tom Howard, the executive director of the State Water Resources Control Board, admitted last week that he had erred in calculating how damaging the impact would be. The Delta smelt count dropped to the lowest level in recorded history. The impact on salmon was equally horrendous. The state reported that 95 percent of the juvenile Chinook salmon that spawned in the upper Sacramento River died because of the poor water conditions. Rising water temperatures and lower river levels also resulted in the growth of invasive plants that damage water quality. California can't let this degradation of the largest estuary west of the Mississippi continue. The state will determine in March how much water can be pumped from the Delta in the months ahead. Gov. Jerry Brown needs to demonstrate that he has his priorities straight when it comes to the Delta's delicate ecosystem. Advertisement Big Ag critics contend that limiting pumping of additional water from the Delta constitutes putting fish before people. It's a misleading argument. The Delta smelt is merely the canary in the coal mine when it comes to preserving the estuary's health. Further degradation to the Delta will ultimately threaten the quality of the drinking water for Northern California residents. Central Valley farmers, who suck up 80 percent of the water used in California, have proved that they have an unquenchable thirst for additional water to irrigate their crops. They've already sucked dry their own aquifers and irresponsibly planted thousands of acres of almond orchards without sufficient guarantees that water would be available during California's inevitable drought years. The public policy makers who will make the crucial decision on Delta pumping in March are the same ones who are also asking state residents to trust them to the care of the Delta with their plan to build two massive $25 billion tunnels to pump even more water south from the Delta. California's drought shows no signs of abating as the final weeks of the rainy season approaches. Central Valley farmers need to come up with an alternate plan that does not do further damage to the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From moira at onramp113.com Wed Feb 25 17:49:30 2015 From: moira at onramp113.com (Moira Burke) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 17:49:30 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Mercury News editorial: Delta's health should take priority over pumping In-Reply-To: <000501d05145$3009db50$901d91f0$@att.net> References: <000501d05145$3009db50$901d91f0$@att.net> Message-ID: <7FBF9F88-B764-414C-BE10-F52819CCDD88@onramp113.com> I'll say. Positively heroic is right. M o i r a B u r k e mobile/text 530 750 9747 On Feb 25, 2015, at 1:51 PM, Kier Associates wrote: > I think the Mercury-News is downright heroic, editorializing on behalf of protecting the SF Bay-Delta estuary when you consider that their readership is served by the Santa Clara Valley Water District, a Delta water-drawing, Delta Habitat Conservation and Conveyance Program (DHCCP is the consortium of water districts promoting construction of the Twin Delta Chunnels) dues-paying ally (at least in the DHCCP sense) of Westlands and Met. > > Let?s hear it for the Merc-News! > > Bill Kier > From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 9:59 AM > To: Env-trinity > Subject: [env-trinity] Mercury News editorial: Delta's health should take priority over pumping > > http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_27590905/mercury-news-editorial-deltas-health-should-take-priority > Mercury News editorial: Delta's health should take priority over pumping > Mercury News Editorial > POSTED: 02/24/2015 02:46:10 PM PST5 COMMENTS| UPDATED: ABOUT 18 HOURS AGO > California needs to get serious about protecting the health of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, one of Silicon Valley's most valuable water sources. The short-term needs of Central Valley farmers are significant. But they pale in comparison with preserving the long-term water quality of the estuary that provides water for two-thirds of the state's residents. > California took a significant risk when it waived some environmental protections last year for the Delta in order to pump additional water south to save acres of almond orchards. The results were not pretty. Tom Howard, the executive director of the State Water Resources Control Board, admitted last week that he had erred in calculating how damaging the impact would be. > The Delta smelt count dropped to the lowest level in recorded history. The impact on salmon was equally horrendous. The state reported that 95 percent of the juvenile Chinook salmon that spawned in the upper Sacramento River died because of the poor water conditions. Rising water temperatures and lower river levels also resulted in the growth of invasive plants that damage water quality. > California can't let this degradation of the largest estuary west of the Mississippi continue. The state will determine in March how much water can be pumped from the Delta in the months ahead. Gov. Jerry Brown needs to demonstrate that he has his priorities straight when it comes to the Delta's delicate ecosystem. > Advertisement > > Big Ag critics contend that limiting pumping of additional water from the Delta constitutes putting fish before people. It's a misleading argument. The Delta smelt is merely the canary in the coal mine when it comes to preserving the estuary's health. Further degradation to the Delta will ultimately threaten the quality of the drinking water for Northern California residents. > Central Valley farmers, who suck up 80 percent of the water used in California, have proved that they have an unquenchable thirst for additional water to irrigate their crops. They've already sucked dry their own aquifers and irresponsibly planted thousands of acres of almond orchards without sufficient guarantees that water would be available during California's inevitable drought years. > The public policy makers who will make the crucial decision on Delta pumping in March are the same ones who are also asking state residents to trust them to the care of the Delta with their plan to build two massive $25 billion tunnels to pump even more water south from the Delta. > California's drought shows no signs of abating as the final weeks of the rainy season approaches. > Central Valley farmers need to come up with an alternate plan that does not do further damage to the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. > _______________________________________________ > 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 hooparivers at gmail.com Wed Feb 25 22:16:45 2015 From: hooparivers at gmail.com (Regina Chichizola) Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 22:16:45 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Sacred Water, Klamath People and the Struggle for Cultural Survival Message-ID: Sacred Water, Klamath People and the Struggle for Cultural Survival https://warriorpublications.wordpress.com/2015/02/25/sacred-water-klamath-people-and-the-struggle-for-cultural-survival/ February 25, 2015 (Upper Klamath Basin, Oregon) Entangled in the heart of an arduous century long battle over water rights in the Upper Klamath Basin, is the struggle of the Klamath, Modoc, Yahooskin Peoples for cultural survivance. Our elders have always told us that water is life, water is priceless. Our water is so sacred it should never be quantified, compromised or negotiated. But what happens to the future of a culture, whose spiritual foundation is water, when even to tribal negotiators, the priceless becomes a mere commodity? In a world where some believe everything has its price, many of us as Klamath, Modoc, Yahooskin descendants hold strong to the values of our ancestors. The values of our ancestors have taught us that water, above all else, is essential to our way of life as Indigenous People. Our water sustains all our sacred foods and medicines, which have supported us since time immemorial in the Upper Klamath Basin. [image: Klamath people in dug out canoes, 19th century. Photo: Wikipedia.] Klamath people in dug out canoes, 19th century. Photo: Wikipedia. Without it, we cease to be a People. We are the descendants of Kientpoos, Captain Jack, who refused to be tamed by the United States and their destructive colonial agenda to tap our aquifers, irrigate our beautiful homelands and degrade them into barren farm lands. On October 3, 1873 the US government sentenced Kientpoos (Captain Jack), Schonchin John, Black Jim, and Boston Charley to death by hanging at Fort Klamath. 9 years later in 1882, farmers introduced irrigation to the Klamath area. In 1905, the Bureau of Reclamation?s massive project, otherwise known as the Klamath Reclamation Project, replumbed the region. Today, seven dams, 45 pumping stations, 185 miles of canals and 516 miles of irrigation ditches stretch like a watery web over the land. Less than 25 percent of the original wetlands remain. Some 25,000 acres of those wetlands have been leased to farmers while another 200,000 acres have been turned into farmland. Agricultural runoff has altered the chemistry of the lakes and wetlands and waterfowl populations have declined by two-thirds. It is a familiar story in the arid West ? water moved from where it was to places where it should not be. ?What we have,? explains former Klamath Tribe Water Attorney Bud Ullman, ?is an over-commitment of the water resource and general ecosystem degradation. There have been promises of water initially to Indians in the Treaty?, then there were promises to the farmers in a big irrigation project?, then promises for water to other farms. This all adds up to more water than nature gives us to work with. (Winona Laduke, *Klamath Water, Klamath Life* 2002) The irrigable lands of the Klamath Project are in south-central Oregon (62 percent) and north-central California (38 percent). The Project currently provides full service water to approximately 210,000 acres of cropland. The two main sources that supply water for the project: Upper Klamath Lake and the Klamath River; and Clear Lake Reservoir, Gerber Reservoir, and Lost River, which are located in a closed basin. (www.usbr.gov) An over commitment of water paired with climate change is hastily altering the water cycle in the Klamath Basin. Snow pack levels melted out 2-4 weeks early in 2014. In November 2014, Gerber Reservoir was reported to be 99 percent dry. In an attempt to resolve conflicts between Indigenous senior water rights holders and junior rights holders, the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) was introduced in 2009 and the final document was signed on February 18, 2010 in Salem, Oregon . [image: Members of Klamath Tribal council and Klamath Tribes negotiation team at the latest community meeting in Portland, OR 2/9/15. In order from left to right: chairman Don Gentry, Kathy Hill, Vivian Kimbol, Anna Bennett, Taylor Tupper [public information/news manager], and Shawn Jackson.] Members of Klamath Tribal council and Klamath Tribes negotiation team at the latest community meeting in Portland, OR 2/9/15. In order from left to right: chairman Don Gentry, Kathy Hill, Vivian Kimbol, Anna Bennett, Taylor Tupper [public information/news manager], and Shawn Jackson. Since then, two more agreements have been drafted and introduced, the Klamath Basin Hydroelectric Settlement (KHSA) on February 18, 2010 and the Upper Klamath Basin Comprehensive Agreement (UKBCA) on March 4, 2014. While the Klamath Basin has glorified these agreements as a historical reconciliation, Indian Water Settlement agreements similar to the KBRA have been on the rise, and since 1989 congress has ratified at least 30. Spring 2014, Klamath Tribal members were notified at a series of community meetings in Portland, Eugene, Chiloquin and Klamath Falls that the UKBCA had been finalized and referendum ballots would be mailed the following week. This left tribal members only 19 days to review over 100 pages of legal and scientific documentation and cast a vote to approve (or deny) and direct the Klamath Tribal chairman, Donald Gentry, to sign the proposed legislation. According to the Klamath Tribes Referendum Official Ballot, ?all ballots must be received by the US Post Office in Chiloquin by 9:00 a.m. Wednesday, April 9, 2014. Or they will not be counted.? [image: image[1]] Many tribal members, primarily those who live out of area, either did not receive their ballots or received their ballots after the deadline for submission. 564 Tribal members voted yes, in favor of the Agreement, and 419 voted no. Less than one third of eligible voters cast a vote. Lack in ethical leadership has affected business at home and many have not been given the opportunity to exercise their right to vote. Administration is not updating addresses for tribal members to tribal departments. Members who live out of area have also had their ballots rejected because addresses didn?t match elections. There were two tribal newsletters in 2014 which some still have not received. This has left countless tribal members disenfranchised. Numerous tribal members have now been questioning the motives of their own tribal government and the tribal negotiators of these water agreements. As of last week, Fidelity National Financial Ventures announced it had sold the assets of Cascade Timberlands, LLC to Whitefish Cascade Forest Resources, LLC, based in Singapore. The sale included the Mazama Tree Farm, which is a key component in the Klamath Tribes negotiations regarding the KBRA. This may now give the Klamath Tribes a special circumstance to file for withdrawal from the agreements as outlined in section 33.2.2. in the KBRA. This option is not currently being shared or discussed with Tribal members. And the actions of Klamath Tribal negotiators regarding this issue are yet to be determined. Within this last year we have watched the UKBCA, turn into Senate Bill 2379 and witnessed it die in Senate at the end of 2014. Every time a new document is drafted, new language is introduced.On January 8th 2015 Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon reintroduced the agreements as Senate Bill 133. Direct quote from SB 133: ?Prohibits water allocations for fish and wildlife and National Wildlife Refuge purposes from adversely affecting water allocations for irrigation purposes..? There were originally 80,000 acres of seasonal marshes in the Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge. On average the Refuge served about 10 million birds and had a large winter population of threatened Bald Eagles. At the current status, the Refuge will essentially be a cracked lakebed. Now a year after the signing of the UKBCA, for us as Tribal People whose primary interest is to protect all sacred things that are outlined in the 1864 Treaty that pertain to our survivance as a culturally distinct People, more is coming to light in regards to these documents along with various reasons to not support them. These ?agreements? do not secure that which is necessary to protect what is promised under the Treaty. These agreements do not protect that which is crucial to our spirituality and way of life. ?The adverse effects of KBRA on water needed for fish became much clearer during the dam removal EIS stage than they were earlier. Buried in the klamathrestoration.gov list of engineering studies is a definitive report showing that KBRA means less water during many key times than is currently required by the BiOps protecting Coho Salmon., e.g., during dry year months. The irrigators like this outcome but no one who wants Salmon to thrive should be satisfied.? Tom Schlosser, legal counsel for Hoopa Valley Tribe [image: Klamath member making dug out canoes.] Klamath member making dug out canoes. Signatory tribes, such as the Klamath, Yurok, and Karuk Tribes have hailed the agreements as a path toward dam removal and fisheries restoration. Through the KBRA and Upper Basin agreement those Basin Tribes with water rights, or which have advocated for Salmon, have been promised funding for restoration and economic development in exchange for not pressing for increased flows in the Klamath River. Klamath Tribal Members have been told the agreements do not relinquish any rights, however, the agreements irrefutably contain language that limits the federal trust responsibility. Both the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians (ATNI) and the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) have resolutions opposing any action that limits or abolishes the federal trust responsibility. Nevertheless, signatory tribes have chosen to proceed into the agreements. The Hoopa Valley, Quartz Valley and Resighini tribes did not sign. They argued the agreement subordinates priority tribal water rights and the Endangered Species Act. They argued the lack of water effects Chinook and Coho Salmon health and future salmon runs in the Klamath Basin. They argued that the inexpensive, direct path to dam removal is restarting the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission process for these facilities. The Klamath agreement has blocked this process for years. The government is frequently conflicted in their obligation to protect Tribes but often chooses to protect irrigators that have created a large economy based on Tribal resources. The crux of the dispute is the United States government has been involved by providing assets and paying for resources to advance the cases (sell-out our rights), when they have a fiduciary duty as trustee to protect Tribes. Clearly, the Bureau of Reclamation is also pulling levers behind the scenes with the Pacificorp power company. In 2014, salmon were sick and dying in the Klamath River and BOR prompted Pacificorp to provide water, with the promise to pay back that water the following year. Though residents complain about the toxic river conditions, Pacificorp continues to operate outside the guidelines of the clean water act. The Klamath Basin long term plan for 2015 provides no water for the environment. In Sec. 2.5.1 footnote 8 and 4.3.1 n. 14 of the KBRA indicate that Upper Klamath water will not be used to address lower Klamath fish health; the Upper Klamath will be managed by the KID BiOp. As it stands now, the most senior water right goes to support agriculture and to the flooding of fields to prove usage, for increased farm subsidies in the Upper Basin. The KBRA and associated agreements are not at all an exercise in self-determination but advocating for a blood oath from Tribes. Although, we are faced with drought, contamination and over-consumption, the Klamath Tribal council and Klamath Tribes Negotiation Team continue to support an agreement that permits destructive acts against our culture, environment, and our future as Klamath, Modoc, Yahooskin Peoples. *Honor The Treaty of 1864* is a group of like minded individuals who want to honor our ancestors and our 7th generation by protecting our resources and our rights. While these ideas are not new and many people before us stood for the same things we do, our group was officially formed in 2014. We welcome all people who support our cause. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Feb 26 08:20:25 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 08:20:25 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] TRRP: Proposed 2015 Limekiln Gulch Channel Rehabilitation Site Draft Environmental Document for Review Message-ID: <1424967625.99736.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.trrp.net/2015/eais_limekilngulch/ Proposed 2015 Limekiln Gulch Channel Rehabilitation Site Draft Environmental Document for Review Published: FEBRUARY 25, 2015 Proposed 2015 Limekiln Gulch Channel Rehabilitation Site Draft Environmental Document for Review Public Meeting: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 Douglas City School in Douglas City 6:30 to 8:00pm Document Links: * Draft EA/IS (6 MB) * Checklist (677kb) * Excerpted Site Map (figure 3)(422kb) * Public Meeting Display Ad (68kb) * Other Relevant Documents: * Master EIR * Programmatic EIS/EIR * TRRP Foundational Documents As part of the Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) channel rehabilitation activities, 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 this March meeting to learn about proposed 2015 construction at the Limekiln Gulch (LKG) Channel Rehabilitation site and to provide your input. On Wednesday March 11th, 2015, the LKG meeting will be held at the Douglas City School in Douglas City, CA from 6:30 to 8:00pm. Project information will be presented and comments on the scope of the project will be accepted. The LKG site is located on the mainstem Trinity River, about 0.3 miles upstream of Steel Bridge Campground near Douglas City, CA. The TRRP proposes to construct LKG in summer 2015 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 both terrestrial and aquatic habitat quality. The Project would increase habitat complexity via construction of slow water refuge habitats (e.g., side channels) for juvenile salmon and steelhead, reconnection of the floodplain with the river, revegetation with native plants, and placement of wood/rock structures to react with flow and create/maintain habitat. The Draft Environmental Document that formally analyzes the impacts of these projects and meets California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements will be available on the TRRP website in March 2015 at www.trrp.net, and on Reclamation?s website: http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=20621 for a 30 day public review and comment period. This meeting is to receive public input and to share present design alternatives. For further information, please contact Mr. Brandt Gutermuth, Bureau of Reclamation, at 623-1806 or e-mail bgutermuth at usbr.gov. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Thu Feb 26 10:51:12 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 10:51:12 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Times-Std: Klamath sees healthy salmon return in 2014 Message-ID: <004801d051f5$318a9ef0$949fdcd0$@sisqtel.net> Note that actual escapement to the Scott River was 10,419 Chinook adults (plus 2,051 jacks) while the Salmon River's return was 2,706 adults (plus 527 jacks) - the figures got reversed in the text from the actual data in Appendix B, table B-6. http://www.pcouncil.org/2015/02/35342/2014salrvw-online/ http://www.pcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/salsafe2014_AppendixB.pdf Klamath sees healthy salmon return in 2014 By Kenny Priest, For the Times-Standard http://www.times-standard.com/sports/20150225/klamath-sees-healthy-salmon-re turn-in-2014 Posted: 02/25/15, 9:37 PM PST | So much for last year being a down year on the Klamath. Turns out the number of fall Klamath River adult kings [Chinook] returning to the river was much higher than originally predicted. According to the Pacific Fisheries Management Council (PFMC), which recently completed their preliminary stock assessment evaluation, 160,444 adults returned along with 22,348 jacks, or two year-old kings. The predicted run size was 92,800. The increase in returns allowed for a whopping 95,330 natural spawners, which is roughly 234 percent of what's required. Based on the number of jacks that returned, which is used as one of the factors in predicting next year's run, we should be in for another good year on the Klamath. Last year's sport quota for the entire Klamath Basin was 4,128 adults, which was based on the 92,800 run size. Looking at the actual numbers, we could see a much higher sport quota in 2015. Iron Gate Hatchery on the upper Klamath also saw a spike in returning adults. On an average year, roughly 15,000 will return. In 2014, 24,300 returned. Add in another 6,975 that returned to the Trinity River Hatchery, and we're about 7,000 fish over the 35-year average for both hatcheries combined. The upper Klamath tributaries, including the Salmon, Scott, and Shasta Rivers, also saw an increase in the returning salmon. The Shasta River has historically been the most important Chinook salmon spawning stream in the upper Klamath River, supporting a spawning escapement of 27,600 adults as recently as 2012 and 63,700 in 1935. The escapement in 2014 to the Shasta River was 14,412 adults. Escapement to the Salmon and Scott Rivers was 10,419 and 2,706 adults, respectively [sic]. Next up is the annual Salmon Information meeting, which was being held today in Santa Rosa. Ocean abundance will be discussed, which will then trickle down to river quotas. To view the ocean salmon fishery report, visit www.pcouncil.org/wp content/uploads/ salsafe2014_FullDocument.pdf . PFMC set to meet March 6-12 The Pacific Fishery Management Council and its advisory bodies will meet March 6-12, 2015 in Vancouver, Washington, to address issues related to salmon, Pacific halibut, highly migratory species, ecosystem based management, and habitat matters. On the agenda are the alternatives for the 2015 ocean salmon fisheries for public review. Cash for Trinity steelhead, salmon tags If you've been successful catching steelhead and salmon on the Trinity River, a $10-50 reward could be yours. All you need to do is return your fish tags this season according to a press release issued Wednesday by the CDFW. Of the more than 4,500 fish that were tagged, 3,000 are eligible for a cash reward. CDFW uses information gathered from the tags applied to Chinook, coho and steelhead in the Trinity River system to calculate harvest and help biologists estimate population size of steelhead and salmon runs. Only tags returned to CDFW in the same season they are obtained can be used in estimates. The timely return of tags to CDFW is critical because the data is also needed for the annual season setting process. Reward tags are clearly marked, though any tag returned is appreciated. The information non-reward tags are equally important to the process. When the tag is returned, CDFW will send you information about where and when your fish was tagged, in addition to any reward for which you might qualify. For more information, visit https:/ /cdfgnews.wordpress.com/2015/02/25/north-coast-anglers-could-be-rewarded-for -returning-fish-tags-in-timely-manner. Weekend weather We'll be seeing periods of light rain beginning Thursday evening according to Reginald Kennedy of Eureka's National Weather Service. He said, "Thursday and Friday we'll see some showers and they'll start to taper off on Saturday. Another weak system will bring a few showers on Monday. Del Norte could see anywhere from a half to an inch of rain from Thursday through Saturday while Humboldt may see a quarter to a half. The rainfall totals will definitely be less as you move south." Find "Fishing the North Coast" on Facebook and fishingthenorthcoast.com for up-to- date fishing reports and North Coast river information. Questions, comments and photos can be emailed to kenny at fishingthenorthcoast.com. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Feb 26 16:24:19 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 16:24:19 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: Draft Environmental Documents; Public Meeting on Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Project In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1424996659.79142.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> On Thursday, February 26, 2015 3:53 PM, Janet Sierzputowski wrote: Draft Environmental Documents; Public Meeting on Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Project Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, Calif. MP-15-022 Media Contact: Erin Curtis, 916-978-5100, eccurtis at usbr.gov For Release On: Feb. 26, 2015 Reclamation Releases Draft Environmental Documents; Public Meeting on Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Project WEAVERVILLE, Calif. ? As part of the Trinity River Restoration Program, the Bureau of Reclamation has released the Draft Environmental Assessment/Initial Study for the Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Site: Limekiln Gulch. A public meeting will be held to receive comments on Wednesday, March 11, from 6:30 to 8:00 p.m. at the Douglas City School, Douglas City, Calif. Representatives from Reclamation, the Bureau of Land Management (federal co-lead agencies) and the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (California state lead agency) invite you to learn about the scope of the project and submit public comments at the meeting. The Limekiln Gulch channel rehabilitation site is located on the mainstem Trinity River about 0.3 miles upstream of Steel Bridge Campground near Douglas City. The project proposes to start construction and rehabilitation this summer. Constructing this project would increase salmon and steelhead habitat downstream of Lewiston Dam, as described in the Dec. 19, 2000, Record of Decision for the Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration Environmental Impact Statement. The proposed project would enhance the quality of terrestrial and aquatic habitat and increase habitat complexity by (1) constructing slow water refuge habitats, such as side channels, for juvenile salmon and steelhead, (2) reconnecting the floodplain with the river, (3) re-vegetating with native plants, and (4) placing wood and rock structures that react with flow to create and maintain habitat. The Draft EA and IS for this project were prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and the California Environmental Quality Act and are available at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=20621or the Trinity River Restoration Project website at www.trrp.net. If you have problems accessing the documents online, please call 916-978-5100 (TTY 800-877-8339) or email mppublicaffairs at usbr.gov. Written comments must be received by close of business Tuesday, March 31. Please send comments to Brandt Gutermuth, Trinity River Restoration Program, P.O. Box 1300, Weaverville, CA 96093 or bgutermuth at usbr.gov. For further information, please contact Gutermuth at 530-623-1806 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, Mid-Pacific 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, CA 95825 United States -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Feb 26 22:35:48 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 22:35:48 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fisheries Agencies Report Positive Outlook for 2015 Ocean Salmon Fishing Season In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1425018948.47560.YahooMailNeo@web120304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> California Department of Fish and Wildlife News Release Feb. 26, 2015 Media Contacts: Jennifer Simon, CDFW Ocean Salmon Project, (707) 576-2878 Andrew Hughan, CDFW Communications, (916) 322-8944 Kirsten Macintyre, CDFW Communications, (916) 322-8988 Fisheries Agencies Report Positive Outlook for 2015 Ocean Salmon Fishing Season At the annual salmon informational meeting held in Santa Rosa today, state and federal fishery scientists presented encouraging news for sport and commercial salmon anglers. Forecasts suggest there are 652,000 adult Sacramento River fall Chinook salmon in the ocean this year, along with 423,800 adults from the Klamath River fall run. Fish from these runs comprise the vast majority of salmon taken in California?s ocean and inland fisheries. These forecasts, which were higher than last year, will be used over the next few months by fishery managers to set sport and commercial fishing season dates, commercial quotas, and size and bag limits. ?The forecasts are encouraging and suggest that California fisheries may see salmon seasons in 2015 that have increased opportunities over last year,? said Melodie Palmer-Zwahlen, a senior environmental scientist with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Chinook salmon harvested in ocean fisheries in 2015 hatched 2-4 years ago and, as a result, have not been highly impacted by California?s drought. Starting next year, it is anticipated that future ocean salmon fishing opportunities may be impacted by the ongoing drought. Season dates and other regulations will be developed by the Pacific Fishery Management Council and California Fish and Game Commission over the next few months. For more information on the salmon season setting process or general ocean salmon fishing information, please visit the Ocean Salmon Project website at www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/oceansalmon.asp, or call the salmon fishing hotline at (707) 576-3429. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Fri Feb 27 10:35:35 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 10:35:35 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Article submission: Fish agencies and anglers are optimistic about 2015 ocean salmon season In-Reply-To: <1424996659.79142.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1424996659.79142.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4E2657B8-FA1E-4E65-BBCC-0E33FEEA5EF4@fishsniffer.com> Good Morning Here is a brief summary of the meeting yesterday. I will do a more detailed report later. Thanks Dan http://www.fishsniffer.com/blogs/details/recreational-anglers-are-cautiously-optimistic-about-2014-ocean-salmon-seas/ Fish agencies and anglers are optimistic about 2015 ocean salmon season by Dan Bacher State and federal fishery scientists speaking at the annual salmon informational meeting held in Santa Rosa Thursday shared encouraging news for sport and commercial salmon anglers for the upcoming 2015 ocean salmon season. Forecasts, developed in modeling based on the returns of two year old salmon, "jacks" and "jills," to the river in the fall of 2014 suggest there are 652,000 adult Sacramento River fall Chinook salmon in the ocean this year, along with 423,800 adults from the Klamath River fall run. Fish from these runs comprise the vast majority of salmon taken in California?s ocean and inland fisheries, according to a statement from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). These forecasts, surprising many anglers at the meeting since they were higher than last year, will be used over the next few months by fishery managers to set sport and commercial fishing season dates, commercial quotas, and size and bag limits. ?The forecasts are encouraging and suggest that California fisheries may see salmon seasons in 2015 that have increased opportunities over last year,? said Melodie Palmer-Zwahlen, a senior environmental scientist with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Palmer-Zwahlen noted that Chinook salmon harvested in ocean fisheries in 2015 hatched 2-4 years ago and, as a result, have not been highly impacted by California?s drought. "Starting next year, it is anticipated that future ocean salmon fishing opportunities may be impacted by the ongoing drought," she stated. Season dates and other regulations will be developed by the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) and California Fish and Game Commission over the next few months. Thursday's meeting was a key first step in establishing coastal salmon fishing seasons and regulations for this year that are expected to be finalized and announced by the PFMC and the California Fish and Game Commission in April.Pending these decisions, the 2015 recreational salmon season is on track to open in most of California on Saturday, April 4, noted a news release from the Coastside Fishing Club. ?When it came to salmon projections for the state and anticipated ocean fishing opportunities during 2015, the mood at the meeting could be best described as cautiously optimistic,? said Coastside Fishing Club President and Science Director Dan Wolford, a voting member of the PFMC. ?About 212,000 adult salmon returned to spawn in California?s Sacramento River and tributaries in 2014 ? well above the 180,000 escapement objective previously set by fishery managers." Another positive note was the solid number of returning two-year old fish, commonly referred to as "jacks" and "jills," according to Wolford. Included in the overall returns for 2014 were 25,359 jacks ? about 25-percent more than returned in 2013. Since the majority of these sub-adult salmon tend to stay out in the ocean for another year before returning, this is another positive sign for ocean salmon numbers and solid fishing opportunities in 2015. At this time last year, scientists estimated an abundance of about 600,000 three-year old Sacramento River salmon. Iinitial estimates for 2015 put the forecasted number of adults a bit higher than last year, at 650,000. "The 2014 returns are a pleasant surprise and point to the success of the extraordinary efforts of the Department to truck juvenile hatchery fish around the deadly conditions encountered in the rivers and bay- delta system," Wolford observed. Wolford said returning adult salmon numbers on the Klamath River were also stronger in 2014 than in the previous year ? with the 95,330 natural adult spawners more than doubling the established minimum of 40,700 fish. An additional 31,000 adult salmon also returned to the Klamath Basin hatcheries. ?We face many challenges in California, not the least of which is our continuing drought," said Wolford. "Still, the positive salmon return numbers from 2014 and the forecast for the coming season gives us reason to be hopeful. "The PFMC will weigh these projections and take into account a wide range of considerations as it develops regulations that will ultimately decide when, where and how anglers can fish for salmon in the state." Wolford was featured on a panel with Coastside Director Marc Gorelnik, who serves on the PFMC Salmon Advisory Subpanel, the body charged with developing season options for adoption, and other members of the PFMC and its advisory panels. "Involvement with the PFMC is just one of many initiatives this volunteer-driven organization undertakes to benefit anglers and fish alike, including the construction, operation and maintenance of salmon acclimation pens located in Pillar Point Harbor," according to the releasd. "Over the past three years, Coastside volunteers have received, fed, vaccinated and released nearly one million juvenile salmon into area waters, each sporting a coded wire tag that allows fishery managers to track movements of these hatchery fish ? as well as the program?s overall success ? through the eventual capture of returning fish." Fishermen who want to stay on top of developing news and regulations can visit the Coastside Fishing Club website at www.CoastsideFishingClub.com . For more information on the salmon season setting process or general ocean salmon fishing information, please visit the Ocean Salmon Project website atwww.dfg.ca.gov/marine/oceansalmon.asp, or call the salmon fishing hotline at (707) 576-3429. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Feb 27 11:12:29 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 11:12:29 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: Reclamation Announces Initial Water Supply Allocation for Central Valley Project In-Reply-To: <6f738bc6720546a88f2a270750f4369f@usbr.gov> References: <6f738bc6720546a88f2a270750f4369f@usbr.gov> Message-ID: <1425064349.84476.YahooMailNeo@web120303.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, Calif. MP-15-023 Media Contact: Erin Curtis, 916-978-5100, eccurtis at usbr.gov For release On: Feb. 27, 2015 Reclamation Announces Initial Water Supply Allocation for Central Valley Project SACRAMENTO, Calif. ? The Bureau of Reclamation today announced the initial 2015 water supply allocation for Central Valley Project agricultural contractors and municipal and industrial contractors. This initial allocation is based on a conservative estimate of the amount of water that will be available for delivery to CVP water users. The allocation, which will be re-examined on a monthly basis as the water year progresses, reflects current reservoir storages, precipitation and snowpack conditions in the Central Valley and Sierra Nevada. The California Department of Water Resources reports snowpack is below average for this date with the snow water content statewide currently at 20 percent or less of average for this time of year. California is experiencing its fourth consecutive year of below-average precipitation, and the Governor?s Emergency Drought Proclamation, issued January 17, 2014, remains in effect. Without unusually heavy precipitation over the next few months, extreme drought conditions are forecasted to persist throughout the Central Valley. Unfortunately, many agricultural water contractors may face a second year of receiving no water from the project ? an unprecedented situation. In addition, reduced amounts of water are expected to be available from the CVP for urban uses, although Reclamation anticipates having adequate supplies to provide for unmet health and safety needs for these water users. Reclamation?s initial CVP allocations are primarily based on CVP reservoir storage levels and DWR?s February 2015 Runoff Forecast, which indicates another critically dry water year for both the Sacramento Valley and the San Joaquin Valley. Reclamation began Water Year 2015 in October 2014, with only 3.1 million acre-feet of carryover storage in six key CVP reservoirs. This was 26 percent of capacity and 47 percent of the 15-year average for October 1. Since that time, the State has seen several significant rain events but also extended periods of very dry weather. January 2015 was the driest January in recorded history for northern California. With low storage and extremely low snowpack, Reclamation?s water managers will work with the State of California and all contractors to effectively carry out project operations and improve water supply consistent with all applicable laws. Based on low forecasted inflows to Shasta Lake, the State?s largest reservoir, Reclamation is also projecting this year to be a second consecutive ?Shasta Critical Year? for the purposes of determining maximum contract quantities for many senior water rights holders and wildlife refuges in the Central Valley. If current dry conditions persist, CVP water contractors, whose water supply is based upon senior water rights and the Shasta Critical criteria, will see their contract supply reduced. Although project supplies are limited, Reclamation is committed to working with these contractors to meet their demands through the summer. ?We are bracing for a potential fourth year of severe drought, and this low initial allocation is yet another indicator of the dire situation,? said Reclamation Mid-Pacific Regional Director David Murillo. ?Reclamation and the Department of the Interior will continue to work with the State of California and our water users to do everything possible to increase water deliveries from the project as we move yet another difficult year. Our economy and our environment depend on it.? Reclamation determines the allocation of CVP water for agricultural, environmental and municipal and industrial purposes based upon many factors. Today?s initial allocation, based on a conservative runoff forecast, is driven by critically dry hydrologic conditions, low storage levels, water quality requirements, flow objectives, relative priority of water rights and endangered species protection measures. Reclamation and DWR are operating consistent with the 2015 Drought Contingency Plan submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board that outlines numerous actions to help the CVP and State Water Project manage limited water supplies during these drought conditions. This includes expanding operational flexibility to conserve stored water and take full advantage of excess and abandoned flows in the Delta. ?The rain events in December were encouraging, but the persistent dry weather the first two months of this year underscores our need to plan for another critical year of drought. We have been working closely for months with our State and federal agency partners to try to minimize impacts and will continue to do so,? Murillo said. This initial set of CVP allocations is based on a conservative assumption that dry conditions will continue for the remainder of the water year. With almost two months remaining in California?s rainy season, there is still an opportunity for improved conditions. If conditions improve and hydrology is closer to or above average for the next several months, CVP supplies could improve, with increased supplies to M&I contractors and potentially some water available for allocation to agriculture water users. North-of-Delta Contractors * Agricultural water service contractors North-of-Delta are allocated 0 percent of their contract quantity. * M&I water service contractors North-of-Delta will receive enough water to meet their health and safety needs or at least 25 percent of their historic use, whichever is greater. South-of-Delta Contractors * Agricultural water service contractors South-of-Delta are allocated 0 percent of their contract quantity. * M&I water service contractors South-of-Delta will receive enough water to meet their health and safety needs or at least 25 percent of their historic use, whichever is greater. Friant Division Contractors * Based on DWR?s February 2015 Runoff Forecast for the upper San Joaquin River, contractual requirements to prior right holders, and the overall forecasted operation of the CVP, the Friant Division water supply allocation is 0 percent of Class 1 and Class 2. * Reclamation will be working with the Friant contractors to determine what amount of water will made available to meet health and safety needs within the Friant service area. Eastside Water Service Contractors * Eastside water service contractors (Central San Joaquin Water Conservation District and Stockton East Water District) will receive 0 percent of their contract quantity due to a lack of available CVP supplies out of New Melones. As the water year progresses, changes to hydrology and opportunities to exercise operational flexibility of the CVP are factors and conditions that will influence future allocations. Water supply updates will be made as appropriate and posted on Reclamation?s website at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/pa/water. For additional information, please contact the Public Affairs Office at 916-978-5100 (TTY 800-877-8339) 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, Mid-Pacific 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, CA 95825 United States -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Fri Feb 27 11:54:17 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 11:54:17 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Elk Grove News: Field Poll Reveals Most California Voters Oppose Brown's 'Big Government Projects' In-Reply-To: <1425064349.84476.YahooMailNeo@web120303.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <6f738bc6720546a88f2a270750f4369f@usbr.gov> <1425064349.84476.YahooMailNeo@web120303.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <804E3DE8-885E-46AA-87CD-94FC92743394@fishsniffer.com> http://www.elkgrovenews.net/2015/02/field-poll-reveals-most-california.html Field Poll Reveals Most California Voters Oppose Brown's 'Big Government Projects' Written By EGN on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 | 18:50 By Dan Bacher | February 25, 2015 | A Field Poll released on February 24 revealed that Governor Jerry Brown continues to receive "strong approval" from California voters, but the same voters oppose his big government spending projects, including the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the twin tunnels. The poll results find nearly 56-percent of the state's voters approving of Brown's performance in office, while 32-percent disapprove. However, then asked to consider three negative statements that have been made about the Governor, a 57-percent majority agrees with one of them ? ?favors too many big government projects that the state cannot afford right now.? Although not specifically mentioned in the survey, the "big government projects" they were referring to include the high speed rail project and the twin tunnels plan, the controversial "legacy" public works projects of the Brown administration. This view is held by 76-percent of Republicans and 56-percent of the state's non-partisans, but a smaller percentage (45-percent) of the state's Democrats. Restore the Delta (RTD), opponents of Governor Jerry Brown?s rush to build water export tunnels that would drain the Delta and doom sustainable farms, salmon and other Pacific fisheries, responded today to the Field Poll finding that the majority of California voters believe the Governor "favors too many big government projects the state cannot afford right now.? The voters? response is understood, including by the pollster, to include the Delta tunnels, according to RTD. ?Voters do not support the massive water export tunnels project," said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of RTD. "Governor Brown must rethink his water policies, and embrace a new, sustainable water solution. Governor Brown does have the vision and experience to recognize a dead end, and to abandon the doomed BDCP tunnels, which violate the Clean Water Act, degrade Delta families? drinking water, and threaten salmon extinction.? ?For $67 billion, Californians get no new water, lose our fisheries and spend generations paying to subsidize huge, unsustainable industrial agriculture on unsuitable, drainage impaired Westside San Joaquin Valley lands," stated Barrigan-Parrilla. "That money would be better spent on alternatives that will make more water available to all Californians: recycling, storm water capture, conservation, groundwater cleanup and recharge etc. It?s time for a new, sustainable solution that makes new water, creates long-term jobs, promotes regional water independence and preserves fisheries and sustainable farms.? She compared Governor Brown's massive tunnels with a sustainable water solution, as embodied in the Environmental Water Caucus Responsible Exports Plan. The tunnels would cost $67 billion, while a sustainable water solution would cost $20 billion The tunnels would create no new water, while a sustainable water solution would create 5 to 10 million acre feet of water. The tunnels would create 10,000 short-term construction jobs and destroy thousands of Delta farming and Pacific fisheries-related jobs, while a sustainable water solution would create thousands of long-term jobs installing water-saving devices and replacing the infrastructure. The tunnels would mainly benefit huge mega-growers irrigating toxic, drainage impaired land on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley, while a sustainable water solution would benefit ALL Californians. There is no doubt that Governor's Brown's approval ratings would slip well below 50 percent if the mainstream media and corporate "environmental" NGOs would stop greenwashing the Governor's environmental record and report the truth about Brown's war on fish, water and the environment. Not only has Brown rushed the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to build the peripheral tunnels, but he has overseen the expansion of fracking in California; has approved the creation of oil industry-friendly "marine protected areas" under the corrupt Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative; has presided over record water exports from the Delta in 2011; and has brought Delta smelt, longfin smelt, Central Valley steelhead and Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon closer to extinction. The truth about Governor Brown's environmental record can be viewed here. - See more at: http://www.elkgrovenews.net/2015/02/field-poll-reveals-most-california.html#sthash.LAikrxT3.dpuf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Gov+Brown+Poll+results.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 55327 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Fri Feb 27 13:29:53 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 21:29:53 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Jweek 7& 8 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C4FB015@057-SN2MPN1-041.057d.mgd.msft.net> Greetings, Please see attachment for the Jweek 7 & 8 (Feb 12-25)update to the Trinity River trapping summary. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2014 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW8xlsx.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 60407 bytes Desc: 2014 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW8xlsx.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Mar 2 09:58:11 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 09:58:11 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Central Valley, Delta water rights under scrutiny Message-ID: <1425319091.96274.YahooMailNeo@web120303.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/environment/article11882384.html Central Valley, Delta water rights under scrutiny BY MATT WEISERMWEISER at SACBEE.COM 03/01/2015 11:00 AM 03/02/2015 7:07 AM Hundreds of property owners across California?s Central Valley and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta are scrambling to prove they have a right to divert water from the region?s streams, the result of a state order that comes due in just four days. The orderfrom the State Water Resources Control Board is driven by a longstanding dispute over scarce water supplies, one that has intensified as California appears likely to face a fourth straight drought year. But proving those water rights may be difficult: In many cases, the proof lies buried in county parcel maps and other property records dating as far back as the 1850s. Property owners who fail to submit the required proof by Friday could be ordered to stop diverting water entirely. The dispute focuses primarily on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, a troubled estuary that is the heart of California?s complex water diversion system. State and federal agencies divert water from the Delta to serve about 25 million people and 3 million acres of farmland across the state. But their water rights are actually inferior to those held by property owners in the Delta itself. Related Sacramento City Council OKs speeding up installation of water meters ?I?m angry. Why are they coming after us?? said Charlotte Gilmore, a Sacramento resident whose family has owned a large farm parcel on Ryer Island in the Delta since the 1930s. ?I don?t think the state is being fair coming at us to solve their problems.? The dispute stems from a complaint filed in July by the California Department of Water Resources and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which operate the massive water diversion systems in the Delta as well as major upstream reservoirs. The two agencies suspect water released from their reservoirs is being inappropriately diverted by property owners in the Delta as it flows past their land. This prompted a countercomplaint from the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, a nonprofit group, alleging DWR and Reclamation are diverting water from the Delta and its tributary streams that belongs to property owners. As a first step toward resolving the issue, the State Water Resources Control Board on Feb. 4 ordered 1,061 property owners with claims to water in the Central Valley to prove those claims by March 6. The order applies only to ?senior? water rights, including those established before 1914 and ?riparian? rights. Geographically, the order covers territory from approximately Redding all the way south to Merced, with a major emphasis on the Delta. The riparian category is particularly troublesome to track because these are the oldest rights, typically attached to waterfront property. In the early days of California settlement, the federal government allowed settlers to acquire property by ?reclaiming? swampland, usually by converting it to farming. In most cases, this activity included a right to draw water from an adjoining stream for crop irrigation. Historically, state regulators required no record keeping of riparian water rights. Only five years ago did the water board order riparian water users to begin reporting how much water they divert each year. Many have never been required to provide legal proof of their water rights. ?The idea that people can gather, collate and submit this information in approximately 30 days is, frankly, pretty daunting in most cases,? said Kevin O?Brien, an attorney at Sacramento law firm Downey Brand who is helping about 30 clients respond to the order. ?It?s not like people have this stuff sitting around in a shoebox.? Gilmore provides a case in point. Her father acquired their Ryer Island property in 1939, when it was willed to him by a close family friend. That friend obtained the property through a federal land grant in the 1850s. Any proof of a water right likely will be found in property records from that Gold Rush era. Such records often are found in faded paper archives at a county recorder?s office, or in court records, and are not electronically searchable. ?We had rights and used that water before the state even had any departments,? Gilmore said. ?It?s very difficult to prove it.? Katherine Mrowka, enforcement section manager at the water board, said the order is not just a response to the dueling complaints filed with her agency. The information also will help protect senior water rights if the state orders reductions in water diversions due to the drought, as it did last year. When such curtailments are ordered due to low stream flows, those with junior water rights are required by state law to stop diverting water to ensure enough for those with senior rights. By verifying all the senior rights and their water needs, Mrowka said, the water board can ensure curtailments are adequate to meet those needs. ?Our underlying goal here is to protect the priority system for water rights,? Mrowka said. ?We need this information so we can do good modeling of supply vs. demand.? She said water board staff met recently with several attorneys representing property owners affected by the order. To make the process easier, the board agreed to simplify the online forms it makes available for reporting the information. The information gathered from property owners could lead to an adjudication, in which water rights are investigated and verified in a judicial proceeding, a process that can take years. The result is a finding that apportions water among the parties and has the weight of a court ruling. The California Sportfishing Protection Alliance asked for adjudication in its complaint to the board, partly because of estimates that the state has given out five times more water rights than Central Valley watersheds can produce in an average year. ?We?ve promised more water than we have,? said Bill Jennings, executive director of the sport-fishing group. ?You don?t solve it by going after senior water-right holders that have had this water for years. You solve it by bringing demand into balance with supply. And the state just can?t bring itself to do that.? Mrowka said adjudication is possible later but that it won?t happen soon because the water board can?t take on something so complicated while also managing the drought. Call The Bee?s Matt Weiser at (916) 321-1264. Follow him on Twitter @matt_weiser. Environment Central Valley, Delta water rights under scrutiny Feds say many Central Valley farmers will get no water deliveries Hundreds of pits filled with oil wastewater discovered in California's Kern County Field Poll: More Californians want mandatory water rationing Exposure to small particle pollution linked to heart-disease death Environment More from The Bee NEWS Public invited to learn about Delta water flows NEWS Feds to evaluate rates charged for Delta water NEWS -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Mar 2 10:21:16 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 10:21:16 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Mercury: California drought: Water shortages a near certainty for this summer In-Reply-To: <1425320003.27261.YahooMailNeo@web120304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1425320003.27261.YahooMailNeo@web120304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1425320476.41689.YahooMailNeo@web120304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> The February CVP operations forecast (reservoir levels, flow volumes, etc) can be found at: 90% exceedance forecast (dry) http://www.usbr.gov/mp/cvo/data/Feb90_2015.pdf 50% exceedance forecast (average) http://www.mercurynews.com/drought/ci_27611367/california-drought-water-shortages-near-certainty-this-summer California drought: Water shortages a near certainty for this summer as feds announce low deliveries. By Paul Rogers progers at mercurynews.com In a clear indicator that California is descending into a fourth year of drought, the federal government on Friday announced that the Central Valley Project -- California's largest water delivery system -- will provide no water again this year to most Central Valley farmers and only 25 percent of the contracted amount to urban areas such as Santa Clara, Alameda and Contra Costa counties.The announcement from the Bureau of Reclamation means that farmers in California's main agricultural region will fallow hundreds of thousands of acres, and heavily pump already depleted wells, perhaps faster than last year.It also increases the likelihood of stricter conservation rules -- including fines for excessive water use -- this summer for millions of residents who receive water from the Santa Clara Valley Water District, the East Bay Municipal Utility District and the Contra Costa Water District, all of whom draw a portion of their supply from the Central Valley Project."Today's picture is not a pretty one," said David Murillo, regional director for the Bureau of Reclamation. "Based on all indicators, we are looking at a fourth year of drought." The Central Valley Project was built starting in the 1930s. It moves water from Shasta Lake near Redding all the way to Bakersfield through a series of 20 dams, 500 miles of canals and huge pumps. In most years, the project provides nearly 90 percent of its water to farms. In dry years, cities receive priority over most farmers. Farmers, however, with the oldest claims to water could receive up to 75 percent of their contracted amounts this year.Meanwhile, urban water providers said Friday's news means they will scramble to increase conservation, buy water from the few willing sellers, and will rely on heavier groundwater pumping to get through the year.Most of California's major cities have so far gotten by with only voluntary conservation rules, with no fines or water cops. That may well change now."Unless it pours rain in the next two months, we're facing a long, dry, tough summer," said Abby Figueroa, a spokeswoman for the EBMUD, which serves 1.3 million people in Alameda and Contra Costa counties. Figueroa said the district's board will meet in April to discuss putting in place penalties for excessive water use, and mandatory limits on when people can water lawns. Some cities, like Morgan Hill, already limit lawn watering to only one day a week. Customers in EBMUD and the Santa Clara Valley Water District cut use 13 percent last year from the prior year. Not bad, but below Gov. Jerry Brown's request for 20 percent. On March 24, the Santa Clara Valley Water District will discuss tougher conservation measures, which could include asking South Bay cities to strictly limit lawn watering and, for the first time during this drought, issue fines for violators. They also will consider further ramping up rebates for people who remove lawns and buy water-efficient appliances. To make up for the lack of rain, the district has been heavily pumping groundwater, taking the water table under San Jose down 60 feet over the past three years. "We're going to have to do more belt-tightening," said Garth Hall, district deputy operating officer. "I don't know how far each city will go. It's going to vary across the landscape." At the Contra Costa Water District, the board in April will consider tightening a rule that doubles the cost of water for households that use more than 1,000 gallons a day -- about triple the area average. Residents in San Francisco, the Peninsula and South Bay who receive Hetch Hetchy water are not affected by Friday's announcement. The last three years have been the driest three-year period in California history back to the Gold Rush in 1850. Although Northern California received several strong storms in December and February -- and is expecting light rain this weekend -- those storms have not built up the state's critical Sierra Nevada snowpack, which stood at 19 percent of normal on Friday. That's because they were warm storms, and record hot temperatures in January and February have melted much of the snow. "We're flirting with the lowest snowpack on record," said Frank Gehrke, chief of the state's snow survey program. Farm groups said Friday the news means major economic pain in the San Joaquin Valley and other agricultural regions, many of which received no federal water last year. "As rural Californians face an uncertain future, their communities will continue to struggle with mounting unemployment and economic hardship," said Mike Wade, executive director of the California Farm Water Coalition. Wade called the announcement "a tragic repeat of last year," and said more jobs will be lost and land fallowed. Last year, 428,000 acres, or 5 percent of the state's cropland, was left unplanted because of the drought, and 17,100 jobs -- about 4 percent of all state farm employment -- were lost. Wade called on the federal government to relax regulations to protect salmon, smelt and other endangered fish to allow more water to be pumped out of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, something environmental and fishing groups oppose. "Coming on the heels of the driest three-year period in California's history, it's not surprising that allocations are low across the state," said Doug Obegi, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council in San Francisco. Pumping even more water out of the Delta will increase salinity and harm drinking water quality for 25 million California residents, Obegi said, noting there already have been huge salmon die-offs due to water cutbacks and increased river temperatures. "Waiving environmental laws won't make it rain," he said. Staff writer Kim Smuga-Otto contributed to this report. Paul Rogers covers resources and environmental issues. Contact him at 408-920-5045. Follow him at Twitter.com/paulrogerssjmn. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Mar 6 08:03:51 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 08:03:51 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Celebrating Zeke Grader - Fishing Community Hero/Champion In-Reply-To: <1120269328442.1120110205518.1398432904.0.161100JL.2002@scheduler.constantcontact.com> References: <1120269328442.1120110205518.1398432904.0.161100JL.2002@scheduler.constantcontact.com> Message-ID: <1425657831.16911.YahooMailNeo@web120302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> On Friday, March 6, 2015 8:00 AM, Institute for Fisheries Resources wrote: The Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman's Associations & The Institute for Fisheries Resources Cordially invite you to attend Friday, April 10, 2015 from 6pm - 9pm ---------------------------------------- Zeke's Catch of the Day A special event in honor of William F. Zeke Grader ---------------------------------------- A celebration for the Pacific Coast's leading champion for the commercial fishing industry. Tickets: $50 per person Appetizers, beer and wine will be served Donations are tax deductible R.S.V.P. required by April 3 Bay Model Visitor Center 2100 Bridgeway Blvd, Sausalito, CA 94965 (Between Harbor Drive and Marinship Way) For more information contact Harriet Lew at: Phone: (415) 561-3474 x221 Fax: (415) 561-5464 E-mail: hlew at ifrfish.org PURCHASE TICKETS OR DONATE ---------------------------------------- Forward this email This email was sent to tstokely at att.net by hlew at ifrfish.org | Update Profile/Email Address | Rapid removal with SafeUnsubscribe? | Privacy Policy. Institute for Fisheries Resources| PO Box 29196| San Francisco| CA| 94129 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Mar 6 12:18:27 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 12:18:27 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Maven: State Water Board Revises Order for State and Federal Water Project Operations During Drought Message-ID: <1425673107.92841.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://mavensnotebook.com/2015/03/06/this-just-in-state-water-board-revises-order-for-state-and-federal-water-project-operations-during-drought/ This just in ? State Water Board Revises Order for State and Federal Water Project Operations During Drought March 6, 2015 Maven Other news This morning, the State Water Resources Control Board issued a press release regarding the March 5th revised order, which was posted last night: State Water Resources Control Board Executive Director Tom Howard today made several changes to the Temporary Urgency Change Order, first issued on February 3, covering the operations of the State Water Project (SWP) and the federal Central Valley Project (CVP) in light of the continuing, severe drought. >A January 23 Temporary Urgency Change Petition(Petition) from the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) asked for several changes in their water right permit and license terms to cope with continuing drought conditions. The Executive Director issued a change order on February 3 granting most of the requests. The February 3 order granted flexibility in the operation of the Delta Cross Channel Gates to combat salinity intrusion, reduced Delta outflow requirements to preserve water in storage for use later in the year, and allowed for a base level of exports to meet water supply needs while protecting fish and wildlife uses. Today?s revised order provides the CVP and SWP further flexibility to store and move water, especially in response to health and safety needs. >The revised order removes some limitations that were in the original order on water transfers. Specifically, the changes clarify that the limitations on exports from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta) contained in the February 3 order do not apply to transfers of water by SWP contractors or CVP contractors to farmers and urban water users south of the Delta. This change is consistent with the requirements that were established in 2014 that allowed DWR and USBR, operators of the two major water projects, to transfer their contractors? water without that water being counted against the projects? export limits. >Regarding exports, the revised order continues to allow a base level of exports when flow requirements in the Delta are not being met. In their Petition, DWR and USBR also requested the flexibility to pump at an additional intermediate export rate, allowing more water to be exported, resulting in a further reduction in Delta outflows. The revised order approves this intermediate rate under very limited conditions, when flows in the Delta fall below the thresholds established in the February 3 order. Under this change, the SWP and CVP are authorized to increase exports only if DWR or USBR determines that health and safety needs, as defined in the Central Valley Project and State Water Project 2015 Drought Contingency Plan, require the use of the intermediate rate. If DWR and USBR make this determination, they are to first notify the Executive Director of the State Water Board of their intent to increase exports, by how much, for whose benefit and for what purpose. This change responds to extensive written and oral comment that the Board received on the devastating impacts of the drought on California?s communities and ensures that public health and safety remains the top priority. >The Board also heard from many Delta, San Francisco Bay, conservation, and fishing industry voices that opposed increased exports and stressed the importance of maintaining minimal outflows for water quality and fish and wildlife purposes. These interests point to the lengthy scientific proceedings that led to the establishment of the standards that most of the changes in the 2014 and 2015 Temporary Urgency Change Orders have set aside to lessen the drought?s impacts on agricultural and urban communities. The revised order concludes that while further reductions in Delta outflow will likely have a negative effect on fish and wildlife, approval of an additional intermediate export rate, that is only available for minimum public health and safety needs, is reasonable when weighed against the human suffering of the drought. >The revised order also concludes that the unconditional approval of the intermediate export rate as requested by the projects is not reasonable. This conclusion takes into account the narrow focus of the State and federal fish agencies? concurrence with the unconditional intermediate export rate proposal on endangered species and not its overall effect on fish and wildlife, as clarified in their February 27 comments. Fish populations in the Delta are now at record low levels and cannot be considered resilient to current conditions. The additional increment of water that would be made available under an unconditional intermediate export rate, while providing some relief to agricultural and urban water users, would not improve water storage conditions. In addition, an increase in exports coupled with a further reduction in Delta outflows would cause even greater impacts to a variety of fish species in the Delta, which are already severely stressed by the drought and are likely to be adversely affected by the reduction in Delta outflows that has already been approved. For these reasons, today?s revision to provide the CVP and SWP with the flexibility to ensure that public health and safety needs are met only authorizes increased exports when absolutely necessary. >Today?s revised order follows a State Water Board workshop held February 18 to review the February 3 order. The revisions: > * Clarify that water saved in reservoirs as a result of the temporary urgency change orders will be used consistent with the Drought Contingency Plan and Temperature Management Plans for Delta operations, and are not subject to Executive Director discretion; > * Clarify that export limitations do not apply to transfers within and between the state and federal water projects; and > * Allow increased exports to meet public health and safety needs if documented. >The State Water Board recognizes the cost and suffering the ongoing drought is causing to farmers, communities and the environment. Hundreds of thousands of acres of farmland have been fallowed; tens of thousands of farm jobs lost; some communities have had to resort to bottled water, portable showers, drilling new wells and running new pipes when their faucets ran dry; and fish and wildlife have suffered dramatic declines. >Fish and wildlife have also suffered greatly. Fish populations in the Delta estuary are at record low levels. Last year, loss of temperature control due to low water levels resulted in the loss of 95 percent of the winter run Chinook Salmon below Shasta Dam and upstream of the Delta. >In addition to protecting the commercial and recreational fishing industries, maintaining a minimum Delta outflow is critical to keeping salinity levels from ruining Delta farming operations and urban drinking water supplies. The minimum Delta outflow approved in this Order is the bare minimum needed to protect these water supplies. >The temporary urgency change orders approved by the Executive Director seek to find a balance between these competing needs in the face of historic dry conditions. Unfortunately, the drought has left California with no good options, only hard choices. This order makes further revisions to operations that benefit water supply while still maintaining minimal fish and wildlife protections. >A number of objections and petitions have been filed against the February 3 order. The State Water Board members will consider an order addressing those objections and petitions in the next three months. In addition, it is likely that DWR and USBR will ask for additional flexibility in the coming months. >Information on this and other State Water Board drought year water actions. >Visit SaveOurWater.com to find out how everyone can do their part, and visit Drought.CA.Gov to learn more about how California is dealing with the effects of the drought. ??????????????? Get the Notebook blog by email and you?ll always be one of the first to know! * Sign up for daily emails and get all the Notebook's aggregated and original water news content delivered to your email box by 9AM. Breaking news alerts like this one, too. Sign me up! Maven?s Notebook constantly watching over the world of California water -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Mar 10 08:24:30 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 08:24:30 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Magistrate: Agency too slow with Klamath refuges plan Message-ID: <1426001070.87809.YahooMailNeo@web120303.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Magistrate: Agency too slow with Klamath refuges plan Posted March 6 0 0 By JEFF BARNARD, Associated Press MEDFORD, ORE. ? A federal magistrate has found the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service needs to speed up work on overdue plans for managing wildlife refuges in the Klamath Basin. Conservation groups that filed the lawsuit said Friday they hope the magistrate's recommendation, which still needs to be affirmed by a judge, leads to more of the basin's scarce water going to wildlife, instead of potato and onion farms on the Lower Klamath and Tule Lake refuges straddling the Oregon-California border. Bob Salinger of Portland Audubon Society, lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, said in the course of developing the comprehensive plans, the service will have to show that the farming is compatible with wildlife. When thousands of birds have been dying from disease linked to the lack of water for marshes where they nest and rest during migration along the Pacific Flyway, it is legitimate to ask whether irrigating the farms instead helps wildlife, he added. The Klamath Water Users Association, which represents farmers on the refuge, maintain their water right predates the refuges' by 20 years, and a federal law known as the Kuechel Act allows farms on the two refuges. Greg Addington, executive director of the association, said he was confident farms would remain on the refuge even after the plan is finished. The comprehensive plan was due in 2012. The service says it can finish by October 2017, but U.S. Magistrate Judge Michael Clarke in Medford wants it by August 2016, saying the service has not given a good reason for the delay. Fish and wildlife spokesman Matt Baun said the agency was reviewing its options, and committed to producing a plan as soon as possible. The Klamath Basin is going into a third straight year of drought, making it likely tough decisions will have to be made about sharing scarce water between protected fish, farms and the refuges. Read more at http://www.wral.com/magistrate-agency-too-slow-with-klamath-refuges-plan/14496115/#oFgRQ5ApFAfsJOyT.99 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Mar 10 08:38:03 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 08:38:03 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Chronicle_Opinion=3A_George_Miller-_Tap_C?= =?utf-8?q?alifornia=E2=80=99s_innovators_to_develop_water_policies?= Message-ID: <1426001883.11362.YahooMailNeo@web120304.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/article/Tap-California-s-innovators-to-develop-water-6115670.php OPINION Tap California?s innovators to develop water policiesBy George Miller March 6, 2015 After 40 years of working on California water issues, it sometimes feels to me as if we haven?t learned anything. When I began my congressional career in 1975, powerful San Joaquin Valley agricultural interests were planning new dams and a new water facility in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. Environmental needs were ignored, and enormous subsidies encouraged wasteful and environmentally damaging water use. As I left the Congress in January, despite some important steps forward ? including enactment of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act ? all of these challenges continued. Federal water priorities are still being set in response to the demands of politically connected irrigators. Billions of taxpayer dollars have been spent on dams and canals to serve a small fraction of the state?s economy, with little consideration of the needs of most Californians and the environment. Four decades ago, the environmental and fishing communities did not yet have a seat at the water policy table. Today, they are being intentionally excluded from key policy debates. The drought gripping California and the West should force us to face the new reality of water policy. The policies of the past century won?t work in a future where we will face continued population growth and the effects of climate change. Federal decision-makers need to acknowledge what most experts know: The era of building big dams that cause ecological havoc and cannot pay for themselves is over. Instead, we need to use existing technology and invest in innovations to generate the water we need at a price we can afford. The roadblocks to adoption of a 21st century water policy are not caused by federal law, but by bureaucratic inertia and political pressure from beneficiaries of the status quo. Twenty years ago, for example, Congress authorized programs that convert wastewater into clean water. Yet the proposed 2016 federal budget devotes less than 2 percent of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation?s $1.1 billion budget to water recycling. Federal policy is mired in early 20th century thinking, in contrast with evolving thinking in Sacramento. Last year, Gov. Jerry Brown?s Water Action Plan pointed the way to sustainable water policies, including long overdue groundwater-management legislation. Voters passed a water bond to finance groundwater clean up, water recycling, conservation and ? it is hoped ? modern water storage rather than traditional dams. These developments show the promise of a new direction. Here are the cornerstones of an affordable, sustainable water policy: Reduce reliance on the delta and increase local solutions: State and federal agencies must reduce reliance on the delta. That?s already state policy. Our environment and economy will be stronger when users are less reliant on this overworked ecosystem. Progress is being made here. Los Angeles, under the leadership of Mayor Eric Garcetti, plans to cut use of imported water by 50 percent by 2024. Many cities are refocusing on local sources, recognizing that conservation is our largest source of new water and that our ocean outfalls represent the next ?river? for California to tap into. (Together, those outfalls dump more water than the combined flows of the Tuolumne, Merced and Stanislaus rivers.) These local sources will be more reliable in the future than over-allocated rivers that are subject to intensifying drought cycles. Embrace credible economics: Huge water projects and water subsidies aren?t just environmentally damaging, they also represent flawed economic policies that harm the taxpayer and California?s economy. Smarter water sources are cheaper as well as greener. A more business-oriented approach will point to sustainable solutions that benefit the entire state, creating more jobs on farms, in our cities and in salmon-fishing communities. Support agricultural modernization: Some farmers have made strides toward water efficiency, but we need to do much more because agriculture uses 80 percent of California?s water. We can build more sustainable agricultural communities by increasing efficiency; managing groundwater; cleaning up pollution that leaves rural communities without drinkable water; and avoiding an overemphasis on permanent, drought-susceptible crops, like almonds. Develop restoration programs, not environmental rollbacks: Decades of antiquated water management have helped drive the San Francisco Bay-Delta ecosystem to its lowest level ever. Yet a few cynical interests are attempting to use the drought to weaken environmental laws. Sacrificing our environment wouldn?t end water shortages, but it could shut down the salmon fishery, endanger millions of migratory wildfowl and eliminate tens of thousands of jobs. Our natural resources need emergency restoration programs to help them survive droughts ? not rollbacks that could lead to extinction of species and impoverished communities. Adopt a 58-county approach: Rather than policies dominated by a few agricultural counties, California needs a 58-county water policy that meets the needs of the Bay Area, North Coast fishermen, South Coast cities, delta towns and Central Valley farmers. California and Congress should no longer pursue ?water grab? policies that take one region?s water to benefit another. The best way to craft new policies is to involve all California interests, rather than pursue another generation of back-room water deals. Ours is widely recognized as the nation?s most innovative state ? a global leader in entertainment, high technology and renewable energy. It?s time that our water policies tapped into that creativity to use water-management strategies that ensure a thriving future for California?s economy and environment.George Miller represented Contra Costa and Solano counties in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1975 to 2015. To comment, submit your letter to the editor at www.sfgate.com/submissions. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Mar 10 10:10:54 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 10:10:54 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] LA Daily News: Groundwater law results in confusion, futility: Thomas Elias Message-ID: <1426007454.68875.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.dailynews.com/opinion/20150309/groundwater-law-results-in-confusion-futility-thomas-elias Groundwater law results in confusion, futility: Thomas Elias By Thomas D. Elias, Los Angeles Daily News POSTED: 03/09/15, 9:57 AM PDT |0 COMMENTS It?s beginning to look like the hosannas that greeted California?s first-ever groundwater regulation law were a tad premature when it passed late last summer. For after a tantalizing winter of heavy rains but insufficient snowfall to dent the state?s four-year drought, confusion over the groundwater rules has begun to set in. One thing for sure: The rain and snow of the just-concluding winter have not been nearly enough to begin recharging California?s more than 100 significant aquifers. These have been pumped without regulation for many decades, to the point where land subsidence has become highly visible in the San Joaquin Valley and some other areas. The new law?s rules sounded just fine ? until someone happened to look at the time limits. The rules are set up to force water agencies to design local regulations preventing further overdrafts, an overdraft defined as pumping more water from underground than percolates down to replace it. The state will review all such plans and take over regulation if locals don?t enforce their new restrictions. Sounds great, and it might improve matters 25 years from now if there?s anything left in those aquifers. There had better be: California gets almost 40 percent of its current water supply from underground, and a California with little groundwater would have to cut its population considerably. But there are no guarantees, partly because local water authorities have until the end of next year merely to decide who controls groundwater in each area ? this could be county supervisors or irrigation district officers or just about anyone. Whoever gets jurisdiction will have five to seven more years to design plans creating sustainability ? a balance between pumping and replenishment. After that, they?ll have 20 years to put the plans into action. So it might be about 30 years before the rules have any detectable effect, and at current pumping rates, there would be little or no groundwater left by then. Which means this law has never had teeth. Nor, after lobbyists for groundwater users got through with the Legislature, was it intended to. It?s all been happy talk all along. But even that is now dissipating. While the choice of agency to control groundwater has been easy and obvious in some areas like the Coachella Valley of Riverside County, which sits atop a gigantic underground lake, disputes are rising elsewhere. Canal districts want control in some areas, but so do nearby irrigation districts. In some places, county supervisors want control, even though aquifers never conform to political boundaries or property lines. In some cases, more than one water agency?s boundaries cover parts of a single aquifer. In others, water agency lines cover more than one source of underground water. So power struggles are now in nascent phases, with some officials nonplussed. ?I expect we?ll coordinate to share basins with other districts,? says one water manager. ?But we?re unsure how to do that.? And the new law doesn?t spell out patterns to follow, another of its multiple flaws. None of this, of course, prevented farm area lawmakers from opposing the weak new law while it was under consideration. Their shortsighted obstructionism has made that law practically unworkable even before it?s supposed to get started. So this law is both ludicrous and worthy of satire, except that the continuing depletion of aquifers is no laughing matter. Which means it?s time for the Legislature to get back to work, if lawmakers are capable of that. The timetable needs to be cut from 30 years down to no more than five. There must be a mechanism to create new groundwater agencies if existing districts can?t resolve disputes. And there needs to be far more reliable information on the exact amount of water in each basin. Failure to do any of these things will surely produce a far more severe disaster than the current drought ? unless Mother Nature intervenes with several years of much heavier rain and snow than California has seen in decades. Thomas D. Elias is a writer in Southern California. tdelias at aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Mar 10 12:09:42 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 12:09:42 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Public Notice of Renewal of TRRP 5 year Channel Rehabilitation Projects' 401 Cert and workshop 3/26 Message-ID: <1426014582.84795.YahooMailNeo@web120305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> The full notice with the draft Order is attached. Public Notice for Water Quality Certification and/or Waste Discharge Requirements (Dredge/Fill Projects) and Notice of Public Workshop Bureau of Reclamation, Trinity River Restoration Program ? Channel Rehabilitation for Remaining Phase 1 and Phase 2 Sites Trinity County The Regional Water Board is proposing to continue to regulate the Bureau of Reclamation, Trinity River Restoration Program ? Channel Rehabilitation for Remaining Phase 1 and Phase 2 Sites (Project) pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1341) and Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act authority. In addition, staff will consider all comments on the draft Water Quality Certification that are submitted in writing and received at this office by mail during a 45-day comment period that begins on the first date of issuance of this notice and ends at 5:00 p.m. on the last day of the comment period. During the public comment period, the Regional Water Board staff will conduct a public workshop on March 26, 2015, from 7 ? 9:00 p.m. at the public library in Weaverville, California, to take comments on the attached draft Water Quality Certification. The purpose of the public workshop is to hear and receive written comments specifically on water quality aspects of activities regulated by the attached Draft Water Quality Certification. If you have any questions, please contact staff member Gil Falcone at (707) 576-2830 or Stephen Bargsten at (707) 576-2653 within 45 days of the posting of this notice. Written comments can be submitted electronically to Northcoast at waterboards.ca.gov . The application for this Water Quality Certification and the Regional Water Board?s file for past permitted activities contain a significant amount of additional details about the past and proposed Projects including maps, photos and reports. The Regional Water Board file is available for public review. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: NCRWQCB notice TRRP 5 year permit mainstem projects 150306_GBF_dp_TRRP_GWQC_PN.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 445088 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Wed Mar 11 17:17:48 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 00:17:48 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinty River Trapping Summary update JWeek 10 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C4FEF10@057-SN2MPN1-041.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hi Everyone, Please see attachment for the Jweek 9 and 10 (Feb 26-Mar 11) trapping summary update. This is the final update for the 2014-15 season. March 10 was the last spawn day at the Trinity River Hatchery. The weirs await the coming trapping season. Thanks to everyone who is interested and participated in another successful year of monitoring and fish production on the Trinity. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2014 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW10xlsx.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 60421 bytes Desc: 2014 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW10xlsx.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Mar 13 11:37:00 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 11:37:00 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] LA Times OP-ED Op-Ed California has about one year of water left. Will you ration now? Message-ID: <1426271820.41831.YahooMailNeo@web120303.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-famiglietti-drought-california-20150313-story.html Op-Ed California has about one year of water left. Will you ration now? By JAY FAMIGLIETTI Given the historic low temperatures and snowfalls that pummeled the eastern U.S. this winter, it might be easy to overlook how devastating California's winter was as well. As our ?wet? season draws to a close, it is clear that the paltry rain and snowfall have done almost nothing to alleviate epic drought conditions. January was the driest in California since record-keeping began in 1895. Groundwater and snowpack levels are at all-time lows. We're not just up a creek without a paddle in California, we're losing the creek too.CAPTION Snow Drought Bad News For California Snow Drought Bad News For CaliforniaAre Desalination Plants The Future Of Water In Drought-Stricken California?California Drought Stings Honeybees, BeekeepersDrought in West Literally Moves MountainCalifornia's Coastal Redwoods Stressed By Record-Breaking Drought Data from NASA satellites show that the total amount of water stored in the Sacramento and San Joaquin river basins ? that is, all of the snow, river and reservoir water, water in soils and groundwater combined ? was 34 million acre-feet below normal in 2014. That loss is nearly 1.5 times the capacity of Lake Mead, America's largest reservoir.lRelated OP-ED Gov. Jerry Brown's fracking problemSEE ALL RELATED 8 Statewide, we've been dropping more than 12 million acre-feet of total water yearly since 2011. Roughly two-thirds of these losses are attributable to groundwater pumping for agricultural irrigation in the Central Valley. Farmers have little choice but to pump more groundwater during droughts, especially when their surface water allocations have been slashed 80% to 100%. But these pumping rates are excessive and unsustainable. Wells are running dry. In some areas of the Central Valley, the land is sinking by one foot or more per year. As difficult as it may be to face, the simple fact is that California is running out of water ? and the problem started before our current drought. NASA data reveal that total water storage in California has been in steady decline since at least 2002, when satellite-based monitoring began, although groundwater depletion has been going on since the early 20th century.How was Exide allowed to pollute for so long and endanger so many people? Right now the state has only about one year of water supply left in its reservoirs, and our strategic backup supply, groundwater, is rapidly disappearing. California has no contingency plan for a persistent drought like this one (let alone a 20-plus-year mega-drought), except, apparently, staying in emergency mode and praying for rain. In short, we have no paddle to navigate this crisis.cComments * Agriculture is responsible for 80% of California's fresh water use (State Dept of Water Resources). Agriculture represents 3% of California's $2.2 Trillion economy (State Dept. of Finance). Interior and exterior residential water use, including lawns and swimming pools, accounts for... BUDLITE6 AT 10:29 AM MARCH 13, 2015ADD A COMMENTSEE ALL COMMENTS 189 Several steps need be taken right now. First, immediate mandatory water rationing should be authorized across all of the state's water sectors, from domestic and municipal through agricultural and industrial. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California is already considering water rationing by the summer unless conditions improve. There is no need for the rest of the state to hesitate. The public is ready. A recent Field Poll showed that 94% of Californians surveyed believe that the drought is serious, and that one-third support mandatory rationing. Second, the implementation of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014 should be accelerated. The law requires the formation of numerous, regional groundwater sustainability agencies by 2017. Then each agency must adopt a plan by 2022 and ?achieve sustainability? 20 years after that. At that pace, it will be nearly 30 years before we even know what is working. By then, there may be no groundwater left to sustain.Total water storage in California has been in steady decline since at least 2002 ... while groundwater depletion has been ongoing since the early 20th century.- Third, the state needs a task force of thought leaders that starts, right now, brainstorming to lay the groundwork for long-term water management strategies. Although several state task forces have been formed in response to the drought, none is focused on solving the long-term needs of a drought-prone, perennially water-stressed California. Our state's water management is complex, but the technology and expertise exist to handle this harrowing future. It will require major changes in policy and infrastructure that could take decades to identify and act upon. Today, not tomorrow, is the time to begin. Finally, the public must take ownership of this issue. This crisis belongs to all of us ? not just to a handful of decision-makers. Water is our most important, commonly owned resource, but the public remains detached from discussions and decisions. This process works just fine when water is in abundance. In times of crisis, however, we must demand that planning for California's water security be an honest, transparent and forward-looking process. Most important, we must make sure that there is in fact a plan. Call me old-fashioned, but I'd like to live in a state that has a paddle so that it might also still have a creek. Jay Famiglietti is the senior water scientist at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory/Caltech and a professor of Earth system science at UC Irvine. Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Mar 13 12:20:05 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 12:20:05 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Daily Kos: Brown Administration Hides Truth About Tunnels From Public Message-ID: <1426274405.19557.YahooMailNeo@web120303.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/12/1370534/-Brown-Administration-Hides-Truth-About-Tunnels-From-Public# Dan BacherFollowRSS Daily Kos member * Profile * Diaries (list) * Stream THU MAR 12, 2015 AT 03:54 PM PDT Brown Administration Hides Truth About Tunnels From Public byDan BacherFollow * * * 4 Comments / 4 New Restore the Delta (RTD) today held a press conference about the numerous attacks on the SF Bay Delta estuary. "Public comments on Delta tunnels are being suppressed, MWD has funded a $600k attack on Delta water rights, and of course, a deceptive campaign by pro-tunnels Californians for Water Security is currently spreading lies about our 8 year old grassroots effort," according to RTD. You can hear the audio of the press conference here: https://soundcloud.com/... NOTE: Technical difficulty between 22:02 to 23:52 Below is a summary of the conference: Brown Administration Hides Truth About Tunnels From Public, Tunnels Opponents Post Suppressed Public Comments: Includes EPA, Army Corps of Engineers & State Water Resources Control Board; MWD Funds Misguided $600,000 Attack on Delta Water Rights, Would Ruin Sustainable Family Farms Sacramento, CA- Friends of the River (FOR), Restore the Delta (RTD) and other opponents of Gov. Brown?s rush to build Peripheral Tunnels that would drain the Delta of freshwater and doom sustainable farms, and salmon and other Pacific fisheries, today announced posting on the Friends of the River website of hundreds of suppressed public comments on the Brown Administration?s Draft Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS). These comments, including those from public agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Army Corps of Engineers and even the State?s own Water Resources Control Board, have been suppressed by the Administration. The tunnels opponents also exposed Metropolitan Water District (MWD) funding of a misguided, $600,000 legal attack on Delta farmers? senior water rights. The attack, discussed only in a closed-door session on Tuesday, will fail, and is a waste of MWD ratepayer money, because it is premised on a ?broken? Department of Water Resources (DWR) model. Friends of the River obtained copies of the BDCP comments under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and posted them at www.friendsoftheriver.org/bdcpcomments regardless of whether the particular comments oppose or favor the Water Tunnels, or agree or disagree with Friends of the River?s comments. The Brown Administration has especially suppressed scathing comments made by environmental organizations, water districts, and government agencies from throughout the Bay-Delta region and Northern California. The Brown Administration is cutting off the voices of the people who will be harmed by the project. These BDCP documents reveal that fisheries will not recover, and Clean Water Act standards will not be met because Delta water quality will deteriorate to dangerous levels, and the tunnels will be dry over 50% of the time. ?Gov. Brown is suppressing nearly 1,000 (928) public comments, keeping Californians in the dark about the facts and alternatives to his unsustainable water export project submitted by those who are not BDCP Water Tunnels advocates,? said Friends of the River Senior Counsel Bob Wright. ?Thousands of comments from individuals have also been suppressed by the Brown Administration. Since the BDCP agencies are not airing both sides of the issues?in the traditional American way?Friends of the River is now doing the government?s job of informing, as opposed to propagandizing, the public.? Friends of the River has posted nearly 300 comment letters from public agencies and organizations, with some letters having as many as 19 attached exhibits. This is truly a wealth of information about the likely environmental and economic consequences of the Water Tunnels. Because of the huge volume of comments by individuals, Friends of the River was unable to complete the posting of comments by individuals made after May 14, 2014. So, there are still thousands of comments that remain hidden from public view. After the BDCP Drafts were released in December 2013 for public review, the BDCP website was closed to the posting of comments. That is an undeniable fact shown by simply going to the BDCP website. This hiding of contrary information from the public even extends to comments by critically important public agencies, such as the EPA, Army Corps of Engineers, and State Water Resources Control Board. ?The deliberate suppression of independent comments on the BDCP website is calculated to deceive the public about the adverse environmental effects, and true costs of the Water Tunnels,? said Wright. ?The reason the BDCP agencies conceal the detailed, scientifically-supported comments from public agencies and public interest organizations is because the Water Tunnels are a bad project that cannot withstand informed public scrutiny.? Large California infrastructure project boosters are masters of deception, as evidenced by the explosion of the forecasted cost of the new San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge span from $1 billion to $6 billion?and that scandal included the suppression by this same State government of contrary critical quality control information. The tunnels opponents pointed to a recent study showing that ?deceptions or strategic manipulation of information or processes? is a cause of late, over-budget and failed large infrastructure projects. ?[A]cross the globe, large infrastructure projects almost invariably arrive late, over-budget and fail to perform up to expectations.? Flyvbjerg, Garbuio and Lovallo, Delusion and Deception in Large Infrastructure Projects, 51 California Management Review 170, 171-2 (winter 2009). ?The underlying reasons for all forecasting errors can usefully be grouped into three categories: delusions or honest mistakes; deceptions or strategic manipulation of information or processes; or bad luck.? (Id. at 172). ?The BDCP would divert water away from the sustainable, multi-generational farms of the Delta. These farms have senior water rights dating back to soon after statehood in 1850. The state and federal water export projects were originally premised on in-Delta uses being fully satisfied, and water quality maintained prior to any exports occurring,? said Delta water rights attorney Osha Meserve. ?With these senior water rights, which were promised to be protected as a condition of the export projects, the Delta is entitled to all the water it needs for beneficial uses as long as it is not wasted.? Yet those who would benefit from the BDCP are now openly attacking the right of Delta farmers to use water within their own watershed. This attack is based in part on the faulty results of a broken DWR model showing that in-Delta consumptive use is much higher in drought years than in other years. The model was built decades ago, and appears purposefully designed to over-predict outflow and water quality requirements being met so that exports could be maximized. Based on this fundamental error in the model?s prediction of in-Delta consumptive use, DWR and the water exporters like Metropolitan Water District appear to believe that more water would be available for export if some Delta water uses were curtailed. However, for a variety of reasons, curtailment of Delta water uses would not create more water for export. In-Delta consumptive use has remained largely the same over the past 100 or more years, since a similar amount of acreage has remained in production over time. Due to the unique hydrology of the Delta, water on the Delta islands is reused many times over and any excess water is quickly returned to the system by each island?s drainage network for others to use. ?This attack on senior Delta water rights appears to be based on DWR?s erroneous model and is a waste of MWD ratepayer funds,? said Meserve. ?Even if MWD?s efforts did lead to curtailment of some Delta water uses, more water will not be available for export. MWD and other exporter funds would be better spent reducing reliance on Delta water exports by making more efficient use of limited water supplies available in drought years.? Hiding Public Comments, Attacking Tunnels Opponents ?The Metropolitan Water District and other Delta water-takers are funding attacks on the legal water rights of Delta farmers, residents and businesses, and on RTD, which represents the people of the Delta and sustainable water alternatives,? said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of RTD. Instead of facing California?s water reality, Tunnel proponents have doubled down by attacking the Delta on two fronts. ?Instead of following the law and allowing public access to crucial comments critical of the tunnels boondoggle, the tunnels proponents are hiding information and attacking tunnels opponents,? said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of RTD. First they are after Delta water rights. As Osha Meserve explained, the Metropolitan Water District is willing to spend $600,000 of ratepayer money to destroy sixth generation family farms like Steve Heringer?s, and hundreds of others. But that is not enough: Delta Tunnels proponents are now attacking our 8-year-old grass roots effort by creating media campaigns that simply tell lies about the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, and the people of the Delta. ?Desperate Delta Tunnels proponents are attacking Delta communities, and RTD on every front, outspending Tunnels opponents by hundreds of millions of dollars to pave the way for the water grab,? said Barrigan-Parrilla. ?Restore the Delta and Friends of the River have filed Public Information Act Requests with the Metropolitan Water District, Westlands Water District, Kern County Water Agency, and the Santa Clara Valley Water District. If they are willing to spend rate payer money attacking Delta water rights, we want to see how much they are spending on consultants who are running dishonest and disruptive viral media campaigns to misinform the public.? Here are links to related materials: Who owns Californians for Water Security domain and controls website: http://restorethedelta.org/... Public Records Act requests of Westlands and other water agencies regarding funding of pro-tunnels group that is attacking Restore the Delta: http://restorethedelta.org/... Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, March 10, 2015 Agenda Item regarding increasing funding for attack on Delta water rights (Item 8-8): http://mwdh2o.granicus.com/... TAGS * Bay Delta Conservation Plan * Corporate Greenwashing * Dan Bacher * Delta Tunnels * Environment * Metropolitan Water District (MWD) * Westlands Water District -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Mar 14 10:42:38 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 10:42:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] California poised to tighten watering restrictions Message-ID: <1426354958.22710.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/environment/article14076221.html California poised to tighten watering restrictions BY MATT WEISERMWEISER at SACBEE.COM03/13/2015 5:58 PM 03/14/2015 9:33 AM These sprinklers were running at the corner of 22nd and S streets in Sacramento on Wednesday, moments after a storm cleared. This would become illegal under state law if the State Water Resources Control Board enacts a series of new water conservation rules at its meeting next week. MATT WEISER MWEISER at SACBEE.COM * Story * Comments (1) Millions of Californians soon may be forced to adjust their lives around a crucial timekeeping device in their homes. Not their alarm clocks, but their irrigation timers. The State Water Resources Control Board on Tuesday is poised to get even tougher on water conservation as California now seems assured of a fourth year of drought. The main focus of the proposal set for a board vote is landscape watering, responsible for about 70 percent of all urban water consumption in California. The board is expected to order every urban water agency in California to limit outdoor watering to specific days of the week ? for both residential and business customers. In many cases, this would mean only two days per week. California has never before considered such a sweeping statewide mandate on landscape irrigation, not even during the drought of 1977, often referenced as the worst in modern times. But it now seems certain the present drought will eclipse that marker, making more drastic measures necessary.Related As drought worsens, L.A. water agency offers cash to Sacramento Valley farmersCity of Sacramento residents limited to two-day wateringCalifornia officials review underground wells for risks The move comes after data from January showed Californians reduced their water use only 8.8 percent compared to January 2013, missing by a wide margin the governor?s emergency drought order last year asking state residents to cut water use by 20 percent each month compared to what they used in 2013. Water board members think this occurred because the month was unusually warm and dry, and residents opened up hoses and sprinklers to water landscaping. ?It?s clear that there is still excessive outdoor watering throughout the state,? said Tracy Quinn, a policy analyst on water issues at the Natural Resources Defense Council in Los Angeles. ?The board could and should do more.? Last year, the water board ordered every large urban water provider ? those with more than 3,000 customers ? to take measures to restrict landscape watering. But officials now concede this order was not strict enough. The order called on water agencies to activate a portion of their ?water shortage contingency plan? ? a document required of all large water suppliers ? to limit landscape watering. But the plans are not uniform, and each agency responded differently. Some restricted watering to three days a week. Others told customers not to water during the hottest daylight hours, but otherwise allowed daily watering. ?The way we wrote things this last year, in hindsight, was probably too big of a loophole to leave open,? said Max Gomberg, a senior environmental scientist at the water board. ?We?re trying to tighten that up.? The new proposal requires water agencies to activate that portion of their shortage plan that limits landscape watering to certain days. If their plan has no such provision, they would be required to allow watering only two days per week. This requirement also would be extended, for the first time, to 2,500 small water providers, or those with fewer than 3,000 customers. These agencies are not required by state law to have a shortage plan. As an alternative to specifying watering days, these smaller agencies would be allowed to impose other rules to achieve a 20 percent reduction in water use. In another major change, all water agencies also would be required to ban outdoor irrigation during ?measurable rainfall? and for 48 hours after rain ceases. ?None of this stuff has been done before at the statewide level,? Gomberg said. Gomberg did not know how many water agencies would be affected by the rule changes, because the state doesn?t track how many agencies limit watering days. Neither does the Association of California Water Agencies, or ACWA, which represents 430 agencies that deliver about 90 percent of the water used by the state?s cities, farms and businesses. David Bolland, special projects manager at ACWA, said he suspects most large water agencies already have rules on the books that limit watering days. For those that don?t, he plans to ask the water board to allow agencies to amend their water shortage plans as they see fit, rather than be forced to adopt the two-day watering rule. ACWA also wants 60 days to comply, rather than the 30 days set out in the proposed order. ?There needs to be that flexibility of adapting to local conditions,? Bolland said. ?We think it is appropriate at this point to focus additional attention on outdoor irrigation. One of the things it does is kind of raise the profile of the issue in communities where maybe it hasn?t reached yet.? In the Sacramento region, 12 out of 19 members of the Regional Water Authority already limit landscape watering to certain days, though not always two, said Amy Talbot, the authority?s water efficiency manager. This includes Sacramento, which has among the region?s strictest watering rules, adopted as standard operating practice before the drought began. The city?s rule typically allows watering only one day a week during winter, and three days a week when daylight saving time is in effect. When the drought emergency began last year, the city cut that back to two days a week during the warm months. Watering is banned between 10 a.m. and 7 p.m. at any time of year. Talbot said her agency supports the state?s move to get stricter on outdoor watering. ?Landscape water use ... plays a large part in the Sacramento region?s overall water consumption,? she said, ?which is why water providers here for many years have been focusing on promoting water efficiency outdoors.? The rule package, if adopted, would require millions of Californians to search their garages and backyards for the dusty plastic box that houses their irrigation controller. For many people, this is a ?set and forget? contraption that keeps sprinklers gushing no matter what the weather is or what the local water agency requires. These gadgets can be difficult to reset, especially because the operating manual often gets lost. To help, the website SaveOurWater. com ? partially funded by the state Department of Water Resources ? offers a repository of downloadable operating manuals for many irrigation controllers. The state this year will be watching more closely to see if customers and agencies are complying with the rules. Since July, large water agencies have been required to submit monthly reports to the board on their water conservation efforts. If Tuesday?s rule package is adopted, they also would have to begin reporting how many warnings and fines they issue to control water waste and how many personnel they have devoted to enforcement. Failure to comply with the new rules could result in fines of $500 per violation per day for agencies, individuals or businesses. The water board also is working on a new water-waste phone hotline. It would allow anyone in the state to report water waste by calling a toll-free number. The water board would then notify the property owner and the local water agency to ensure it gets fixed. Gomberg hopes to have the hotline operating in time for summer. ?Another set of emergency regulations ? say in late spring or early summer ? is definitely a possibility if we think that more needs to be done,? Gomberg said. Call The Bee?s Matt Weiser at (916) 321-1264. Follow him on Twitter @matt_weiser. WATERING RESTRICTIONS Water agencies in the Sacramento region that already restrict landscape watering days: ? City of Sacramento ? El Dorado Irrigation District ? Placer County Water Agency ? Rancho Murieta Community Services District ? Carmichael Water District ? Sacramento Suburban Water District ? City of Folsom ? Sacramento County ? Elk Grove Water District ? City of Lincoln ? Rio Linda/Elverta Community Water District ? City of West Sacramento Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/environment/article14076221.html#storylink=cpy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Mar 14 19:54:12 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 19:54:12 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Siskiyou Daily: New issues emerge around Klamath River agreements Message-ID: <1426388052.71054.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> By David Smith dsmith at siskiyoudaily.com March 10. 2015 9:00AM New issues emerge around Klamath River agreements Three agreements on the Klamath River are once again causing a stir along the river?s length as legislation authorizing the agreements awaits a Senate committee?s approval. Three agreements on the Klamath River are once again causing a stir along the river?s length as legislation authorizing the agreements awaits a Senate committee?s approval. Senate Bill 133, authored by United States Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), would grant the federal government authority to execute the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement and the Upper Klamath Basin Comprehensive Agreement. Wyden previously submitted a similar bill that died in committee last year. The KHSA?allows for the potential removal of four dams along the Klamath River, while the KBRA?allocates resources to a number of fisheries and river restoration activities. The UKBCA, the youngest of the three agreements, would provide millions in federal funding to the Klamath tribes, increase flows into Upper Klamath Lake and rescind a number of irrigation-related claims filed by the Klamath tribes. The agreements are often touted as beneficial collaborations between diverse interests across a geographically large area, but the past month has shown some discord among the parties. On Thursday, the Herald & News reported that the Klamath tribes, along with the Yurok and Karuk tribes, have each filed dispute initiation notices under KBRA?guidelines. Of particular interest for the Klamath tribes is the recent private sale of the 90,000-acre Mazama Forest, according to the Herald & News story. The Mazama Forest acquisition was a key stipulation of the Klamath Tribes? involvement in the UKBCA, which would have fulfilled promises under the KBRA. It was announced in late February that the forest lands were instead sold to Singapore-based Whitefish Cascade Forest Resources while the tribes were still awaiting Congressional approval of the agreements. While the tribal leadership has expressed an interest in seeing the agreements through, a group emerged recently that would like to see a complete separation from the process. The group, calling itself Honor the Treaty of 1864, believes that the KBRA?and UKBCA?will do more harm to tribal rights than help. ?The KBRA?and associated agreements are not at all an exercise in self-determination but advocating for a blood oath from Tribes,??the group states in a recent press release. ?Although, [sic] we are faced with drought, contamination and over-consumption, the Klamath tribal council and Klamath Tribes Negotiation Team continue to support an agreement that permits destructive acts against our culture, environment, and our future as Klamath Modoc, Yahooskin Peoples.? Whether the agreements are implemented still hinges on the passage of SB 133, and on Feb. 27 a different Upper Klamath sector sent a letter of support for the bill to Wyden. The Family Farm Alliance ? which represents agricultural water users in 17 states ? reported in its letter that its 10-member board unanimously voted in February to support passage of SB 133. ?The three Klamath Agreements ... reflect an intensive, collaborative effort that has consumed much of the last decade,??the letter reads. ? ... Without these agreements successfully making it through Congress, local irrigators face no protection from enforcement of significant tribal water rights, no viable plan for dealing with the Endangered Species issues and no identifiable path for working toward target power rates that are similar to other Western agricultural regions.? The FFA? letter notes that it does not endorse the removal of dams, but ultimately sees the benefits of the agreements outweighing that reservation. Currently, SB?133 is under consideration by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20150310/NEWS/150319976 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Mar 16 12:11:01 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 12:11:01 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] PEER Press Release: FEDERAL FUNDS FOR DROUGHT-STRICKEN FISH SIPHONED BY IRRIGATORS Message-ID: <1426533061.27925.YahooMailNeo@web120302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> http://www.peer.org/news/news-releases/2015/02/18/federal-funds-for-drought-stricken-fish-siphoned-by-irrigators/ For Immediate Release: Feb 18, 2015 Contact: Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337 FEDERAL FUNDS FOR DROUGHT-STRICKEN FISH SIPHONED BY IRRIGATORS Klamath Contracts Worsen Drought Conditions by Pumping More Groundwater Posted on Feb 18, 2015 | Tags: California ________________________________ Washington, DC ? A federal program that was supposed to help drought-stressed fish populations in the Klamath Basin has been hijacked for the sole benefit of select irrigators, according to a whistleblower disclosure filed today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). Overall, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has spent nearly $70 million dollars without any apparent legal authority to do so. The Bureau of Reclamation operates the Klamath Project, the main water works in Northern California and southern Oregon. The project provides water from Upper Klamath Lake and the Klamath River, including Clear Lake and Gerber Reservoirs, to 210,000 acres of cropland across a 5,700 square mile watershed, an area larger than Connecticut. In recent years, the area has been crippled by a series of droughts. While the Bureau is supposed to work with Klamath Project irrigators, the relationship has gotten much too close, according to biologists. They point to a 2008 Reclamation contract with Klamath Water and Power Agency (KWAPA) for a feasibility study on the potential for water marketing to increase water supplies in the Klamath Basin for the benefit of fish and wildlife. The original five-year contract has been amended 17 times and extended through 2023, at a cost several times the original estimate. The feasibility study was never done and is long forgotten. Instead funds have been used to ? * Purchase water supply contracts benefitting a small group of irrigators despite a provision declaring that any water purchases would be ?for the direct benefit of fish and wildlife habitat;? * Pursue counterproductive, unsustainable, and short-term fixes to Klamath Basin water woes, such as pumping large amounts of groundwater until private wells go dry. This has required well owners to dig new and deeper wells into ever shrinking groundwater supplies; and * Pay expenses of a semi-official association of Klamath Project irrigators, the KWAPA, including their salaries, fringe benefits, office space, equipment and travel. ?This contract has morphed beyond any recognizable shape from a feasibility study into a direct subsidy bearing no relationship to fish and wildlife,? stated PEER Senior Counsel Paula Dinerstein who filed the scientists? disclosure with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel. ?It appears KWAPA just sucked in more and more government funds with little oversight and for no discernible benefit to the general public.? The Office of Special Counsel, a federal whistleblower protection agency, is charged with reviewing the scientists? disclosure and deciding within 15 days whether it evidences a ?substantial likelihood of validity.? If so, the Special Counsel is supposed to direct the Secretary of Interior to conduct a formal investigation into systemic violations. If the violations are confirmed it could result in the reimbursement of unauthorized payments as well as punishment for responsible Reclamation officials. ### Read the scientists? disclosure Look at schedule of contract payments View the Office of Special Counsel disclosure function See Reclamation history of lavish Klamath contracts -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Mar 16 16:30:57 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 16:30:57 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] (no subject) Message-ID: <1426548657.77914.YahooMailNeo@web120306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> I will be unable to attend. I hope somebody from the public attends to take notes. TS ********************************************************** http://odp.trrp.net/Data/Meetings/AttachmentDetails.aspx?attachment=585&meeting=1529 TRINITY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL US Forest Service, 3644 Avtech Parkway Redding, CA 96002 Draft Agenda for March 25-26, 2015 Wednesday, March 25, 2015 Time Topic, Purpose and/or Decision to be Made Discussion Leader Regular Business: 9:30 Introductions: Seth Naman, Chair ? Welcome ? Approval of Agenda 9:45 Public Forum Seth Naman 10:00 Report from TMC Chair Seth Naman ? TMC action items ? By-laws discussion ? signatures on 2013 as amended version 10:45 Federal/Regional updates Federico Barajas 11:30 Solicitor?s Watershed Guidance Federico Barajas 11:45 Funding Opportunity Announcement TBD 12:00 Lunch 1:00 Humboldt County TMC membership Mike Orcutt 2:00 Report from Executive Director Robin Schrock ? TRRP 2015 assessment strategy by WY ? Organizational Updates ? Work Group updates o Quarterly summery (handout) Information / Decision Items: 2:30 Current conditions & Flow WG update Robert Stewart 3:00 Implementation Update Conor Shea/Logan Negherbon ? 2014 Rehabilitation project update ? 2015 Rehabilitation projects updates ? Outyear project designs 3:45 Compliance Update Brandt Gutermuth 4:15 Public forum 4:45 Adjourn Join WebEx meeting Meeting number: 578 855 669 Meeting password: Abc123 Join by phone 1-408-792-6300 Call-in toll number (US/Canada) Access code: 578 855 669 Information / Decision Items: Thursday, March 26, 2015 Time Topic, Purpose and/or Decision to be Made Discussion Leader 9:00 Open Forum 9:15 Science Update Ernie Clarke Annual Work Plan (AWP) 2016 ? Inter Disciplinary Team ? Decision Support System 10:00 Fish Production Model Joe Polos 10:30 Gravel Augmentation Presentation Robert Stewart ? Gravel Work Group Prioritized Work Plan ? Gravel work group direction from the TMC 12:00 Lunch 1:15 Riparian vegetation approaches James Lee 2:15 Trinity River Temperature Management ? draft letter Seth Naman 2:45 Open Forum 3:15 TMC Chair Meeting Summary of Action Items Seth Naman 3:30 Adjourn Join WebEx meeting Meeting number: 576 093 692 Meeting password: Abc123 Join by phone 1-408-792-6300 Call-in toll number (US/Canada) Access code: 576 093 692 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Tue Mar 17 09:07:16 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 09:07:16 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?iso-8859-1?q?Daily_Kos_-_Water_coalition_to_hold_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?press_conference_regarding_=27shutdown=27_of_Nestl=E9_Plan?= =?iso-8859-1?q?t?= In-Reply-To: <814971F1-9D74-4309-95EA-8173A0430FCE@mcn.org> References: <25963783.-355664455@pin.pinDB.mail.salsalabs.com> <3E786EA7-0A1D-4816-8522-207A3A7FE05E@fishsniffer.com> <814971F1-9D74-4309-95EA-8173A0430FCE@mcn.org> Message-ID: <6394DB76-961D-4656-B110-521FE3AD66B5@fishsniffer.com> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/16/1371402/-Water-coalition-to-hold-press-conference-regarding-shutdown-of-Nestle-Plant Water coalition to hold press conference regarding 'shutdown' of Nestl? Plant by Dan Bacher The city of Sacramento is in the fourth year of a record drought - yet the Nestl? Corporation continues to bottle city water to sell back to the public at a big profit, local activists charge. The Nestl? Water Bottling Plant in Sacramento is the target of a major press conference on Tuesday, March 17, by a water coalition that claims the company is draining up to 80 million gallons of water a year from Sacramento aquifers during the drought. The coalition, the "crunchnestle alliance," says that City Hall has made this use of the water supply possible through a "corporate welfare giveaway," according to a press advisory. A coalition of environmentalists, Native Americans and other concerned people announced the press conference will take place at March 17 at 5 p.m. at new Sacramento City Hall, 915 I Street, Sacramento. The coalition will release details of a protest on Friday, March 20, at the South Sacramento Nestl? plant designed to "shut down" the facility. The coalition is calling on Nestl? to pay rates commensurate with their enormous profit, or voluntarily close down. "The coalition is protesting Nestl?'s virtually unlimited use of water ? up to 80 million gallons a year drawn from local aquifers ? while Sacramentans (like other Californians) who use a mere 7 to 10 percent of total water used in the State of California, have had severe restrictions and limitations forced upon them," according to the coalition. "Nestl? pays only 65 cents for each 470 gallons it pumps out of the ground ? the same rate as an average residential water user. But the company can turn the area's water around, and sell it back to Sacramento at mammoth profits," the coalition said. Activists say that Sacramento officials have refused attempts to obtain details of Nestl?'s water used. Coalition members have addressed the Sacramento City Council and requested that Nestle? either pay a commercial rate under a two tier level, or pay a tax on their profit. In October, the coalition released a "White Paper" highlighting predatory water profiteering actions taken by Nestle? Water Bottling Company in various cities, counties, states and countries. Most of those great ?deals? yielded mega profits for Nestle? at the expense of citizens and taxpayers. Additionally, the environmental impact on many of those areas yielded disastrous results. Coalition spokesperson Andy Conn said, "This corporate welfare giveaway is an outrage and warrants a major investigation. For more than five months we have requested data on Nestl? water use. City Hall has not complied with our request, or given any indication that it will. Sacramentans deserve to know how their money is being spent and what they?re getting for it. In this case, they?re getting ripped off.? The press conference and protest will take place just days after Jay Famiglietti, the senior water scientist at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory/Caltech and a professor of Earth system science at UC Irvine, revealed in an op-ed in the LA Times on March 12 that California has only one year of water supply left in its reservoirs. (http://touch.latimes.com/#section/ -1/article/p2p-83043355/) "As difficult as it may be to face, the simple fact is that California is running out of water ? and the problem started before our current drought. NASA data reveal that total water storage in California has been in steady decline since at least 2002, when satellite-based monitoring began, although groundwater depletion has been going on since the early 20th century. Right now the state has only about one year of water supply left in its reservoirs, and our strategic backup supply, groundwater, is rapidly disappearing. California has no contingency plan for a persistent drought like this one (let alone a 20-plus-year mega- drought), except, apparently, staying in emergency mode and praying for rain." Meanwhile, Governor Jerry Brown continues to fast-track his Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the peripheral tunnels to ship Sacramento River water to corporate agribusiness, Southern California water agencies, and oil companies conducting fracking operations. The $67 billion plan won't create one single drop of new water, but it will take vast tracts of Delta farm land out of production under the guise of "habitat restoration" in order to irrigate drainage-impaired soil owned by corporate mega-growers on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. The tunnel plan will also hasten the extinction of Sacramento River Chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, Delta and longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other fish species, as well as imperil the salmon and steelhead populations on the Klamath and Trinity rivers. The peripheral tunnels will be good for agribusiness, water privateers, oil companies and the 1 percent, but will be bad for the fish, wildlife, people and environment of California and the public trust. For more information about the crunchnestle alliance, contact Andy Conn (530) 906-8077 camphgr55 at gmail.com or Bob Saunders (916) 370-8251. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Mar 17 14:01:39 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 14:01:39 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Endangered Delta Smelt May Be Extinct Message-ID: <1426626099.52777.YahooMailNeo@web120301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Capital Public Radio Endangered Delta Smelt May Be Extinct Amy Quinton "Prepare for the extinction of the Delta Smelt in the wild," UC Davis fish biologist Peter Moyle told a group of scientists with the Delta Stewardship Council. http://www.capradio.org/articles/2015/03/16/endangered-delta-smelt-may-be-extinct/ "We are unable to determine with certainty which threats or combinations of threats are directly responsible for the decrease in delta smelt abundance. However, the apparent low abundance of delta smelt in concert with ongoing threats throughout its range indicates that the delta smelt is now in danger of extinction throughout its range." from: http://www.fws.gov/sfbaydelta/species/delta_smelt.cfm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Tue Mar 17 15:44:51 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:44:51 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fishermen and Delta leaders say water exporters are destroying Delta smelt! In-Reply-To: References: <25963783.-355664455@pin.pinDB.mail.salsalabs.com> <3E786EA7-0A1D-4816-8522-207A3A7FE05E@fishsniffer.com> <814971F1-9D74-4309-95EA-8173A0430FCE@mcn.org> <6394DB76-961D-4656-B110-521FE3AD66B5@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <7E471B4A-4635-492E-8F8A-7365E475F534@fishsniffer.com> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/17/1371584/-Fishermen-and-Delta-leaders-say-exporters-are-destroying-Delta-smelt Fishermen and Delta leaders say water exporters are destroying Delta smelt! by Dan Bacher The Delta smelt, once the most abundant fish in the entire Bay Delta Estuary, may already be extinct, according to UC Davis fish biologist and author Peter Moyle, as quoted on Capital Public Radio. "Prepare for the extinction of the Delta Smelt in the wild," Moyle told a group of scientists with the Delta Stewardship Council. (http://www.capradio.org/articles/2015/03/16/endangered-delta-smelt-may-be-extinct ) The latest trawl survey by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) found just six smelt to date. That survey follows the fall midwater trawl survey, when biologists recorded the lowest number of smelt ever documented, 8, at a total of 100 sites sampled from September through December. "That trawl survey came up with just six smelt, four females and two males," Moyle told Capital Public Radio. "Normally because they can target smelt, they would have gotten several hundred.? ?Moyle says the population of Delta smelt has been declining for the last 30 years but the drought may have pushed the species to the point of no return. If the smelt is officially declared extinct, which could take several years, the declaration could change how water is managed in California,? according to the report. ?All these biological opinions on Delta smelt that have restricted some of the pumping will have to be changed,? said Moyle. The Delta smelt is an indicator species that demonstrates the health of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. The 2.0 to 2.8 inch long fish is endemic to the estuary and spends all of its life in the Delta. Restore the Delta and the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA), opponents of the Governor?s Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the peripheral tunnels, responded to the alarming news that the Delta smelt may be extinct by blasting a move by the State Water Resources Control Board to further weaken Delta outflow and water quality standards. In a press release, they said the smelt may be reaching the ?point of no return? if swift action is not taken ? and indicated that the Board?s action makes even more likely the decimation of this one-time most abundant Delta species, and winter-run Chinook salmon this year. The State Water Board's action lowered Delta outflow for purpose of managing the ecosystems and salinity control, a move that they said is ?bad for fish, good for invasive species and helps storage? by reducing how much water the projects send from upstream reservoirs to keep salt out of the Delta. ?The State Water Board, even in the face of near-extinction of Delta smelt and salmon, is proposing to drastically relax minimal water quality and flow standards enacted to protect the Bay-Delta and tributary streams, for the third year in a row,? said Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. ?Delta and longfin smelt and Winter-run Chinook salmon have collapsed to less than one percent of historic numbers, and are facing extinction.? ?Yet the Water Board and the Governor expect our rivers and fisheries to bear the burden and suffer the consequences of mismanagement, even as additional acres of almonds are planted in the Valley. The Delta is a national treasure belonging to all of the people in the state and nation. It must not be sacrificed to the insatiable greed of special interests,? he stated. Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta, said, ?Restore the Delta and its partners have worked for 8 years for the protection of Delta smelt. Excessive water pumping by the State and Federal water exporters, especially on behalf of those growing almonds in the Westlands Water District and Kern County, has led to the collapse of the estuary.? ?And here in the fifth year of drought, the State Water Resources Control Board has left open a loophole that one could drive a Mack truck through, by allowing water exporters to tell the board how much water they need, and allowing for emergency water for these same growers. State and Federal fish agencies are failing to enforce laws to protect fisheries,? she emphasized. ?The estuary is unraveling; California is running out of water; and all the Brown Administration can talk about is dry tunnels that will save neither the fish, nor the people of California,? she explained. Barrigan-Parrilla asked, ?How much longer will the Brown Administration fiddle, and ignore that California must adjudicate water rights. Huge industrial farms on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley cannot be sustained while the estuary collapses. She also noted that droughts are recurrent and predictable weather patterns in California ? and ?droughts are not emergencies, except when our water agencies fail to manage for their recurrence.? Barrigan-Parrilla and Jennings said the current water quality objectives give a "green light" to the California Department of Water Resources and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to gamble that each water year will be normal to wet: they prioritize upstream storage for exports to south of Delta storage, resulting in a ?beggar-thy- neighbor? competition pitting against each other exports, salinity control, fish protection, and ecosystem-protective outflows. ?This situation is preventable and state and federal agencies failed to prevent it,? said Barrigan-Parrilla. ?Mismanagement of our water resources by the State of California and federal government are sending both the endangered salmon and Delta smelt to extinction. Their political favoring of billionaire growers over the rest of us is finishing off the fish.? ?Gov. Brown favors big agribusinesses on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley over the economic and environmental over the economic and environmental needs of the people who live in the Bay-Delta Estuary. Our salmon fisheries support a $1.5 billion economy that supports a $1.5 billion economy, Delta farming a $5.2 billion economy,? said Barrigan-Parrilla. For more information about the collapse of Delta smelt, longfin smelt, striped bass, threadfin shad, Sacramento River splittail, Central Valley salmon and steelhead and other fish species,, go to: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/01/09/18766643.php -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Mar 18 13:52:03 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 20:52:03 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] East Bay Express: California Targets Wrong Water Wasters Message-ID: <758512262.49806.1426711923979.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> California Targets Wrong Water Wasters | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | California Targets Wrong Water WastersLate last week, a senior water scientist at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory at Caltech issued a harsh wake-up call to California when he revealed... | | | | View on www.eastbayexpress... | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | ? California Targets Wrong Water Wasters? As the state's water supply plummets to scary levels, officials are going after people who overwater their lawns. That's a good idea. But they're not the worst culprits. By?Robert Gammon?@RobertGammonEmailPrintclick to enlarge - - If Governor Brown and California water officials are going to get serious about conserving water, they need to abandon business practices like growing water-intensive crops in the desert. Late last week, a senior water scientist at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory at Caltech issued a harsh wake-up call to California when he revealed that the state is down to?just one year of water supplies?because of the drought and the overuse of water in the past decade. Writing in an op-ed in the?Los Angeles Times, Jay Famiglietti, who is also a professor of Earth system science at UC Irvine, noted that California's groundwater supplies are dwindling rapidly and the Sierra snowpack this winter is essentially nonexistent. Famiglietti also pointed out that California has no backup plan for when the water runs out, and so he called for immediate, strict, mandatory water rationing throughout California.On Tuesday of this week, the State Water Resources Control Board was prepared to enact some tougher rules, including limiting outdoor watering to two days a week. And while the proposed rules are long overdue, they are arguably not tough enough to avert a disaster, particularly if the state is now in the early stages of a so-called mega-drought ? a prolonged dry spell that could last twenty years or more.Moreover, environmentalists say the proposed regulations fail to address the state's largest water waster: Big Agribusiness. In fact, California's agricultural interests use 80 percent of the available water in the state each year (even though they represent just 2 percent of California's economy). "But there's no target [reduction] for agricultural use," noted Tom Stokely, a water policy analyst for the nonprofit California Water Impact Network. Instead, Stokely pointed out that the state is just targeting urban and suburban water users in its rationing plan, even though they only consume about 20 percent of the California's available water each year.It's one of the great illusions in the Golden State. When we think of wasting water, we think of emerald lawns, lush gardens, and backyard swimming pools. And while it's true that many households and businesses are still wasting lots of water ? and we need tougher rules to stop them ? the true water wasters are large agricultural interests that are increasingly growing water-intensive crops, particularly almonds, in extremely dry sections of California, including the western San Joaquin Valley (see "California's Thirsty Almonds," 2/5/14).In the past decade, the number of almond orchards in the state has grown by roughly 50 percent ? primarily because tree nuts are highly profitable for farmers. And while growing nuts in the wetter northern Central Valley makes sense, it is irresponsible to plant tens of thousands of acres of almond trees in areas that don't have enough water.According to state data, California's almond crop now consumes more water than all outdoor watering combined. You read that right. Even if every Californian stopped watering their gardens tomorrow, it would not save as much water that which is used for almonds in the state. "As a consumer, it makes you ask, 'Why should I conserve water when they're planting 40,000 acres of almonds in the desert?'" Stokely said.Environmentalists, however, are concerned the current record-drought conditions will only lead to dumber decisions about water. They're worried that instead of calling for the end of water-intensive farming in the desert, Governor Jerry Brown and state water officials will double-down on their plan to build two giant water tunnels underneath the delta so that it will be easier to ship Northern California water to the dry San Joaquin Valley. "They don't want to do what really needs to be done," said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of the conservation group Restore the Delta, referring to ending water-wasting practices by Big Ag in California.Environmentalists are also concerned that Brown and other centrist Democrats, such as US Senator Dianne Feinstein, will join with Republicans in calling for the weakening of our environmental laws in order to send water shipments to farmers in the San Joaquin Valley ? even if it means driving some fish species to extinction. "At what point to we accept that we're overusing a limited supply?" said Bill Jennings, executive director of the conservation group California Sportfishing Protection Alliance.For their part, agricultural interests have argued that they shouldn't be subject to rationing because they're too important to the state. After all, they say, how would we eat without the state's bountiful farms?But environmentalists rightly note that no one is calling for a cutback on water use for the state's essential food supplies. The problem is the water wasted on non-essential crops. Right now, California is producing far more almonds than state residents can consume. So much so that 80 percent of the state's almond crop is now exported ? much of it to China. In other words, we're essentially exporting our water to China.That's absurd. And if Governor Brown and California water officials are ever going to get serious about conserving water, then they need to abandon crazy business practices ? like growing water-intensive crops in the desert and spending $25 billion on water tunnels to make it happen so we can sell more nuts to China. That's especially true now that we've only got one year of water left.Contact?the author of this piece,?send?a letter to the editor,?like?us on Facebook, or?follow?us on Twitter. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ddj at cah2oresearch.com Wed Mar 18 22:04:08 2015 From: ddj at cah2oresearch.com (Deirdre Des Jardins) Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2015 22:04:08 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] East Bay Express: California Targets Wrong Water Wasters In-Reply-To: <758512262.49806.1426711923979.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <758512262.49806.1426711923979.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Jay Famigletti is right. Last year, Metropolitan Water District's member agencies used 1.88 million acre feet of water -- 107% of average. To keep up with demand, MWD needed to draw down their dry year storage by 48% to provide the water, from 2.3 MAF to 1.2 MAF. This year MWD has a good allocation of Colorado River water, so they won't need to draw down storage that much, but in the future they might not be so lucky. You don't want to know what will happen when MWD's dry year reserves are exhausted and they have a 10 percent allocation of SWP water for 19 million people. It would be very bad for the Sacramento Valley, the San Joaquin Valley, and the Delta. > On Mar 18, 2015, at 1:52 PM, Tom Stokely wrote: > > California Targets Wrong Water Wasters > > > > > > > > > California Targets Wrong Water Wasters > Late last week, a senior water scientist at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory at Caltech issued a harsh wake-up call to California when he revealed... > View on www.eastbayexpress... > Preview by Yahoo > > > California Targets Wrong Water Wasters > As the state's water supply plummets to scary levels, officials are going after people who overwater their lawns. That's a good idea. But they're not the worst culprits. > By Robert Gammon @RobertGammon > > Email > > Print > > click to enlarge > > If Governor Brown and California water officials are going to get serious about conserving water, they need to abandon business practices like growing water-intensive crops in the desert. > Late last week, a senior water scientist at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory at Caltech issued a harsh wake-up call to California when he revealed that the state is down to just one year of water supplies because of the drought and the overuse of water in the past decade. Writing in an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times, Jay Famiglietti, who is also a professor of Earth system science at UC Irvine, noted that California's groundwater supplies are dwindling rapidly and the Sierra snowpack this winter is essentially nonexistent. Famiglietti also pointed out that California has no backup plan for when the water runs out, and so he called for immediate, strict, mandatory water rationing throughout California. > On Tuesday of this week, the State Water Resources Control Board was prepared to enact some tougher rules, including limiting outdoor watering to two days a week. And while the proposed rules are long overdue, they are arguably not tough enough to avert a disaster, particularly if the state is now in the early stages of a so-called mega-drought ? a prolonged dry spell that could last twenty years or more. > Moreover, environmentalists say the proposed regulations fail to address the state's largest water waster: Big Agribusiness. In fact, California's agricultural interests use 80 percent of the available water in the state each year (even though they represent just 2 percent of California's economy). "But there's no target [reduction] for agricultural use," noted Tom Stokely, a water policy analyst for the nonprofit California Water Impact Network. Instead, Stokely pointed out that the state is just targeting urban and suburban water users in its rationing plan, even though they only consume about 20 percent of the California's available water each year. > It's one of the great illusions in the Golden State. When we think of wasting water, we think of emerald lawns, lush gardens, and backyard swimming pools. And while it's true that many households and businesses are still wasting lots of water ? and we need tougher rules to stop them ? the true water wasters are large agricultural interests that are increasingly growing water-intensive crops, particularly almonds, in extremely dry sections of California, including the western San Joaquin Valley (see "California's Thirsty Almonds," 2/5/14). > In the past decade, the number of almond orchards in the state has grown by roughly 50 percent ? primarily because tree nuts are highly profitable for farmers. And while growing nuts in the wetter northern Central Valley makes sense, it is irresponsible to plant tens of thousands of acres of almond trees in areas that don't have enough water. > > According to state data, California's almond crop now consumes more water than all outdoor watering combined. You read that right. Even if every Californian stopped watering their gardens tomorrow, it would not save as much water that which is used for almonds in the state. "As a consumer, it makes you ask, 'Why should I conserve water when they're planting 40,000 acres of almonds in the desert?'" Stokely said. > Environmentalists, however, are concerned the current record-drought conditions will only lead to dumber decisions about water. They're worried that instead of calling for the end of water-intensive farming in the desert, Governor Jerry Brown and state water officials will double-down on their plan to build two giant water tunnels underneath the delta so that it will be easier to ship Northern California water to the dry San Joaquin Valley. "They don't want to do what really needs to be done," said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of the conservation group Restore the Delta, referring to ending water-wasting practices by Big Ag in California. > Environmentalists are also concerned that Brown and other centrist Democrats, such as US Senator Dianne Feinstein, will join with Republicans in calling for the weakening of our environmental laws in order to send water shipments to farmers in the San Joaquin Valley ? even if it means driving some fish species to extinction. "At what point to we accept that we're overusing a limited supply?" said Bill Jennings, executive director of the conservation group California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. > For their part, agricultural interests have argued that they shouldn't be subject to rationing because they're too important to the state. After all, they say, how would we eat without the state's bountiful farms? > But environmentalists rightly note that no one is calling for a cutback on water use for the state's essential food supplies. The problem is the water wasted on non-essential crops. Right now, California is producing far more almonds than state residents can consume. So much so that 80 percent of the state's almond crop is now exported ? much of it to China. In other words, we're essentially exporting our water to China. > That's absurd. And if Governor Brown and California water officials are ever going to get serious about conserving water, then they need to abandon crazy business practices ? like growing water-intensive crops in the desert and spending $25 billion on water tunnels to make it happen so we can sell more nuts to China. That's especially true now that we've only got one year of water left. > Contact the author of this piece, send a letter to the editor, like us on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Mar 19 11:08:35 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 18:08:35 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Governor Brown, Legislative Leaders Announce $1 Billion Emergency Drought Package In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1669260284.727061.1426788515809.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Begin forwarded message: Governor Brown, Legislative Leaders Announce Billion Emergency Drought Package #yiv7467444321 h1, #yiv7467444321 h2, #yiv7467444321 h3, #yiv7467444321 h4, #yiv7467444321 h5, #yiv7467444321 h6 {font-family:"arial black", arial, sans-serif;} | View this email in a web browser ??? | ??? Forward to a friend ??? | | | | | | | | | | FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: | Contact: Governor's Press Office | | Thursday, March 19, 2015 | (916) 445-4571 | Governor Brown, Legislative Leaders Announce $1 Billion Emergency Drought Package SACRAMENTO ? Mobilizing state resources to face another year of extreme dry conditions, Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. today joined Senate President pro Tempore Kevin de Le?n, Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins, and Republican Leaders Senator Bob Huff and Assemblymember Kristin Olsen to announce legislation to help local communities cope with the ongoing, devastating drought. The $1 billion package will expedite bond funding to make the state more resilient to the disastrous effects of climate change and help ensure that all Californians have access to local water supplies.??This unprecedented drought continues with no signs yet of letting up,? said Governor Brown. ?The programs funded by the actions announced today will provide direct relief to workers and communities most impacted by these historic dry conditions.??The legislation includes more than $1 billion for local drought relief and infrastructure projects to make the state?s water infrastructure more resilient to extreme weather events.? The package accelerates $128 million in expenditures from the Governor?s budget to provide direct assistance to workers and communities impacted by drought and to implement the Water Action Plan. It also includes $272 million in Proposition 1 Water Bond funding for safe drinking water and water recycling and accelerates $660 million from the Proposition 1e for flood protection in urban and rural areas.?"Taken together, this package provides a major boost to our state?s efforts to manage the drought and strengthen our infrastructure," said pro Tempore De Le?n. "I want to thank the Governor and the Speaker for working together to respond to this crisis. It shows how we?as leaders--can get things done when we all work together in common purpose."?"The drought isn?t letting up, so we can?t let up either," said Speaker Atkins. "This legislation will deliver relief to Californians harmed by the drought and help us manage the significant problems the drought continues to cause. Since our skies are still clear?our job is too. And making sure we meet emergency needs, prepare for short term problems, and advance longer-term projects are an important part of that effort."?"I want to thank the Governor, the pro Tem and the Speaker for inviting us today. We were briefed on this proposal just this morning, and so far it sounds like a good approach.? We need to review the legislation in detail but it seems like a reasonable start," said Senate Replican Leader Bob Huff. "Republicans have consistently said that storage is essential for providing a reliable water source to all of California for future generations. The Prop 1 water bond that was passed last year is a critical step forward in meeting the needs for California?s future. There?s no question California?s drought crisis has worsened, as once again we?ve experienced a dry winter.? With the hot summer months approaching, it?s incumbent on all Californians to be responsible with how they use water. It?s critical that we act now."??"This emergency drought relief is an important band aid," said Assembly Republican Leader Kristin Olsen. "We must move beyond temporary fixes. Projects to increase water supply have been hung up in government red tape for decades. I'm glad today we are making decisions that help people and look to us all to take real actions on long-term projects so emergency actions are no longer needed."?The Sierra Nevada snowpack, which Californians rely on heavily during the dry summer months for their water needs, is at a near record low. The March snowpack measurement came in at 0.9 inches of water content in the snow, just 5 percent of the March 3rd historical average for the measurement site. The overall water content for the Northern Sierra snowpack came in at 4.4 inches, just 16 percent of average for the date. Central and southern Sierra readings were 5.5 inches (20 percent of average) and 5 inches (22 percent) respectively. Only in 1991 has the water content of the snow been lower.??Taking action to further strengthen water conservation in the state, the State Water Resources Control Board on Tuesday voted to expand and extend an?emergency regulation?to prohibit certain water use, such as washing down sidewalks, and create a?minimum standard for outdoor irrigation restrictions by urban water suppliers.?Since last February, the state has pledged over $870 million to support drought relief,?including?money for food to workers directly impacted by the drought, funding to secure emergency drinking water supplies for drought impacted communities and bond funds for projects that will help local communities save water and make their water systems more resilient to drought.?Last month, Governor Brown met with U.S. Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell in Sacramento to announce nearly?$20 million in federal drought relief?for California?s Central Valley Project.?In December 2013, the Governor formed a?Drought Task Force?to closely manage precious water supplies, to expand water conservation wherever possible and to quickly respond to emerging drought impacts throughout the state. The following month, the administration finalized a comprehensive?Water Action Plan?that charts the course for California to become more resilient in the face of droughts and floods and the Governor declared a?drought state of emergency. In April 2014, the Governor called on the state to?redouble their efforts?at combating drought.?Last fall, the Governor signed legislation requiring?local, sustainable groundwater management?as well as legislation to put a?water bond?before voters, which won bipartisan approval in the Legislature and was approved overwhelmingly at the polls. He also issued an Executive Order?streamlining efforts to provide water to families?in dire need as the extreme drought continues to grip the state by making funding available through the California Disaster Assistance Act to provide water for drinking and sanitation to households currently without running water.?Governor Brown has called on all Californians to reduce their water use by 20 percent and prevent water waste. Visit?SaveOurWater.com?to find out how everyone can do their part and?Drought.CA.Gov?to learn more about how California is dealing with the effects of the drought.???? ??? ### | | | Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. State Capitol Building Sacramento, CA 95814 | | | Forward | View?in?Browser | | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Fri Mar 20 09:03:11 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 09:03:11 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Article submission: Water exports are driving Delta smelt and salmon to extinction In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5F564CBD-96BB-4612-AF48-E76531D7D092@fishsniffer.com> http://www.calitics.com/diary/15707/fishermen-and-delta-leaders-say-water-exports-are-destroying-delta-smelt Water exports are driving Delta smelt and salmon to extinction by Dan Bacher The endangered Delta smelt, once the most abundant fish in the entire Bay Delta Estuary, may already be extinct, according to UC Davis fish biologist and author Peter Moyle, as quoted on Capital Public Radio. "Prepare for the extinction of the Delta Smelt in the wild," Moyle told a group of scientists with the Delta Stewardship Council. The latest trawl survey by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) found just six smelt to date. That survey follows the fall midwater trawl survey, when biologists recorded the lowest number of smelt ever documented, 8, at a total of 100 sites sampled from September through December 2014. "That trawl survey came up with just six smelt, four females and two males," Moyle told Capital Public Radio. "Normally because they can target smelt, they would have gotten several hundred.? ?Moyle says the population of Delta smelt has been declining for the last 30 years but the drought may have pushed the species to the point of no return. If the smelt is officially declared extinct, which could take several years, the declaration could change how water is managed in California,? according to the report. ?All these biological opinions on Delta smelt that have restricted some of the pumping will have to be changed,? said Moyle. The Delta smelt is an indicator species that demonstrates the health of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. The 2.0 to 2.8 inch long fish is endemic to the estuary and spends all of its life in the Delta. Restore the Delta and the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA), opponents of the Governor?s Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the peripheral tunnels, responded to the alarming news that the Delta smelt may be extinct by blasting a move by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to further weaken Delta outflow and water quality standards. They said the smelt may be reaching the ?point of no return? if swift action is not taken ? and indicated that the Board?s action makes even more likely the decimation of this once flourishing Delta species and endangered Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon this year. The State Water Board's action lowered Delta outflow for the purpose of managing the ecosystems and salinity control, a move that the BDCP critiics said is ?bad for fish, good for invasive species and helps storage? by reducing how much water the projects send from upstream reservoirs to keep salt out of the Delta. ?The State Water Board, even in the face of near-extinction of Delta smelt and salmon, is proposing to drastically relax minimal water quality and flow standards enacted to protect the Bay-Delta and tributary streams, for the third year in a row,? said Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. ?Delta and longfin smelt and Winter-run Chinook salmon have collapsed to less than one percent of historic numbers, and are facing extinction.? ?Yet the Water Board and the Governor expect our rivers and fisheries to bear the burden and suffer the consequences of mismanagement, even as additional acres of almonds are planted in the Valley. The Delta is a national treasure belonging to all of the people in the state and nation. It must not be sacrificed to the insatiable greed of special interests,? he stated. Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta, said her group and its partners have worked for 8 years for the protection of Delta smelt. She pinpointed "excessive water pumping" by the state and federal water exporters, especially on behalf of those growing almonds in the Westlands Water District and Kern County, for leading to the collapse of the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas. California's almond orchards use about 3.5 million acre feet of water, nearly 9 percent of the state's agricultural water supply. That is enough water to supply the domestic needs of the Los Angeles Basin and metropolitan San Diego combined, approximately 75 percent of the state's population, according to Carolee Krieger, Executive Director of the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN).(http://m.sfgate.com/opinion/openforum/article/Why-almonds-cover-California-5655309.php ) ?And here in the fifth year of drought, the State Water Resources Control Board has left open a loophole that one could drive a Mack truck through, by allowing water exporters to tell the board how much water they need, and allowing for emergency water for these same growers," Barrigan-Parrilla emphasized. "State and Federal fish agencies are failing to enforce laws to protect fisheries." ?The estuary is unraveling; California is running out of water; and all the Brown Administration can talk about is dry tunnels that will save neither the fish, nor the people of California,? she explained. Barrigan-Parrilla asked, ?How much longer will the Brown Administration fiddle, and ignore that California must adjudicate water rights. Huge industrial farms on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley cannot be sustained while the estuary collapses. She also noted that droughts are recurrent and predictable weather patterns in California ? and droughts are "not emergencies," except when the water agencies fail to manage for their recurrence. Barrigan-Parrilla and Jennings said the current water quality objectives give a "green light" to the California Department of Water Resources and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to gamble that each water year will be normal to wet: they prioritize upstream storage for exports to south of Delta storage, resulting in a ?beggar-thy- neighbor? competition pitting against each other exports, salinity control, fish protection, and ecosystem-protective outflows. ?This situation is preventable and state and federal agencies failed to prevent it,? said Barrigan-Parrilla. ?Mismanagement of our water resources by the State of California and federal government are sending both the endangered salmon and Delta smelt to extinction. Their political favoring of billionaire growers over the rest of us is finishing off the fish.? Barrigan-Parrilla said Governor Jerry Brown favors corporate agribusiness interests on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley over the economic and environmental needs of the people who live in the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuary. The salmon fisheries that this estuary sustains support a $1.5 billion economy, while Delta farming supports a $5.2 billion economy. "We are poised to lose Delta smelt, Winter-run salmon, and steelhead as these fisheries are collapsing. Where is Gov. Brown?s concern for the people who live and work in the estuary?? she concluded. Robert Gammon, editor of the East Bay Express, summed up the problem that we face now with a large percent of the state's water dedicated to export crops grown by corporate agribusiness interests. "Right now, California is producing far more almonds than state residents can consume. So much so that at least 70 percent of the state's almond crop is now exported ? much of it to China. In other words, we're essentially exporting our water to China," said Gammon. (http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/california-targets-wrong-water-wasters/Content?oid=4222724 ) If Delta smelt, Winter run Chinook salmon and steelhead go extinct, the question must be asked: will people be next? An estuary and environment that is no longer suitable for these fish to live in is also no longer suitable for people to live and thrive in. Remember - extinction is forever. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bgutermuth at usbr.gov Tue Mar 24 10:38:13 2015 From: bgutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F.) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 10:38:13 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Regional Water Board Public Workshop on TRRP WQ certification: Trinity library March 26th at 7 pm Message-ID: *Regional Water Board Public Workshop* *Trinity County Public Library - Weaverville* *March 26, 2015 ? 7:00 to 9:00 pm* *Public Notice for Reissuing the Trinity River Restoration Program?s General Water Quality Certification for Channel Rehabilitation on the Trinity River* The Regional Water Board is conducting a public workshop for interested persons to learn about the proposed reissuance of the Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP?s) General Water Quality Certification for Channel Rehabilitation pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act [33 USC 1341] and Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act authority. The purpose of the workshop is to hear and receive written comments specifically on the water quality aspects of activities regulated by the Draft Water Quality Certification. Copies of the DRAFT General Water Quality Certification for Bureau of Reclamation, TRRP ? Channel Rehabilitation for Remaining Phase 1 and Phase 2 Sites will be available at the workshop, or electronically at http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/northcoast/public_notices/water_quality_certification/. Copies of Initial Studies associated with the reissuance of 401 Water Quality Certifications for the TRRP?s Fine and Coarse Management Activities are now also available at this website. Written comments within the scope and subject matter of the findings supported by the Initial Studies or on the DRAFT General Water Quality Certification for Bureau of Reclamation, TRRP ? Channel Rehabilitation for Remaining Phase 1 and Phase 2 Sites, can be submitted electronically to Northcoast at waterboards.ca.gov. Comment periods for each document are identified on this website. Please contact staff member Gil Falcone at (707) 576?2830 or Stephen Bargsten at (707) 576?2653 with any questions. 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 http://www.trrp.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Fri Mar 27 13:38:08 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 13:38:08 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] CBB: CDFW study shows water for marijuana growing likely devastating for listed salmon, steelhead Message-ID: <01bc01d068cd$efe26380$cfa72a80$@sisqtel.net> Columbia Basin Bulletin Print this Story Print this Story Email this Story Email this Story CDFW Study Shows Water For Marijuana Growing Likely Devastating For Listed Salmon, Steelhead Posted on Friday, March 27, 2015 (PST) Environmental scientists with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife recently published a first-of-its-kind study that clearly shows that water used for growing marijuana has a devastating effect on fish in the state. The study showed that during drought conditions, water demand for marijuana cultivation exceeded stream flow in three of four study watersheds. The resulting paper, entitled "Impacts of Surface Water Diversions for Marijuana Cultivation on Aquatic Habitat in Four Northwestern California Watersheds," concludes that diminished stream flow from this water-intensive activity is likely to have lethal to sub-lethal effects on state and federally listed salmon and steelhead trout and will cause further decline of sensitive amphibian species. The study was published online in the scientific journal PLOS One and can be found here: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0120016. By using online tools to count marijuana plants and measure greenhouses, and conducting inspections of marijuana cultivation sites with state wildlife officers and local law enforcement, CDFW scientists quantified plant numbers and water use. Utilizing stream flow data provided by staff at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), CDFW determined water demand for cultivation could use more than 100 percent of stream flow during the summer dry season in three of four study watersheds. Stream flow monitoring conducted by CDFW in the summer of 2014 appeared to verify these results. "All the streams we monitored in watersheds with large scale marijuana cultivation went dry," said CDFW Senior Environmental Scientist Scott Bauer, lead author of the research paper. "The only stream we monitored that didn't go dry contained no observed marijuana cultivation." CDFW's Law Enforcement Division works closely with dozens of other state and federal agencies to eradicate illegal marijuana grows on public, tribal and private lands as well as protect the state's natural resources. "This research paper demonstrates the importance of greater regulatory efforts by state agencies to prevent the extinction of imperiled fisheries resources," said CDFW Assistant Chief Brian Naslund. "CDFW's new Watershed Enforcement Team (WET) was created with just that in mind." The WET program works with agency partners to protect public trust resources from the negative effects of marijuana cultivation, which include both excessive water use and pollution. CDFW will continue to monitor the effects of water diversion for marijuana cultivation on stream flow through the summer of 2015. Marijuana cultivation is legal in California if growers have the proper CDFW lake and streambed alteration permits. Responsible growers help conserve the state's natural resources and are less likely to be subject to enforcement action. Bookmark and Share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 8928 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.gif Type: image/gif Size: 63 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.gif Type: image/gif Size: 64 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.gif Type: image/gif Size: 605 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Fri Mar 27 14:51:25 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 14:51:25 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] CBB: 2015 Columbia River Salmon Runs expected to top 2 million fish Message-ID: <020401d068d8$2cb7c4d0$86274e70$@sisqtel.net> Columbia Basin Bulletin Print this Story Print this Story Email this Story Email this Story Fish Managers Expect 2015 Columbia River Salmon Runs To Top 2 Million Fish; Run By Run Numbers Posted on Friday, March 27, 2015 (PST) Columbia River salmon runs should top 2 million fish again in 2015, continuing a trend of record or near-record runs over last decade compared to runs in the 1990s, fish managers reported to the Northwest Power and Conservation Council this month. "The 2015 run and the runs of recent years really show a big bounceback since the 1990s," Bill Tweit of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, told the Council at its March meeting. "We still are in a period of higher than average salmon productivity in the Columbia River. We know it can't last forever, but it's more fun than managing scarcity." Run by run, here is an overview: -- Upriver spring chinook (includes Snake River stocks): 2014 was a good year (242,577 fish). Another strong run is expected in 2015 (232,500 fish). -- Upper Columbia summer chinook: The run continues to be strong (78,304 in 2014, 73,000 predicted in 2015), and it will be boosted in future years by increased production at the Colville Tribes' Chief Joseph Hatchery. -- Upper Columbia sockeye: Record-breaking runs (645,140 in 2014; 394,000 predicted in 2015) have become almost commonplace for this species. The largest component of the run spawns in British Columbia. The Wenatchee River portion of the run (118,480) met its production goal in 2014 --enough for a fishery. -- Mid-Columbia fall chinook: "Another very, very large run" is expected in 2015, Tweit said. The 2014 run totaled 981,100 fish; the 2015 prediction is 1,319,500). -- Coho upstream of Bonneville Dam: "This run is beginning to show a lot of strength," despite high variation from year to year, which is typical of coho. The upriver run in 2014 (255,118 fish) was larger than anticipated. -- Snake River fall chinook: Another strong run is forecast for 2015 (10,250 fish), said Paul Klein, assistant chief of fisheries for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. He said there were "a tremendous number of redds counted last year." -- Snake River sockeye: Klein said 2,786 fish, a record number for the endangered species, were counted at Lower Granite Dam in 2014, and the forecast for 2015 is 1,800. -- Snake River steelhead: The 2014 run was good, and the 2015 run should be good, too -- "not as high as we enjoyed over the last decade, but not horrible, either," he said. -- Snake River spring/summer chinook: "It's not a bad year coming up, compared to the last 15 years," Klein said. -- Snake River coho: Klein said another strong year is anticipated thanks to the ongoing work of the Nez Perce Tribe to rebuild the run. The 2014 run (18,651 fish) was "off the scale," he said, demonstrating again how variable coho run sizes can be from the same number of hatchery smolts released every year. Also see: -- CBB, Feb. 20, 2015, "More Big Numbers Expected For 2015 Fall Chinook Return To Columbia; Third Highest Since 1938" http://www.cbbulletin.com/433202.aspx -- CBB, Jan. 30, 2015, "With Strong Return Expected, Spring Chinook Season Set; Tribes, Idaho Urge Caution On Early Fishing" http://www.cbbulletin.com/433014.aspx Bookmark and Share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 8928 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.gif Type: image/gif Size: 63 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.gif Type: image/gif Size: 64 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.gif Type: image/gif Size: 605 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kierassociates at att.net Fri Mar 27 14:56:18 2015 From: kierassociates at att.net (Kier Associates) Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 14:56:18 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] CBB: CDFW study shows water for marijuana growing likely devastating for listed salmon, steelhead In-Reply-To: <01bc01d068cd$efe26380$cfa72a80$@sisqtel.net> References: <01bc01d068cd$efe26380$cfa72a80$@sisqtel.net> Message-ID: <002001d068d8$db9ae310$92d0a930$@att.net> This morning's public radio news included an update by Lt Gov Gavin Newsom (a putative candidate for Gov in '18) on the work of his (ACLU-promoted) marijuana blue ribbon task force, with Newson saying that it looks like we're going to have a marijuana legalization initiative on next year's ballot and he wants to get the state's ducks, including taxation and regulation, lined up now rather than awaiting the outcome of a '16 election It would be nice to think we could get a civil grip on this pest plant and tamp down its current stream-killing proclivities .. Bill Kier From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Sari Sommarstrom Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 1:38 PM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] CBB: CDFW study shows water for marijuana growing likely devastating for listed salmon, steelhead Columbia Basin Bulletin Print this Story Print this Story Email this Story Email this Story CDFW Study Shows Water For Marijuana Growing Likely Devastating For Listed Salmon, Steelhead Posted on Friday, March 27, 2015 (PST) Environmental scientists with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife recently published a first-of-its-kind study that clearly shows that water used for growing marijuana has a devastating effect on fish in the state. The study showed that during drought conditions, water demand for marijuana cultivation exceeded stream flow in three of four study watersheds. The resulting paper, entitled "Impacts of Surface Water Diversions for Marijuana Cultivation on Aquatic Habitat in Four Northwestern California Watersheds," concludes that diminished stream flow from this water-intensive activity is likely to have lethal to sub-lethal effects on state and federally listed salmon and steelhead trout and will cause further decline of sensitive amphibian species. The study was published online in the scientific journal PLOS One and can be found here: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0120016. By using online tools to count marijuana plants and measure greenhouses, and conducting inspections of marijuana cultivation sites with state wildlife officers and local law enforcement, CDFW scientists quantified plant numbers and water use. Utilizing stream flow data provided by staff at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), CDFW determined water demand for cultivation could use more than 100 percent of stream flow during the summer dry season in three of four study watersheds. Stream flow monitoring conducted by CDFW in the summer of 2014 appeared to verify these results. "All the streams we monitored in watersheds with large scale marijuana cultivation went dry," said CDFW Senior Environmental Scientist Scott Bauer, lead author of the research paper. "The only stream we monitored that didn't go dry contained no observed marijuana cultivation." CDFW's Law Enforcement Division works closely with dozens of other state and federal agencies to eradicate illegal marijuana grows on public, tribal and private lands as well as protect the state's natural resources. "This research paper demonstrates the importance of greater regulatory efforts by state agencies to prevent the extinction of imperiled fisheries resources," said CDFW Assistant Chief Brian Naslund. "CDFW's new Watershed Enforcement Team (WET) was created with just that in mind." The WET program works with agency partners to protect public trust resources from the negative effects of marijuana cultivation, which include both excessive water use and pollution. CDFW will continue to monitor the effects of water diversion for marijuana cultivation on stream flow through the summer of 2015. Marijuana cultivation is legal in California if growers have the proper CDFW lake and streambed alteration permits. Responsible growers help conserve the state's natural resources and are less likely to be subject to enforcement action. Bookmark and Share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 8928 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.gif Type: image/gif Size: 63 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.gif Type: image/gif Size: 64 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.gif Type: image/gif Size: 605 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Wed Apr 1 10:10:27 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2015 10:10:27 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] DWR: California's Most Significant Droughts: Comparing Historical and Recent Conditions Message-ID: <014a01d06c9e$c07cc7a0$417656e0$@sisqtel.net> http://www.water.ca.gov/waterconditions/docs/California_Signficant_Droughts_ 2015_small.pdf Comparing the current drought with others in California history California is in the midst of a significant drought, but how does it compare to other droughts in the state's history? DWR set out to answer that question with the new report, California's Most Significant Droughts: Comparing Historical and Recent Conditions. It was developed in response to questions about the current drought's relative severity. The report looks back as far as the six-year drought of 1929-34. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Apr 1 11:52:27 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2015 18:52:27 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Governor Brown Directs First Ever Statewide Mandatory Water Reductions In-Reply-To: <101B0C64-A137-40D0-9CFA-DFFFBAC5C784@fishsniffer.com> References: <101B0C64-A137-40D0-9CFA-DFFFBAC5C784@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <531284158.3096006.1427914347334.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> | View this email in a web browser ??? | ??? Forward to a friend ??? | | | | | | | | | | PRESS RELEASE | Contact: Governor's Press Office | | Wednesday, April 1, 2015 | (916) 445-4571 | ?Governor Brown Directs First Ever StatewideMandatory Water Reductions??SACRAMENTO ? Following the lowest snowpack ever recorded and with no end to the drought in sight, Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. today announced actions that will save water, increase enforcement to prevent wasteful water use, streamline the state's drought response and invest in new technologies that will make California more drought resilient.??Today we are standing on dry grass where there should be five feet of snow. This historic drought demands unprecedented action,? said Governor Brown. ?Therefore, I?m issuing an executive order mandating substantial water reductions across our state. As Californians, we must pull together and save water in every way possible.??High resolution photos of previous snow surveys are available here.??For more than two years, the state?s experts have been managing water resources to ensure that the state survives this drought and is better prepared for the next one. Last year, the Governor proclaimed a?drought state of emergency. The state has taken steps to make sure that water is available for human health and safety, growing food, fighting fires and protecting fish and wildlife. Millions have been spent helping thousands of California families most impacted by the drought pay their bills, put food on their tables and have water to drink. ?The following is a summary of the executive order issued by the Governor today.??Save Water?For the first time in state history, the Governor has directed the State Water Resources Control Board to implement mandatory water reductions in cities and towns across California to reduce water usage by 25 percent. This savings amounts to approximately 1.5 million acre-feet of water over the next nine months, or nearly as much as is currently in Lake Oroville.?To save more water now, the order will also:? - Replace 50 million square feet of lawns throughout the state with drought tolerant landscaping in partnership with local governments; - Direct the creation of a temporary, statewide consumer rebate program to replace old appliances with more water and energy efficient models; - Require campuses, golf courses, cemeteries and other large landscapes to make significant cuts in water use; and - Prohibit new homes and developments from irrigating with potable water unless water-efficient drip irrigation systems are used, and ban watering of ornamental grass on public street medians. ?Increase Enforcement?The Governor?s order calls on local water agencies to adjust their rate structures to implement conservation pricing, recognized as an effective way to realize water reductions and discourage water waste.?Agricultural water users ? which have borne much of the brunt of the drought to date, with hundreds of thousands of fallowed acres, significantly reduced water allocations and thousands of farmworkers laid off ? will be required to report more water use information to state regulators, increasing the state's ability to enforce against illegal diversions and waste and unreasonable use of water under today?s order. Additionally, the Governor?s action strengthens standards for Agricultural Water Management Plans submitted by large agriculture water districts and requires small agriculture water districts to develop similar plans. These plans will help ensure that agricultural communities are prepared in case the drought extends into 2016.?Additional actions required by the order include: ?? - Taking action against water agencies in depleted groundwater basins that have not shared data on their groundwater supplies with the state; - Updating standards for toilets and faucets and outdoor landscaping in residential communities and taking action against communities that ignore these standards; and - Making permanent monthly reporting of water usage, conservation and enforcement actions by local water suppliers.? ? Streamline Government Response?The order:? - Prioritizes state review and decision-making of water infrastructure projects and requires state agencies to report to the Governor?s Office on any application pending for more than 90 days. - Streamlines permitting and review of emergency drought salinity barriers ? necessary to keep freshwater supplies in upstream reservoirs for human use and habitat protection for endangered and threatened species; - Simplifies the review and approval process for voluntary water transfers and emergency drinking water projects; and - Directs state departments to provide temporary relocation assistance to families who need to move from homes where domestic wells have run dry to housing with running water. ? Invest in New Technologies?The order helps make California more drought resilient by:? - Incentivizing promising new technology that will make California more water efficient through a new program administered by the California Energy Commission. ?The full text of the executive order can be found here. ?For more than two years, California has been dealing with the effects of drought. To learn about all the actions the state has taken?to manage our water system and cope with the impacts of the drought, visit?Drought.CA.Gov.?Every Californian should take steps to conserve water. Find out how at?SaveOurWater.com.?### | | | Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. State Capitol Building Sacramento, CA 95814 | | | Forward | View?in?Browser | | | | #yiv7548217571 h1, #yiv7548217571 h2, #yiv7548217571 h3, #yiv7548217571 h4, #yiv7548217571 h5, #yiv7548217571 h6 {font-family:"arial black", arial, sans-serif;} -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Wed Apr 1 19:03:17 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2015 19:03:17 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Governor Brown's drought order lets corporate agribusiness, oil companies off the hook In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <267A90AE-CC8E-40BE-81D7-95BE0996FD26@fishsniffer.com> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/01/1375000/-Governor-Brown-s-drought-order-lets-corporate-agribusiness-oil-companies-off-the-hook Governor Brown's drought order lets corporate agribusiness, oil companies off the hook by Dan Bacher Governor Jerry Brown today issued an executive order that he claimed will "save water," increase enforcement to prevent wasteful water use, streamline the state's drought response and invest in new technologies that will make California more "drought resilient." The order follows the lowest snowpack ever recorded in California history, with no end to the drought in sight. Critics of the Governor?s water policies quickly responded that Brown?s order lets corporate agribusiness interests, the biggest users of the state's water, and big oil companies off the hook. ?Today we are standing on dry grass where there should be five feet of snow. This historic drought demands unprecedented action,? said Governor Brown. ?Therefore, I?m issuing an executive order mandating substantial water reductions across our state. As Californians, we must pull together and save water in every way possible.? For the first time in state history, Brown has directed the State Water Resources Control Board to implement mandatory water reductions in cities and towns across California to reduce water usage by 25 percent. This savings amounts to approximately 1.5 million acre-feet of water over the next nine months, or nearly as much as is currently in Lake Lake Oroville, according to the Governor's Office. His executive order also features "increased enforcent actions," including calls on local water agencies to adjust their rate structures to implement conservation pricing, recognized as an effective way to realize water reductions and discourage water waste. In addition, the order called for "streamlining government response to the drought," including prioritizing state review and decision-making of water infrastructure projects and requiring state agencies to report to the Governor's Office on any application pending for more than 90 days. To read the full press release and executive order http://gov.ca.gov/news.php?id=18910 After the Governor held his press conference, Adam Scow, Food & Water Watch California Director, released a statement blasting Governor Jerry Brown's Executive Order for calling for mandatory water reductions while not addressing the state's "most egregious corporate water abuses" by agribusiness and oil companies. "It is disappointing that Governor Brown?s executive order to reduce California water use does not address the state's most egregious corporate water abuses. In the midst of a severe drought, the Governor continues to allow corporate farms and oil interests to deplete and pollute our precious groundwater resources that are crucial for saving water. The Governor must save our groundwater from depletion by directing the State Water Board to protect groundwater as a public resource. Governor Brown should direct the Water Board to place a moratorium on the use of groundwater for irrigating crops on toxic and dry soils on the westside of the San Joaquin Valley. In the two year period covering 2014-2015, the Westlands Water District is on pace to pump over 1 million acre feet of groundwater - more water than Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco combined use in 1 year. Much of Westlands grows water-intensive almonds and pistachios, most of which are exported out of state and overseas. This is a wasteful and unreasonable water use, especially during a severe drought. Governor Brown should also stop the ongoing contamination of groundwater aquifers by toxic wastewater from oil and gas operations. It is disturbing and irresponsible that the Brown administration continues to allow oil companies to contaminate and rob Californians of these fresh water sources. Given that there is currently no safe way to dispose of toxic wastewater, the Governor should place a moratorium on fracking and other dangerous oil extraction techniques to prevent the problem from getting even bigger." Restore the Delta (RTD), opponents of Brown?s Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the peripheral tunnels, said Brown?s proposed Drought Barriers on the Delta will push the Delta "closer to collapse." The group said these barriers threaten salmon while the Governor refuses to put restrictions on "corporate mega-farms." ?Governor Brown has had two responses of opposite extremes to the drought crisis,? said RTD executive director Barbara Barrigan- Parrilla. ?The first response is to place the largest burden of conservation on urban water users." "His second response is to push the Delta further toward ecological collapse by expediting the placement of a barrier system to block water flows. Those barriers will decimate fisheries and leave the people of the Delta to suffer due to drought mismanagement by state and federal agencies over the last four years," she noted. ?Governor Brown vacillates between advocating for a good start on urban conservation and inflicting destruction on the Bay-Delta estuary,? said Barrigan-Parrilla. ?He refuses to deal with the real crisis: the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta watershed has been five times over promised, with 70% of those water deliveries going to big almond growers on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. Enforcing better reporting by agricultural users is an important step, but we already know which watersheds are oversubscribed and that the only way to solve the problem is for adjudication of the Delta watershed.? She said the state and federal water projects? drought contingency plan for 2015 estimates that water districts relying on Delta exports have indicated a need for health and safety-related water supplies of 510,000 acre-feet. The water projects have already pumped over 739,000 acre-feet in 2015, about 82 percent of which was stored as of March 21 at San Luis Reservoir, west of Los Banos. Barrigan-Parrilla said it is not yet known how much of these exports are for the "health and safety" purposes of Metropolitan Water District customers, who will be making sacrifices as a result of water rationing and participating heroically in personal responsibility campaigns, and how much is to satisfy industrial mega-farm demand south of the Delta. ?There is not enough water in the watershed to satisfy the insatiable demands of big agribusiness growers on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley and to keep enough surface water in reserve for urban populations,? Barrigan-Parrilla added. Restore the Delta Policy Analyst Tim Stroshane said, ?The proposed drought barriers project for the Delta will allow the Department of Water Resources and the Bureau of Reclamation to continue managing upstream storage so that the pain of the drought will be borne by Delta residents and ecosystems, and not by Delta water takers. The barriers will have drastic consequence on fisheries, commercial and recreational fishing economies, various Delta farming communities, recreation economies, all so that water will be made available beyond what is needed for health and human safety, but for what purposes we don?t know.? ?California must save water first through agriculture reductions on polluted drainage impaired land, which uses 2/3 of the Delta?s exported water. To protect urban areas, we need a Marshall Plan to implement conservation, groundwater storage, storm water capture, cisterns, recycling and effective drought planning. Estimates show that it will cost tens of billions to repair urban water systems alone," Barrigan-Parrilla said. In the last 28 water years (since the beginning of the 1987-92 drought), wet and above normal years have occurred just 11 times (39 percent of the time) in both the San Joaquin and Sacramento River basins, according to Restore the Delta. This means that the premise of ?emergency? drought barriers is false. ?Emergency? connotes an event that is short-lived and infrequent, if it occurs at all. But below normal to critical water years occur more than half the time (as they have for almost the last three decades). ?Emergency? becomes meaningless. ?The Department of Water Resources plans to install and remove barriers simultaneously with when juvenile salmon would be attempting to rear in, or emigrate through, the Delta before they leave for the Pacific Ocean. The most invasive and disruptive activities associated with the barriers proposal occur at critically sensitive times in the life histories of these most magnificent and vulnerable listed species,? Stroshane added. Waters upstream and downstream of the barriers within the Delta will stagnate. When the dilution action of flows is greatly reduced during summer heat, water temperatures increase, salinity is projected to increase, and pollutant and contaminant concentrations will increase as well, according to Stroshane. With the drought barriers, Delta smelt are likely to face extinction this year, with barriers installed to limit flow. And the Delta itself will be become an even less hospitable place for the vulnerable fish species that remain. ?Whether it?s the barriers or the Delta tunnels, it is apparent how little Governor Brown cares for the San Francisco Bay-Delta estuary. He has not insisted on the fallowing of fields during the drought by junior water rights holders. He is pushing Delta smelt to extinction, setting up our salmon fisheries for failure, and sacrificing sustainable six-generation Delta farms for almonds, fracking, and speculative desert development,? concluded Barrigan-Parrilla. For more information on the biggest threats to California's rivers, lakes, ocean waters, fish and environment, go to: http://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/archives/2015/02/16/meet-the-biggest-threats-to-californias-environment-the-winners-of-the-annual-cold-dead-fish-awards -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Apr 2 12:32:44 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 19:32:44 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Ag-Urban Conflict Over Governor's Drought Cut-Back Order: In-Reply-To: <018d01d06d74$a9878810$fc969830$@erols.com> References: <018d01d06d74$a9878810$fc969830$@erols.com> Message-ID: <650199446.3972711.1428003164290.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Drought-stricken California will enforce a mandatory water cutback of 25 percent for urban residents because the state's situation is dire, officials said yesterday after Gov. Jerry Brown (D) issued an executive order with numerous water savings edicts. California for the spring and summer likely will be forced to rely on stored water, they said, to meet the needs of cities and farms."This really spells out the fact that the situation is unprecedented and critical, and requires the actions of all-hands-on-deck," Mark Ghilarducci, director of the California Office of Emergency Services, said during a conference call with reporters and state officials. "Over the last year this drought has taken a toll on our cities, our farms and our natural environment."State officials in calling for shared sacrifice stressed multiple times that it's not an issue of penalties for residents while agriculture drinks up most of the state's water unfettered. This came as journalists peppered the department heads with questions about water use by farms and other large businesses. Greenwire DROUGHT: Calif. water-use crackdown exposes rift between cities, farms Anne C. Mulkern, E&E reporterPublished: Thursday, April 2, 2015 Drought-stricken California will enforce a mandatory water cutback of 25 percent for urban residents because the state's situation is dire, officials said yesterday after Gov. Jerry Brown (D) issued an executive order with numerous water savings edicts.On the same day that a reading of the state snowpack showed the lowest level in recorded history, California leaders in charge of water, agriculture, fish and game, and other resources painted the outlook as grim. The state is entering its fourth year of drought, and there is no forecast for precipitation in the near future.California for the spring and summer likely will be forced to rely on stored water, they said, to meet the needs of cities and farms."This really spells out the fact that the situation is unprecedented and critical, and requires the actions of all-hands-on-deck," Mark Ghilarducci, director of the California Office of Emergency Services, said during a conference call with reporters and state officials. "Over the last year this drought has taken a toll on our cities, our farms and our natural environment."State officials in calling for shared sacrifice stressed multiple times that it's not an issue of penalties for residents while agriculture drinks up most of the state's water unfettered. This came as journalists peppered the department heads with questions about water use by farms and other large businesses."Drought is not an issue over who is impacted the most, but rather drought is impacting all of us," said Chuck Bonham, director of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. "It's not about people or the environment, fish or farms. The task in front of us is how we make it through together."Brown in his executive order directed the state Water Resources Control Board to impose the 25 percent water use reduction compared with last year. Local agencies will decide how to get customers to reduce consumption, state water board Chairwoman Felicia Marcus said. Higher rates for greater use is one likely option.When asked whether rationing now would be used, Marcus didn't respond directly but said that "there will clearly be some sort of limits." Local agencies will "need to limit it to meet the targets that we set for them."A statewide 25 percent cutback is the goal, but a "sliding scale" will be developed to factor in that some places already have conserved more than others, Marcus said. Regions that haven't yet voluntarily cut back therefore could face mandates to reduce by more than one-fourth. The board will develop rules over the next month.City agencies will be put in charge because "it's not like we can chase after everybody and their backyard from the state level," Marcus said. The state can access $10,000-per-day penalties on local bodies that fail to enforce water cutbacks, she said."We do have that authority, and we won't be afraid to use it," Marcus said. However, when asked whether municipal agencies would face a $10,000 fine for their first offense, Marcus said: "We may well do progressive enforcement. It just depends on the situation."California on average uses about 140 gallons per person per day, while in Australia -- which endured an extended drought -- it's 54 gallons per person per day, said Heather Cooley, water program director at the Pacific Institute, a research group.Marcus yesterday said higher use in California mostly stems from outdoor watering. The state could significantly cut its water use by reducing irrigation, she said. It will be up to local agencies to crack down on golf courses, people refilling swimming pools, mega-mansions and other big users.The state will roll out incentives directed at replacing 50 million square feet of lawns with drought-tolerant landscaping, said Mark Cowin, director of the California Department of Water Resources. Many local agencies already have been offering money to eliminate lawns, such as "cash for grass" in Los Angeles (Greenwire, July 2, 2014). The state will aim to help underserved communities, Cowin said. There is no dollar amount set yet.The California Energy Commission will offer financial incentives for people to replace inefficient toilets, urinals and faucets, said commission Chairman Robert Weisenmiller. The amount available hasn't been determined. 'Balancing act' Brown's edict appeared to unmask some long-simmering tensions between urban and agricultural demands. University of California, Los Angeles, law professor Jonathan Zasloff in a blog post responding to the executive order asked, "Are California's new mandatory water restrictions an April Fool's Day joke?""It's important to keep one number in mind: one-sixth. That is the amount of California water that goes to one crop: alfalfa," Zasloff wrote. "It's a pretty low-value crop. And it is not even for human consumption directly; it is used for cattle feed. It could be grown much more easily in the better-watered eastern US, but why should farmers worry about it? They are getting free water based on antiquated water rights law."The Imperial Irrigation District, based in Southern California's Imperial Valley where alfalfa is grown, owns close to one-third of the state's water rights, he said. California's complicated water rights law prioritizes those who were first in line with privileges preceding 1914, when the current allocation structure was created.During the conference call with state officials, there were questions about the reason for targeting urban users when the agricultural sector consumes 80 percent of the water for human use.State officials said it's not accurate to say there's not enforcement against farms because water deliveries have been dramatically cut. The federal government's Central Valley Water Project has reduced its deliveries to zero. The State Water Project, a mammoth system of canals and pumps that transports water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to Southern California, has cut its allocations to 20 percent."The enforcement in this case is that we are curtailing water available to them," Cowin said.For farmers, "it's a much harsher world that they live in," Marcus said, adding that water cutoffs have led to the fallowing of fields.State officials during the call also were asked about growers of almonds and pistachios, which are reputed to be big water consumers. California Department of Food and Agriculture Secretary Karen Ross said they are "very efficient users of water," although she said she did not have exact information on how much water almond crops use.California-grown almonds are one of the state's most lucrative crops and a top agricultural export, going to China, Spain, India, Germany and the United Arab Emirates, according to the California drought report.Asked about the tension between water consumption by nut growers and the 25 percent mandatory cut on urban users, Ross said it was a "balancing act." She noted that the nut crops "have high demand, high markets, and are not grown in many other places in the world.""The use of water is required for all things that we do in the state. It's required for our economy. It's required for growing food crops. It's required for our very quality of life," Ross said. "As people move to more and more plant-based proteins and nutrient-rich foods, that has driven high demand for the very crops that we grow here in California." Surcharges planned As the state looks to local districts to enforce the 25 percent cut, the biggest water wholesaler is planning changes that will mean higher costs for those who use more.The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), a consortium that supplies water to 19 million people, starting July 1 will impose surcharges on member agencies that exceed their allocation. MWD supplies water to the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Municipal Water District of Orange County and San Diego County Water Authority among others.Under the new structure, agencies that use 100 to 115 percent of their allocation will pay a surcharge of $1,480 for each acre-foot over their limit (an acre-foot is water covering an acre up to a foot high).The municipal agencies are likely to pass those costs along to ratepayers, MWD spokesman Bob Muir said.MWD can't ration, he said, because it just supplies to the agencies, which in turn provide water to households and businesses."We don't actually cut off water. It will be a price signal," Muir said.The pending surcharge comes as MWD debates how much it will reduce the supplies it delivers to agencies this summer. The wholesaler is the largest customer of the State Water Project, which at one point sent more than a billion gallons of water per day from the delta to Southern California (E&E Daily, March 27).This year, however, delta deliveries dropped by about two-thirds, leaving MWD facing tough decisions about how much of its own resources to use up. MWD directors on April 14 will decide how much water the wholesaler can afford to withdraw from its reserves. That in addition to Brown's executive order will influence the amount municipal agencies must cut."You're definitely going to see a reduction," Muir said. Delta barricades Brown's executive order also instructs the Department of Water Resources to plan for installing rock barriers in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, which supplies water to two-thirds of California, in order to prevent salt water from entering the rivers due to low flows. The option had been considered last year as well but was never implemented (Greenwire, April 10, 2014).The move is unpopular with environmentalists and delta residents because it would have the effect of blocking river flows for fish trying to make it through the delta, including the threatened delta smelt. The barrier would also interfere with boating and recreation."It's much worse this year because the impacts would be worse this year on water quality," said Barbara Barrigan-Parilla, executive director of Restore the Delta, a nonprofit composed of fishing, farming, development and environmental interests. Water levels are lower, so temperatures will be higher due to stagnant water. "The impacts are really quite frightening," she said.Cowin with the Department of Water Resources said that "if we do not see additional precipitation in April, we likely will have to pursue installation of these barriers."Reporter Debra Kahn contributed.Twitter: @annecmulkern | Email: amulkern at eenews.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Apr 3 06:45:28 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 13:45:28 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard: Local water cuts likely despite surplus water reservoir Message-ID: <1894087114.4446874.1428068728192.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Local water cuts likely despite surplus water reservoir | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | Local water cuts likely despite surplus water reservoirAfter Gov. Jerry Brown ordered unprecedented mandatory water cuts across the state this week in response to a record low snow pack, local water officials are again ... | | | | View on www.times-standard.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | ? Local water cuts likely despite surplus water reservoir By?Will Houston, Eureka Times-StandardPOSTED:?04/02/15, 9:32 PM PDT?|0 COMMENTSAfter Gov. Jerry Brown ordered unprecedented mandatory water cuts across the state this week in response to a record low snow pack, local water officials are again concerned that the state?s sweeping restrictions to contest the drought are leaving little leg room for areas where supplies are ample.Speaking a few hours before the McKinleyville Community Services District Board of Directors voted unanimously to approve previously state-mandated water regulation on Wednesday night, district General Manager Greg Orsini said that they will likely run out of the ability to make further cuts before it runs out of water.?Our per capita consumption of water is lower than the state average,? he said. ?We?re only going to be able to cut so much water before we ask people to stop taking showers and washing clothes and drinking from faucets.?Brown?s Wednesday order calls for the State Water Resource Control Board to impose water restrictions that will lead to a 25 percent reduction in urban water usage statewide from usage levels recorded in 2013. Suppliers will have until the end of February 2016 to reach that goal. The order further states that the extent of the restrictions on water suppliers will be proportional to their per capita water use, with areas with higher usage rates having harsher rules.The order was issued a few hours before two local suppliers ? Arcata and the McKinleyville Community Services District ? were set to approve cuts to outdoor water irrigation in their areas to adhere to the State Water Board?s mandate issued last month that called for cuts to outdoor irrigation. At Wednesday?s Arcata City Council meeting, City Manager Karen Diemer requested that the modification to the city?s required drought contingency plan ? which would have limited outdoor irrigation to two days a week ? be pulled until May 6 due to Brown?s order as well as other considerations.On Thursday, Arcata Environmental Services Director Mark Andre said that city staff is waiting to see what regulations the State Water Board will create in response to Brown?s order before the City Council votes on any changes to its contingency plan.?It will give us a chance to perhaps integrate some of those restrictions into this so we don?t do it piecemeal,? he said.Unlike most areas in the state where reservoirs are depleting, Arcata, McKinleyville and several other municipalities in the Humboldt Bay region enjoy a surplus of water at the Ruth Lake reservoir, which is currently at full capacity. The Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District holds water rights to the reservoir and sells the water wholesale to the municipalities and other industrial customers. District General Manager Carol Rische said her district has requested to be exempted from the state?s past two water mandates due to the ?surplus? of water, but the state has denied both requests.?When we?re seriously in a shortage and we ask the community to do things to conserve, we want them to trust and believe in us,? she said. ?That?s one of the things about this that has been a little frustrating for us.?Since the Samoa pulp mill shut down, 80 percent of the district?s water demand has been cut, according to Rische.Since the State Water Board required that large water providers submit monthly water use data last summer, the McKinleyville Community Services District has consistently decreased water use compared to the same month the year before. But since the state as a whole did not meet Brown?s call for a voluntary 20 percent reduction, the State Water Board mandated suppliers to set limits for outdoor irrigation. On Wednesday night, the McKinleyville Community Services District voted to limit outdoor irrigation to Sundays, Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays.Eureka?s Public Works Director Brian Gerving said that he plans to bring proposed changes to the city?s drought contingency plan to the city council on April 21 to adhere to both the State Water Board?s March order and Brown?s order.?This is definitely going to be a challenge statewide to achieve 25 percent reduction, but particularly in Humboldt County where people have already been doing a really good job of limiting their water use,? he said.In addition to urban water use, the governor?s order calls for restrictions on commercial, industrial and institutional properties. While the examples provided in the order include campuses, golf courses and cemeteries, Rische said she is still waiting to see the full extent of the restrictions that could potentially impact the industrial customers her district serves.One of these industrial customers is DG Fairhaven Power, LLC, which produces biomass power by reusing renewable organic wood materials.?Are you really going to force a renewable power company to reduce its power generation when you also have the goals of a 20 percent renewable energy portfolio?? Rische asked. ?... Until we see the final regulations we?re not going to have clarity.?Rische said that the restrictions could have an impact on municipal revenues generated by selling water to customers.Even though Arcata derives 20 percent of its water from groundwater wells in addition to the full reservoir at Ruth Lake, Andre said the city will do its part to comply with the governor?s request.?It?s a drastic situation statewide, and I hope it starts to rain,? Andre said.A resident of Humboldt County during the drought of 1977, Andre said past practices that worked during that time period could also be ?dusted off? and put to use in the current situation.?Periodically putting those practices into place to get through these kind of periods makes it easier in the future so it?s not too chaotic,? he said.A summary and copy of the governor?s full executive order can be found online at Office of Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. - Newsroom | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | Office of Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. - NewsroomGovernor Brown Directs First Ever Statewide Mandatory Water Reductions | | | | View on gov.ca.gov | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Apr 3 07:09:42 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 14:09:42 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com Editorial: All water users should conserve Message-ID: <1767969995.4454051.1428070182204.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Editorial: All water users should conserve | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | Editorial: All water users should conserveNo matter how much water residents save, their use can?t compare to agricultural users. | | | | View on www.redding.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | Editorial: All water users should conserve At this point, four years into the drought, nobody should be surprised that Gov. Jerry Brown has issued the strictest water-waste prevention and monitoring measures in state history.The only surprise is that the actions didn?t come sooner ? say last year, when Brown declared the drought was a state of emergency.But hope springs eternal and politicians like to take their time. We can only guess the rains that pelted us for much of December looked so promising the bureaucrats were temporarily distracted.In fact, those of us who don?t live in towns or districts with limited annual water allocations probably haven?t been paying much attention either. Last year Brown ordered voluntary 20 percent reductions in water use, but Californians exceeded that goal only once ? hitting 22 percent in that very soggy December.Just days ago while signing a $1.1 billion emergency drought relief bill, Brown darkly promised there was more regulation to come.But his executive order Wednesday is lopsided, relying more on cuts by local water users and providers, who use 20 percent of the state?s water, and issuing lesser orders to agriculture, which soaks up 80 percent of the state?s supply. Nor does it mention oil companies and the water used for fracking.To be fair, as a state water board spokesman noted, earlier this year agriculture took ?enormous cuts? to water deliveries, but that doesn?t mean that most farms have changed their reliance on thirsty crops and thirstier orchards.And though the state is implementing a groundwater regulation package, there are no restrictions on pumping from the aquifers. The spokesman pointed out there are drilling and pumping costs for wells, but do those costs mean anything to corporate farmers?Redding was among many cities that, while implementing water regulations aimed at reducing usage, did not require residents to cut use by a specific percentage. In fact, Redding had enough water to sell some to the perpetually parched Bella Vista Water District.Now statewide reductions are 25 percent of water used last year ? and mandatory. Restrictions imposed by the state Water Resources Control Board will look at per capita uses in each area and those with higher usage last year will have to make it up with proportionally greater reductions this year.Across the state water agencies are being told to adjust their rate structures to discourage water waste. Surcharges, fees and penalties are suggested too. You use too much ? you pay a steep price.From now on, ?permanently,? according to Brown?s executive order, urban water suppliers will report water usage, conservation and enforcement actions to the state. Until now many cities had ignored the state?s request for information.No matter how much water residents save, their use can?t compare to agricultural users. Though Brown?s order requires drought management plans and steady reporting on how farmers intend to manage water demand during the drought and where they expect to get their water, there are no actual cutbacks. The idea is that through the reports the state will discover, and control or eradicate illegal water diversions.Brown promises swift action against illegal diverters and ?wasteful and irresponsible? water use, but penalties are vague. They need to be spelled out so there?s no question about consequences.The report does not directly address the vast overpumping of ground water supplies. As National Public Radio reported just hours before Brown?s order Wednesday, farmers have turned to digging more and more wells, to the point where San Joaquin Valley is sinking at the rate of a half-inch a month as wells are literally sucked dry. Farmers have long objected to well-water monitoring on the basis that they own the water under their farms. But the aquifers don?t follow property lines. Wells on one property can?t help but affect surrounding lands.It?s clear throughout the order that Brown expects cooperation from local water agencies, but nowhere in his order does he directly address how the water board will enforce many of its provisions.If they are to work and be taken seriously, these new restrictions need evenhanded and steady enforcement across the state. There are always some who will do their best to conserve, with or without penalties, but those who blithely assume others will save for them need to be targeted.And the governor needs to do something more about corporate water wasters, no matter who they are. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Apr 4 10:57:58 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2015 17:57:58 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] LA Times: $25-billion Sacramento-San Joaquin delta tunnel project reexamined Message-ID: <1018605533.231817.1428170278840.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> DWR Proposal to Jettison NCCP and HCP elements of the Water Tunnels-Today?s LA Times:?To obtain the 50-year permit, the state and water exporters would have to commit to maintaining those outflows under a variety of conditions over half a century. They could do that by either paying upstream diverters to release water that would flow through the delta or by reducing water exports. That would cost more money and water than they can commit to now."If we jettison the 50-year permit term," Cowin said, "we may wind up having to put those kinds of assets on the table over time. But we don't have to do it up front."?? $25-billion Sacramento-San Joaquin delta tunnel project reexamined ?http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-delta-tunnels-20150404-story.html?Bettina BoxallGov. Jerry Brown's administration is overhauling its proposal for a controversial tunnel project in the Sacramento-San Joaquin delta in the wake of doubts about whether water exporters can meet stringent federal conditions for operating the system over a 50-year period.The $25-billion Bay Delta Conservation Plan is intended to lessen the environmental harm of delta water exports by restoring about 100,000 acres of delta fish and wildlife habitat and building two massive tunnels under the delta that would carry Sacramento River water from a new diversion point to existing pumping facilities that fill southbound aqueducts.A major goal of the plan is to gain a 50-year environmental permit for delta exports that would ease the endangered species restrictions that have cut delta deliveries to San Joaquin Valley growers and the urban Southland.But state water officials have concluded that the federal requirements for such long-term approvals are too onerous for the water exporters to meet."We are considering a lot of different ways of proceeding with the program," said Mark Cowin, director of the state Department of Water Resources. He declined to provide details.Sources familiar with the state discussions said that it is likely the department will separate the habitat restoration component from the tunnel proposal and pursue shorter-term operating permits for the new diversion facilities and existing pumping operations. Although the Bay Delta plan included restoration money, it is unclear how the separate restoration effort would be funded or carried out.lRelated?CALIFORNIAOverpumping of Central Valley groundwater creating a crisis, experts saySee all related8While the changes would not affect construction of the tunnels, they have raised concerns that the restoration work could fall by the wayside. And the revisions, expected to be released in coming weeks, could also make the project less attractive to the urban water and agricultural irrigation districts that have promised to pick up the roughly $15-billion construction tab.Cowin said that while changes are still being worked out, the state will move ahead with plans to both build the tunnels and restore delta habitat."I'm as committed to improving delta conveyance and making the other necessary improvements to the delta ? as I've ever been," Cowin said.We are considering a lot of different ways of proceeding with the program. - Mark Cowin, state Department of Water ResourcesThe tunnel proposal, in the planning stages for nearly nine years, predates Brown's administration. But it is a variation of a doomed peripheral canal project Brown supported in his second term as governor. Voters in 1982 killed that proposal, which called for the construction of a large canal to carry Sacramento River water around the delta to export pumps.Proponents say the new diversion point and tunnels would reduce harmful environmental impacts of the pumping operations, which draw directly from the south delta, killing delta smelt and migrating salmon.The pumps are so powerful that they reverse the direction of delta waterways and have profoundly altered natural hydrologic cycles.Although the current tunnel project was not conceived as drought protection, backers say easing pumping restrictions would allow more water to be sent south of the delta in wet years, boosting drought reserves in the Southland and San Joaquin Valley.cComments - ABSENT government meddling, what is the real value of water to; residential users? farmers? orchardists? industry? FISH? Government adjudication of water rights has been a corrupting mess. There should be a fair Constitutional answer if it can only be found. Those who expend effort & $$ to... jim ewinsat 7:52 AM April 04, 2015Add a comment?See all comments2The plan revisions would represent more than just a bureaucratic change. The agricultural and urban water districts that are the major drivers of the long-planned project were betting that a 50-year permit would stabilize delta deliveries that have been restricted by increasingly stringent protections for endangered fish.Reverting to shorter-term approvals would leave future water deliveries vulnerable to cuts associated with a change in permit conditions. And that raises questions of whether the project is still worth the money to the districts that have promised to pay for the tunnels."We don't really know what the permitting will be 10 years from now, 15 years from now," said Jeffrey Kightlinger, general manager of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which would cover a portion of the tunnels' cost. "That's the challenge in making sure it's a sound investment. Does it pencil out and still make sense?"Drought will prove a formidable opponent in Brown's final term?On the other hand, Kightlinger said that if the water exporters don't have to plan for a half century of evolving delta conditions, "it makes an easier path to permitting" and construction, which is expected to take seven years."I think there are pros and cons" to what the state is considering, he said.Federal fishery agencies have not been persuaded that the habitat improvements will significantly benefit imperiled fish. They also are demanding higher outflows of fresh water from the delta to the ocean to help restore natural hydrologic cycles with which native fish evolved.To obtain the 50-year permit, the state and water exporters would have to commit to maintaining those outflows under a variety of conditions over half a century. They could do that by either paying upstream diverters to release water that would flow through the delta or by reducing water exports. That would cost more money and water than they can commit to now."If we jettison the 50-year permit term," Cowin said, "we may wind up having to put those kinds of assets on the table over time. But we don't have to do it up front."Supported by the largest urban water and irrigation districts in the state, the tunnel project is opposed by delta residents and many environmentalists who argue it will lead to greater exports at the expense of the delta environment.Separating plans for the habitat work from the tunnel construction only adds to their concerns. "Once again, the promise of mitigation and restoration in the delta is taking a back seat," said Patricia Schifferle, director of Pacific Advocates, an environmental group. "One cannot trust that the mitigation will actually get done."bettina.boxall at latimes.com?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 9060 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 3833 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Apr 4 12:00:53 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2015 19:00:53 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Chronicle=3A_California_drought=3A_Why_ma?= =?utf-8?q?ndatory_cuts_didn=E2=80=99t_hit_farms?= Message-ID: <1022562648.243205.1428174053461.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> California drought: Why mandatory cuts didn?t hit farms By?Melody Gutierrez? Updated 7:23?am, Saturday, April 4, 2015 SACRAMENTO ? As Californians prepare for unprecedented mandatory water reductions of 25 percent beginning next month, state officials find themselves defending a decision to exclude the biggest water user in the state in the required cutbacks ? agriculture.Critics have charged that Gov.?Jerry Brown?s order unfairly exempts agriculture from mandatory water savings, despite the industry?s consumption of 80 percent of the state?s water supply that is available for people, businesses and irrigation.?He?s scratching the surface and not addressing the elephant in the room,? said?Adam Scow, director of the advocacy group Food & Water Watch. RELATED STORIES - Water cutback has golf courses, cemeteries scrambling - Climate change to make California drought worse, report says - California drought: Brown orders 25 percent water use reduction Brown and state officials said agriculture has already taken a significant hit in the drought, with farmers? water allotments reduced by state and federal agencies ? a reduction that has forced farmers to?fallow fields, pay higher prices for water and lay off thousands of workers. This year, California farmers who rely on water deliveries from the federal Central Valley Project have been told they will receive nothing due to the drought, while the State Water Project will deliver 20 percent of promised water.?How do you take a reduction below zero?? asked?Joel Nelsen, president of?California Citrus Mutual, a trade association for citrus producers in the state, many of whom rely on the Central Valley Project. ?I don?t get it. The end result is we?ve already lost any and all surface water we could have received, so you can?t take any more from us.?Mandatory cutsOn Wednesday, Brown announced the first-ever mandatory cutbacks for residential and business water users as he stood in a browned meadow in the Sierra Nevada that is typically covered in snow. Brown joined snow surveyors for the annual survey, where the lowest levels ever recorded were entered into California?s record books. The water content in the snow was just 5 percent of normal ? the lowest it has been since records were compiled starting in 1950.Brown?s order called for urban users to reduce water use by 25 percent and create programs to help homeowners replace grass with drought-tolerant landscaping, and replace water-guzzling dishwashers and toilets with more efficient ones. Brown also called on farmers to share more information about the water they are using.?Agriculture is fundamental to California,? Brown told ?NewsHour? on PBS. ?And, yes, they use most of the water, and they produce the food and the fiber that we all depend on and which we export to countries all around the world. So, we?re asking them too to give us information, to file agriculture water plans, to manage their underground water, to share with other farmers.?A?UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences?study last year found the 2014 drought resulted in a 6.6 million-acre-foot reduction in surface water available to farmers. (One acre-foot of water is equivalent to roughly a football field covered in a foot of water.) That?s a 25 percent reduction in the normal amount of surface water available to agriculture, the study found. And it was mostly replaced by increased groundwater pumping.?When people question what are farmers doing, many are fallowing grounds and watching their perennial crops die, even in historically water-rich areas,? said?David Doll, a Merced County nut crop adviser through the?University of California Cooperative Extension.Doll, who advises farmers on best practices for efficient watering and other sustainability issues, said many farmers have upgraded their irrigation systems so there is little waste.Farmers hit hard?This drought impacts farming severely,? Doll said. ?I think in many cases we don?t understand how bad it will affect agriculture until the end of the year.?Higher water prices and more than 400,000 acres of fallowed fields cost farmers $2.2 billion statewide last year, the Watershed Sciences study found, with 17,000 seasonal and part-time farmworker jobs eliminated.?Agriculture is already getting substantial cutbacks,? said?Jay Lund, director of the Center for Watershed Sciences.Lund said requiring a mandatory 25 percent reduction in water use by agriculture is also unfeasible.?You don?t meter their groundwater use, so you can?t regulate it,? Lund said. ?It?s not enforceable, and it?s not a good idea. You do have to cut agriculture in a drought, but we need to be more thoughtful and compassionate about it. You are messing with peoples? livelihoods.?Nelsen of the citrus growers trade group said the roughly 3,500 citrus growers in California, which provide 85 percent of the nation?s fresh lemons, oranges and other citrus fruits, are preparing for a down year, due to fallowed fields, port strikes and smaller fruit attributed to reduced watering. He said the state needs to consider reducing the water directed for environmental purposes, which makes up nearly half of the overall water supply ? this includes both water available for agriculture, industry and urban uses and water that is off-limits to help sustain fish and wildlife. Agriculture uses 80 percent of the water available for drinking and irrigation ? but 40 percent of the total supply.??When people argue that agriculture wasn?t included, maybe not in this order,? Nelsen said. ?All the impact has already occurred. ...What do we do with the water supply? We produce food. I don?t think that?s a bad use of water.?Critics charge that agriculture?s dominance over the state?s water supply is lopsided when considering the industry accounts for just 2 percent of the state?s gross domestic product. Critics say the $40 billion agriculture industry has too much political pull in the state Capitol, accounting for lax regulations.Political cloutNowhere was that seen more than last year?s fight to create groundwater regulations in California, the only Western state that does not monitor its underground water supplies. Pushback from agriculture interests helped delay the implementation of the legislation until 2022.Tom Stokely, a spokesman for the environmental group the California Water Impact Network, said Brown?s mandatory drought order further shows that agriculture?s clout has allowed the industry to resist regulation.?It?s a good thing for urban users to conserve water, but since agriculture uses 80 percent of water, he missed the mark by not including agriculture,? Stokely said. ?A lot of people feel their efforts to conserve water are so that a wealthy almond farmer can plant more trees and make greater profit.?'Need to pull together?Stokely said there were reasonable measures the governor could have taken to ensure the drought isn?t being exacerbated.?What was glaringly omitted was a prohibition of new crops in areas of groundwater overdraft, unreliable water supplies and what we call poison land, where they have land high in selenium,? Stokely said.Water policy experts said the kind of finger-pointing seen following Brown?s order has been intensifying as the drought worsens.?You are starting to see that,? said Heather Cooley, director of the water program at the Pacific Institute in Oakland. ?Urban vs. agriculture. Fish vs. farm. People tend to first look at others. But, the fact is we need to pull together.??Melody Gutierrez is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail:?mgutierrez at sfchronicle.com?Twitter: @MelodyGutierrezCalifornia drought: Why mandatory cuts didn?t hit farms | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | California drought: Why mandatory cuts didn?t hit farmsSACRAMENTO ? As Californians prepare for unprecedented mandatory water reductions of 25 percent beginning next month, state officials find themselves defending... | | | | View on?www.sfgate.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Apr 6 07:29:24 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 14:29:24 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Capitol Journal Why do farmers get a free pass from Brown? Message-ID: <678676749.223523.1428330564761.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-cap-drought-20150406-column.html?track=rss ?Capitol Journal? Why do farmers get a free pass from Brown? - Politics and Government ADDRESS: George Skelton LOS ANGELES TIMESgeorge.skelton?@latimes.comGov. Jerry Brown targets the 20% of developed water that flows to urban use; ag takes up the other 80%Gov. Jerry Brown is talking tough about cutting back water use, but he's making one thing clear: He is not going to tell farmers what they can or cannot grow."I believe farmers should grow whatever they want," he told me and a dinner companion at venerable Frank Fat's restaurant near the Capitol about two weeks ago.Brown stopped by briefly after dining with others and commented about crop regulation without being asked. Then he headed for the door.California's wealthy lagging in water conservationTwo days earlier, I had written a column suggesting it was time state government consider regulating crops based on their water demands and location ? whether grown, for example, on the arid west side of the San Joaquin Valley or up north where it's wetter. This is particularly true for permanent crops ? orchards and vineyards ? that cannot be fallowed during droughts as vegetables can.Almonds are especially thirsty in the southern San Joaquin. But there's a lucrative overseas market for them so growers have been planting more and more trees. Basically, one almond requires a gallon of water to produce.Last week, Brown elaborated on his hands-off-crops position, starting at a Sierra photo op that made newspaper front pages and attracted national TV. Standing on bare ground where there's normally snow, the governor unveiled his new drought-survival plan.lRelated? - POLITICS - Thirsty crops should require state regulation SEE ALL RELATED8It includes tightening the spigot on lawns, golf courses and cemeteries, even digging up grass and substituting drought-resistant landscaping, letting road median strips go brown and junking old appliances."As Californians, we have to pull together and save water in every way we can," the governor declared. "Overall, we're looking for a 25% aggregate reduction...."People should realize, we're in a new era. The idea of your nice little green grass getting lots of water every day, that's going to be a thing of the past.... In many parts of California, they're living in a desert or semi-arid desert and we have to begin to live in more conformity to what nature makes available."But wait a second: He wasn't demanding a 25% cut in overall water use. He was seeking 25% of 20% ? equal to 5% of the total. His target is only the 20% of developed water that flows to urban use. Agriculture devours the other 80%.cComments - Governor Brown is right about California?s water shortage problem, BUT does he really think that cutting our consumption by 5% is the solution? Since the farmers 80% is excluded, a 25% reduction of the remaining 20% = 5% savings overall. At the current price of water, we?re incentivized to...RONALDSTEINAT 7:09 AM APRIL 06, 2015 ADD A COMMENTSEE ALL COMMENTS26Reporters asked, what about that?"Agriculture has already suffered major cutbacks," he replied. "A lot of people are letting their land go fallow. Trees are dying. Farmers have been hit very hard."True. Farmers without senior water rights ? those granted prior to 1914 ? are expecting no deliveries for the second straight year from the federal Central Valley Project. Growers supplied by the State Water Project will receive only 20% of requested deliveries. Last year, more than 400,000 acres ?were left unplanted.Farmers have been trying to recapture the loss by over-pumping groundwater. The water table has been plunging and, in some areas, the land is sinking dramatically.The governor last year signed a historic law to manage groundwater ? we were the last Western state to do that ? but it doesn't have to be implemented for two decades.Brown's executive order last week did require irrigation districts to develop drought management plans and begin monitoring groundwater levels, reporting the numbers to Sacramento."So this will be somewhat of a burden" on farmers, the governor said.Brown later was asked on PBS' "NewsHour" why he didn't focus more on agriculture. He replied that a government deciding which crops to allow is "Big Brother. Outside of war or unprecedented catastrophe, that shouldn't even be considered."This does seem to be an unprecedented drought ? Brown even says so ? but never mind.Brown's state water director, Mark Cowin, who grew up on a San Joaquin Valley farm, echoed the governor's sentiment when I talked to him. "Farming is a business," he said. "How are we to judge" which crops should be grown?How about by the amount of water they gulp? And government could regulate that business the way it does others, telling landowners what they can do with their property, whether it's suitable for housing, a mall or a dump.Yes, agriculture is a business, but it uses 80% of our water and accounts for only 2% of the state's economy.Cowin did acknowledge: "It troubles me to drive around and see new plantings of almonds." But he added that those farmers "take the risk" financially.They also might be taking the groundwater of their neighbors by drilling deeper.But, Cowin continued, all bets are off if the drought drags on."I've been thinking about this a lot," he said. "At the end of the day, if there's a five- or 10-year drought, the state will use all the authority it has to redirect water from agriculture to the health and safety of urban users."Felicia Marcus, chairwoman of the state water board, which will write the details of Brown's plan, also defends laying off agriculture."Agriculture water goes to growing food, which is important to urban areas," she said. "Someone in L.A. may have more in common with a Central Valley farmer than the guy next door watering his lawn."What if the food isn't consumed in L.A., but is exported to Asia? "We can't be an island," she said, "and only grow food for ourselves."But maybe we should if the drought lingers. Otherwise, with every shipped almond we also export a gallon of water.Twitter: @LATimesSkelton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Apr 6 07:55:11 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 14:55:11 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Editorial: On water, Big Ag should ante up, too Message-ID: <1056919820.255149.1428332111658.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/editorials/article17360846.html On water, Big Ag should ante up, tooAll must do more; regulators need a cultural changeBY THE EDITORIAL BOARD04/04/2015 5:01 PM 04/05/2015 12:01 AM - - Comments (3) As the rest of California comes to grips with the state?s historic new water mandates, there?s an elephant in the room. And it?s wearing a farmer?s hat.Gov. Jerry Brown?s order for a 25 percent cut in water consumption homed in hard on towns and cities. From now into an uncertain future, the nice voluntary things many of us have been doing ? the drought-tolerant flowerbeds, the slightly shorter showers ? are going to have to be just the beginning of a much more water-conscious lifestyle.Heaven knows, it is long past time for homeowners here to wake up and smell the Dust Bowl. But with groundwater tables shrinking and the Sierra snowpack fading toward zero, with new rules that are going to cramp everyone from cemetery owners to car washers, even those of us who have already taken a hit are rethinking old habits.So why isn?t more being asked of the constituency that uses 80 percent of the state?s developed water?What about agriculture?That?s the question that keeps coming up.Farmers reply that they already have given for four crushing years at the office. When droughts hit, farms are among the first to feel the effects.More than a half-million acres of California agricultural land were fallowed last year as federal allotments from the Central Valley Project, which allocates water from the state?s reservoirs, were slashed to zero. The state?s farm economy lost more than $2 billion. Seventeen thousand jobs went by the wayside, not counting the collateral damage, from truckers to dockworkers.The toll is expected to double this year, with as many as a million acres of melons, broccoli, rice, lettuce and other crops in peril. Indisputably, agriculture has suffered.But when the governor and others talk about this being a new era, they aren?t talking just about making ends meet until things get back to normal. Normal is gone. We need to re-engineer the way we manage water in every sector, and fast.Already, planners and advocates are talking about ?net-zero? water ordinances that would force developers to balance their additional water footprint by paying for conservation elsewhere, or to make projects self-sufficient with recycled water and rainwater collected on-site.And conservationists are asking whether now is finally the time to require Californians statewide to retrofit properties with sustainable water systems, such as low-flow toilets and drip irrigation, as a condition of resale.These are systemic changes, and we?re all making them. We can?t afford to let agriculture be the exception.Unfortunately, change has never been particularly welcome in California?s farm sector. And the painfully deliberate culture of the state?s water regulators, which would make a snail?s pace look like the Indy 500, hasn?t been giving them much encouragement.For instance, one way that farmers are partially compensating for their lost surface water is by pumping groundwater. Groundwater is precious. But in years wet and dry, and in farms and cities, Californians have tapped it to the point that we don?t have nearly enough now that we?re in this mess.In the San Joaquin Valley, the aquifers have been sucked so dry that the earth is sinking. That?s one reason why the state last year passed a historic groundwater bill to address the plunder.Problem is, the timeline is so slow that decades are likely to pass before meaningful curbs are implemented. By that time, some places will be lucky to have any groundwater left.That timeline needs to be accelerated. Yes, regulating a giant collection of shrinking underground reservoirs is a huge task. And yes, sorting out historic water rights is eye-glazingly complex.But even battleships manage to turn when the need is urgent. We should at least make the attempt.The governor?s executive order last week offered a good start, requiring local agencies to pick up the pace on reporting and monitoring groundwater elevations, and threatening state action if they don?t comply by year end.But other aspects of the new law need to be stepped up, too. For example, incredibly, even in this grinding drought, some agricultural investors are still planting almond orchards, and, in some cases, deliberately locating them just outside the borders of irrigation districts.It?s a trick, water attorneys say: Almonds are lucrative and the lag time in the groundwater law effectively gives them a free ride into the next decade. But this kind of rogue exploitation just steals from our future. Hastening the groundwater law implementation would put some brakes on it.Other priorities need to be fast-tracked as well.For example, the state?s system, such as it is, for transferring unused water is opaque and inefficient.Counties should have more authority to regulate long-term agricultural installations ? like new orchards ? just as they would, say, new subdivisions.And as many as 40 percent of the state?s farmers, by some estimates, still use flood irrigation. Getting more drip irrigation in place, quickly, would be a huge opportunity to conserve.Picking up the pace, however, is a bigger ask than it should be.From top to bottom, the culture of water regulation in California needs to somehow dig deep and start getting aggressive. This state?s Water Resources Control Board?s online database is antiquated and spotty, and the board still is taking years and decades to complete work that ought to be done in a few months.Whether it?s more staffing or more strategic direction, Brown needs to light a fire under his people and give them the tools to do real-time water management.These are not overnight projects, but we can?t stretch them out, either. Clinging to tradition is a luxury of the past. This slow-motion natural disaster we are in has moved into high gear, and we have to be nimble. Even the elephants. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Mon Apr 6 09:31:52 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 09:31:52 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Article submission: State proposes emergency fishing closure of Sacramento River section to 'protect' winter Chinook! In-Reply-To: <1056919820.255149.1428332111658.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1056919820.255149.1428332111658.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2C68E1AB-D7F7-4068-B89F-EE88259D17AF@fishsniffer.com> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/06/1375930/-State-proposes-emergency-fishing-closure-of-Sacramento-River-to-protect-winter-Chinook State proposes emergency fishing closure of Sacramento River section to 'protect' winter Chinook! by Dan Bacher The Brown administration, in collaboration with the Obama administration, has driven winter run Chinook closer to extinction through the abysmal management of Northern California reservoirs and rivers over the past three drought years. Over 95 percent of winter Chinook eggs and young fish perished last year, due to the virtual emptying of Trinity Reservoir on the Trinity River, Shasta Lake on the Sacramento River, Lake Oroville on the Feather River and Folsom Lake on the American River to supply water during a record drought to corporate agribusiness interests, Southern California water agencies and oil companies conducting fracking steam injection operations in Kern County. So what does the Brown administration propose to do to deal with this disaster? Yes, it is proposing to close a 5.5 mile stretch of the Sacramento River to "protect" the winter run! The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) announced in a press release that it will be holding a public meeting to "solicit comments" on a proposed closure of 5.5 miles of the Sacramento River above the Highway 44 Bridge in Redding to Keswick Dam. CDFW has determined this closure is necessary to protect endangered winter-run chinook salmon. The anticipated dates of closure are April 27-July 31. "At the department, it pains us to propose this action for the state,? said Stafford Lehr, CDFW Fisheries Branch Chief. ?But we are in unchartered territory here, and we believe this is the right thing to do if we want to help winter run and be able to fish for big rainbows in the long-run.? The meeting will be held Tuesday, April 7, from 4:30-6:30 p.m. at the Redding Public Library,1100 Parkview Ave. in Redding (96001). "CDFW is proposing a complete fishing closure in this critical holding and spawning area to ensure added protection for the federal and state endangered winter-run chinook, which face high risk of extinction. Given the gravity of the current situation, it is imperative that each and every adult fish be given maximum protection. Current regulations do not allow fishing for chinook salmon, but incidental catch by anglers targeting trout could occur," the CDFW stated. "An estimated 98 percent of the in-river spawning is occurring in the 5.5 mile stretch under consideration for closure. This reach is the principle spawning area in these extraordinary drought year conditions. This section represents only 10 percent of the waters currently open to fishing upstream of the Red Bluff Diversion Dam," the release continued. "In 2014, approximately 95 percent of eggs and young winter-run chinook were lost due to elevated river temperatures. Given current drought conditions, it is likely the 2015-year eggs and young salmon will again be subject to extremely trying conditions," the CDFW stated. "CDFW is tasked by the Governor to work with the California Fish and Game Commission to determine whether fishing restrictions in certain areas are necessary and prudent as drought conditions persist. The proposed closure is also in accordance with the state and federal Endangered Species Acts," the Department claimed. The release ended with a call for "saving" water during the drought: "Governor Brown has called on all Californians to reduce their water use by 25 percent. Visit saveourwater.com to find out how everyone can do their part, and visit drought.ca.gov to learn more about how California is dealing with the effects of the drought." Hey, I agree with the CDFW that "it is imperative that each and every adult fish be given maximum protection." The problem is that this emergency situation that we're now in could have been avoided if the state and federal fishery agencies had done their job and challenged the Department of Water Resources and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation for their abysmal management of water during a drought. But instead of standing up to the water contractors and protecting the public trust as it the CDFW's job to do, the Department's current leadership is leading endangered winter run Chinook, as well as Delta and longfin smelt, spring run Chinook, green sturgeon and other species, to the scaffold of extinction. While Jerry Brown is asking cities and counties to reduce water use by 25 percent, corporate agribusiness and oil companies continue to deplete and pollute surface and water supplies throughout the state. Only when the Department has the courage to address the real issue - the needed retirement of drainage impaired land on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley and a ban on fracking - can we hope to ever restore winter run Chinook and other species. As Adam Scow, Food & Water Watch California Director, said so well, "It is disappointing that Governor Brown?s executive order to reduce California water use does not address the state's most egregious corporate water abuses. In the midst of a severe drought, the Governor continues to allow corporate farms and oil interests to deplete and pollute our precious groundwater resources that are crucial for saving water." "The Governor must save our groundwater from depletion by directing the State Water Board to protect groundwater as a public resource. Governor Brown should direct the Water Board to place a moratorium on the use of groundwater for irrigating crops on toxic and dry soils on the westside of the San Joaquin Valley," said Scow. In the two year period covering 2014-2015, the Westlands Water District is on pace to pump over 1 million acre feet of groundwater - more water than Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco combined use in 1 year, according to Scow. Much of Westlands grows water-intensive almonds and pistachios, most of which are exported out of state and overseas. "This is a wasteful and unreasonable water use, especially during a severe drought," emphasized Scow. (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/01/1375000/-Governor-Brown-s-drought-order-lets-corporate-agribusiness-oil-companies-off-the-hook ) I agree. The Brown administration would rather penalize law-abiding anglers for a looming wave of extinctions engineered by state and federal government water policies than really deal with the problem - the over appropriation of water by corporate interests during a record drought! To discover the truth about Governor Brown's environmental record, go to: http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/09/24/big-oils-favorite-governor-jerry-brown/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Apr 6 11:15:01 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 18:15:01 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Capital Public Radio: Almond Rush Raises Tough Questions During Dry Times Message-ID: <951155660.419765.1428344101949.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Almond Rush Raises Tough Questions During Dry Times | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | Almond Rush Raises Tough Questions During Dry TimesExperts predict this year?s almond crop will be the largest and most profitable ever. But, meeting the demand for nuts during a historic drought raises complicated ... | | | | View on www.capradio.org | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Apr 6 13:13:40 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 20:13:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] NEW YORK TIMES- Beneath California Crops, Groundwater Crisis Grows In-Reply-To: <06ac01d07055$14e1ae50$3ea50af0$@erols.com> References: <06ac01d07055$14e1ae50$3ea50af0$@erols.com> Message-ID: <493260203.522845.1428351221299.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Last week, Mr. Brown imposed mandatory cuts in urban water use, the first ever. He exempted farmers, who already had to deal with huge reductions in surface water from the state?s irrigation works. Mr. Brown defended the decision on ABC?s ?This Week? on Sunday, saying, ?They?re providing most of the fruits and vegetables of America to a significant part of the world.? In normal times, agriculture consumes roughly 80 percent of the surface water available for human use in California, and experts say the state?s water crisis will not be solved without a major contribution from farmers. ? Note:? For better view of graphs, click on link. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/06/science/beneath-california-crops-groundwater-crisis-grows.html?emc=edit_th_20150406&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=2424741 New York Times Science Beneath California Crops, Groundwater Crisis Grows By JUSTIN GILLIS and MATT RICHTELAPRIL 5, 2015 Photo A well-drilling rig at an almond orchard in Hanford, Calif. Land devoted to water-thirsty almonds has doubled in the state in 20 years. Credit Max Whittaker for The New York Times Even as the worst drought in decades ravages California, and its cities face mandatory cuts in water use, millions of pounds of thirsty crops like oranges, tomatoes and almonds continue to stream out of the state and onto the nation?s grocery shelves.But the way that California farmers have pulled off that feat is a case study in the unwise use of natural resources, many experts say. Farmers are drilling wells at a feverish pace and pumping billions of gallons of water from the ground, depleting a resource that was critically endangered even before the drought, now in its fourth year, began.California has pushed harder than any other state to adapt to a changing climate, but scientists warn that improving its management of precious groundwater supplies will shape whether it can continue to supply more than half the nation?s fruits and vegetables on a hotter planet. ?As a drilling frenzy unfolds across the Central Valley, California?s agricultural heartland, the consequences of the overuse of groundwater are becoming plain to see.In some places, water tables have dropped 50 feet or more in just a few years. With less underground water to buoy it, the land surface is sinking as much as a foot a year in spots, causing roads to buckle and bridges to crack. Shallow wells have run dry, depriving several poor communities of water.Scientists say some of the underground water-storing formations so critical to California?s future ? typically, saturated layers of sand or clay ? are being permanently damaged by the excess pumping, and will never again store as much water as farmers are pulling out.?Climate conditions have exposed our house of cards,? said Jay Famiglietti, a NASA scientist in Pasadena who studies water supplies in California and elsewhere. ?The withdrawals far outstrip the replenishment. We can?t keep doing this.?Cannon Michael, a farmer who grows tomatoes, melons and corn on 10,500 acres in the town of Los Banos, in the Central Valley, has high priority rights to surface water, which he inherited with his family?s land. But rampant groundwater pumping by farmers near him is causing some of the nearby land to sink, disturbing canals that would normally bring water his way.?Now, water is going to have to flow uphill,? said Mr. Michael, who plans to fallow 2,300 acres this year.Photo Garrett Schaad after plowing a dry field in Dunnigan, Calif. Credit Max Whittaker for The New York Times In the midst of this water crisis, Gov. Jerry Brown and his legislative allies pulled off something of a political miracle last year, overcoming decades of resistance from the farm lobby to adopt the state?s first groundwater law with teeth. California, so far ahead of the country on other environmental issues, became the last state in the arid West to move toward serious limits on the use of its groundwater.Last week, Mr. Brown imposed mandatory cuts in urban water use, the first ever. He exempted farmers, who already had to deal with huge reductions in surface water from the state?s irrigation works. Mr. Brown defended the decision on ABC?s ?This Week? on Sunday, saying, ?They?re providing most of the fruits and vegetables of America to a significant part of the world.?In normal times, agriculture consumes roughly 80 percent of the surface water available for human use in California, and experts say the state?s water crisis will not be solved without a major contribution from farmers.California?s greatest resource in dry times is not its surface reservoirs, though, but its groundwater, and scientists say the drought has made the need for better controls obvious. While courts have taken charge in a few areas and imposed pumping limits, groundwater in most of the state has been a resource anyone could grab.Yet putting strict limits in place is expected to take years. The new law, which took effect Jan. 1, does not call for reaching sustainability until the 2040s. Sustainability is vaguely defined in the statute, but in most basins will presumably mean a long-term balance between water going into the ground and water coming out. Scientists have no real idea if the groundwater supplies can last until the 2040s. Draining the Central Valley Eighty percent of the water used by humans in California goes to agriculture. The state?s Central Valley has 17 percent of the irrigated land in the United States and produces a quarter of the nation?s food. But growing that food takes more water than is available from rain and snow, even in wet years. Snow and Surface WaterSnow accumulates in the mountains until early April, then slowly melts over the spring and summer, flowing downhill into the Central Valley. A drought in recent years has left the Sierra Nevada with a record low snowpack, below, reducing the flow of surface water and increasing the amount of water that must be pumped from wells.NEVADASACRAMENTOVALLEYSan FranciscoSAN JOAQUINBASINMarch 2010March 2015Wells and GroundwaterEven in relatively wet years, wells in the Central Valley are pumping water faster than it can be replenished, and the depth of well water has been falling.TULAREBASINCALIFORNIAChange in well water heightsFrom 2009 to 201425 feet lower25 feet higher100 feet lower100 feet higherLos AngelesThe water table is also falling, though typically less than measurements from individual wells.Change in the amount of groundwaterIn millions of acre-feet0Sacramento ValleySan Joaquin Basin?25?50DRY YEARS?100Note: One acre-foot of water is enough to flood a football field to a depth of nine inches.Tulare Basin?1251925195019752000?10Sources: California Department of Water Resources; NASA; U.S. Geological Survey; Public Policy Institute of California By Jonathan Corum, Josh Keller and Tim Wallace ?I wish we could do it faster,? Mark Cowin, director of California?s Department of Water Resources, said in an interview. ?I wish we would have started decades ago.?But Mr. Cowin noted that the state, after neglecting groundwater management for so long, had a lot of catching up to do. Years of bureaucratic reorganization and rule-drafting lie ahead. ?This is the biggest game-changer of California water management of my generation,? Mr. Cowin said.In the near term, as the drought wears on and the scramble for water intensifies, farmers are among the victims of the drilling frenzy, as well as among its beneficiaries.Growers with older, shallower wells are watching them go dry as neighbors drill deeper and suck the water table down. Pumping takes huge amounts of electricity to pull up deep water, and costs are rising. Some farmers are going into substantial debt to drill deeper wells, engaging in an arms race with their neighbors that they cannot afford to lose.?You see the lack of regulation hurting the agricultural community as much as it hurts anybody else,? said Doug Obegi, a lawyer with the Natural Resources Defense Council in San Francisco.Photo Juan Silva checking a dam in Zamora, Calif. Credit Max Whittaker for The New York Times Against this backdrop, water-thirsty crops like almonds are still being planted in some parts of the Central Valley to supply an insatiable global demand that is yielding high prices.The land devoted to almond orchards in California has doubled in 20 years, to 860,000 acres. The industry has been working hard to improve its efficiency, but growing a single almond can still require as much as a gallon of California?s precious water.The expansion of almonds, walnuts and other water-guzzling tree and vine crops has come under sharp criticism from some urban Californians. The groves make agriculture less flexible because the land cannot be idled in a drought without killing the trees.Not even the strongest advocates of water management foresee a system in which California farmers are told what they can plant. As the new system evolves, though, the growers might well be given strict limits on how much groundwater they can pump, which could effectively rule out permanent crops like nuts and berries in some areas.?We want to be careful in dealing with this drought not to go down the command-and-control route if we can avoid it,? said Daniel Sumner, professor of agricultural and resource economics at the University of California, Davis. ?It interrupts the flexibility, the creativity and the resilience that people in agriculture have already been using to deal with severe water cutbacks.?Photo Fritz Durst inspecting his barley crop in Zamora. Credit Max Whittaker for The New York Times So far, the over-pumping of groundwater has helped farmers manage through three parched growing seasons.They were forced to idle only about 5 percent of the state?s irrigated land last year, though the figure is likely to be higher in 2015. The farmers have directed water to the highest-value crops, cutting lesser crops like alfalfa.They have bought and sold surface water among themselves, making the best use of the available supply, experts like Dr. Sumner say. And the farmers? success at coping with the drought has meant relatively few layoffs of low-income farmworkers.Still, costs are up and profits are down for many farmers and the thousands of small businesses that depend on them, spreading pain throughout the Central Valley and beyond. ?It?s been a tough couple of years, and it?s just getting tougher in rural parts of California,? said Dave Kranz, a spokesman for the California Farm Bureau Federation, a growers? organization.Because groundwater has helped keep production up, replacing a large proportion of the surface water farmers have lost, the drought has not led to big price increases at the national level, even for crops that California dominates.Photo Ten-day-old cornstalks on a farm in Zamora. Credit Max Whittaker for The New York Times Once the drought ends, a growing population and a climate altered by human-caused global warming will continue to put California?s water system under stress, experts say. A major question is how to manage the groundwater to get Californians through dry years.Meeting that goal may have as much to do with how surface water is managed as with how much is pumped from the ground.Several California experts used the metaphor of a bank account to describe the state?s groundwater supply. Deposits need to be made in good times, they said, so that the water can be withdrawn in hard times.Yet for decades, California farmers have been overdrawing many of the state?s water-holding formations ? its aquifers ? even in years when surface water for irrigation was plentiful, the equivalent of overdrawing a checking account.That will need to change, the experts said, with pumping being limited or even prohibited in wet years so that the underground water supply can recharge. Some land may need to be flooded on purpose so the water can seep downward.The need for groundwater recharge may ultimately limit how much water farmers can have from the surface irrigation system, even in flush years ? the same way that deposits in a bank account limit how many fancy dinners one can eat. Yet in a state where irrigation rights have been zealously guarded for generations, such limitations may not go down easily.?It would be silly to think you are not going to have any fights,? said Denise England, the water expert for Tulare County, toward the southern end of the Central Valley. She cited an aphorism of the West: ?Whiskey?s for drinking, and water?s for fighting over.?John Schwartz and Nelson D. Schwartz contributed reporting.The Parched West: Articles in this series are exploring the impact of the drought that has hit states from the Pacific Coast to the Great Plains.A version of this article appears in print on April 6, 2015, on page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: Beneath California Crops, Groundwater Crisis Grows. Related Coverage - ? Californians Who Conserved Wonder if State Can Overcome Those Who Didn?tAPRIL 2, 2015 ? - ? Parched, California Cuts Off Tap to AgenciesJAN. 31, 2014 ? - ? video California?s Extreme Drought, ExplainedAPRIL 1, 2015 ? - ? How to Save Water: The California WayAPRIL 2, 2015 ? - ? interactive How Much Water Californians Use at HomeAPRIL 1, 2015 ?The Parched West Articles in this series will explore the impact of the drought that has hit states from the Pacific Coast to the Great Plains. - California Drought Tests History of Endless GrowthApril 5, 2015 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 83493 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 15849 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 617244 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 73335 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 80408 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 23575 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 2608 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 5459 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 3170 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 3715 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 2535 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 3069 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Apr 6 15:20:09 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 22:20:09 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] E&E: Water managers mull big changes to hot-button replumbing plan Message-ID: <1938254245.605894.1428358809228.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> ""What's kind of ironic, frankly, about that, is that $240 million has been spent on creating a pile of paper without turning a bit of dirt, which from an engineering standpoint is very surprising," said KCWA's assistant general manager, Curtis Creel. KCWA is the largest agricultural contractor of the State Water Project, receiving about a million acre-feet per year in a normal year. CALIFORNIA:Water managers mull big changes to hot-button replumbing planDebra Kahn, E&E reporterPublished: Monday, April 6, 2015California water managers are considering major changes to their long-standing plan to revamp the state's main water hub, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.The Bay Delta Conservation Plan, or BDCP, in the works for the last eight years, would re-engineer the delta so that water would be delivered to the state's arid central and southern regions primarily via two 30-mile tunnels underneath the delta, rather than routed through it to pumps at the southern end. It also includes a massive amount of habitat restoration around the delta, aimed at compensating for past and future damages caused by the pumping and other activities.State officials now are considering separating the project into two objectives: building the tunnels and restoring delta habitat, according to multiple sources. Separating them would eliminate the need for a sweeping, 50-year federal permit that has proven tricky, as federal agencies have heavily criticized the plan for its lack of specificity and potential to degrade water quality (Greenwire, March 13).?The head of the state's Department of Water Resources confirmed to the?Los Angeles Times?on Saturday the agency is adjusting the plan but did not go into details."We are considering a lot of different ways of proceeding with the program," said DWR Director Mark Cowin.Officials have struggled to balance the tenets of water supply and environmental protection over their eight years of planning. They must satisfy both environmental and local delta interests that balk at the delta losing any more water, as well as the water contractors that would be paying for the tunnels with the expectation that they receive more water than they have in recent years.Without the project, they say, the state's water supply will remain vulnerable to cutbacks to protect endangered species as well as earthquakes that could crumble the delta's mazelike system of levees, sending seawater inland.The prospect of splitting the project up is alarming environmentalists. By disconnecting the two aims of the project, the tunnels would not need an overarching Habitat Conservation Plan under Section 10 of the Endangered Species Act, which would cover endangered species as well as dozens of other species that might become endangered. Instead, splitting the project would require a Section 7 permit for the pumps' incidental killing of listed species, which include the threatened delta smelt and endangered chinook salmon.Over the past several years, the state has tweaked the project in a number of ways to mollify opponents, including reducing the capacity of the tunnels and replacing pumps at the northern end with a gravity-fed conveyance structure (Greenwire, Dec. 22, 2014). The latest change is sure to provoke much more controversy."With no HCP, the covered species list will be much shorter," said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta, a nonprofit composed of fishing, farming, development and environmental interests. "Species like the greater sandhill crane, which are only state-listed, may see rollbacks in protections."DWR is "working at the behest of a few powerful interests without regard for the environment, the public interest, the public's desire or the need for a different approach to policy in the face of climate change," said Kathryn Phillips, director of Sierra Club California.The water agencies that would be paying for the tunnels appear to remain committed to the BDCP but are getting impatient with the pace of planning. One potential customer is the Kern County Water Agency (KCWA), which has provided about $30 million of the total $240 million in planning costs so far."What's kind of ironic, frankly, about that, is that $240 million has been spent on creating a pile of paper without turning a bit of dirt, which from an engineering standpoint is very surprising," said KCWA's assistant general manager, Curtis Creel. KCWA is the largest agricultural contractor of the State Water Project, receiving about a million acre-feet per year in a normal year.Because of the state's drought, KCWA's water deliveries have been cut this year by 80 percent, increasing its customers' expenses for extra supplies and possibly making it harder for it to keep footing the bill for the plan."Limits in water supply will impact the economic viability of the county and therefore impact the ability of all of those water districts to be able to contribute toward any kind of planning effort," Creel said."The state has terminated the Habitat Conservation Plan approach but that has not ended the need to fix our broken water system," said Jason Peltier, deputy general manager of the Westlands Water District, another contractor that has been funding the plans. "We will continue to seek balanced regulatory approaches that actually do some good for the fisheries while rebuilding the social and economic fabric of the Central Valley. Our first priority is to make the existing water system actually work and serve the needs of the people and the environment."A former state official who was closely involved with the project said it could still move forward without an HCP but warned that the state will need to ensure habitat is protected."My view is that it is not important what mechanism is used [Habitat Conservation Plan or just ordinary compliance with the state and federal endangered species acts]," said Jerry Meral, former deputy secretary at the state Natural Resources Agency who is now director of the California water program at the nonprofit Natural Heritage Institute. "But it is critical that the habitat protection and enhancement elements of BDCP be funded and implemented, along with construction of the tunnels."Twitter:?@debra_kahn?| Email:?dkahn at eenews.net? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Apr 6 16:03:54 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 23:03:54 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Jeff Michael: New Data Shows Surprisingly Small Impacts of Drought on Farm Employment Message-ID: <1728285042.621176.1428361434245.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://valleyecon.blogspot.com/2015/03/new-data-shows-surprisingly-small.html Thursday, March 19, 2015 New Data Shows Surprisingly Small Impacts of Drought on Farm Employment While I have a long record of saying that drought impacts on the economy tend to be overblown, even I was surprised by the minimal drought impacts in the data released this morning. The Bureau of Labor Statistics' Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages is the most reliable data on employment (it is a census of quarterly tax filings). ?Data for the 3rd quarter of 2014 was released this morning, representing the peak season for farm employment when drought impacts should be most evident. ?As shown in the table I compiled below, there is virtually no difference in farm employment between 2014 and 2013 in the 3 counties that are thought to be most devastated by the drought. (Jobs are listed under each month in the table, NAICS sector 11 is 99+% agriculture in these counties, the increase in total wages suggest decreased hours is not a big part of the explanation even though the minimum wage increased on July 1, 2014.) There is more data that needs to be compiled before jumping to conclusions, but I think it is important to get this information out there since the rhetoric on jobs, unemployment and water shortages is heating up again. In my view, the impacts of drought are much larger in environmental data such as plummeting fish abundance, than in jobs. ?I surprised a reporter earlier this week when I said that I thought the drought was a bigger environmental crisis than an economic one, and the recent data about 6 delta smelt found in the recent survey compared to virtually no change in agricultural jobs is an example. How to explain this? ? As I said, there is more data to sift through, but it is important to recognize that this drought is coming in the midst of a strong expansion period of Valley agriculture. ?The total number of acres irrigated and harvested has been growing every year for most of the past decade, even in the face of scarce surface water. ?Thus, in the absence of drought, I suspect 2014 employment would have been even higher. ?The drought is causing significant fallowing of relatively low value, and non-labor intensive field crops, while new acreage is coming into production by tapping groundwater. ?Thus, there are farmers laying people off, I don't think the farmers in news reports are lying. ?But clearly, there are others that were hiring. ?In other words, the baseline for agriculture activity is rising,?as I discussed last spring in this post.??Posted by?Jeff?at?1:03 PM?Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to PinterestLabels:?delta tunnels,?Delta water exports,?Economic Outlook and Data,?water bond -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Apr 7 07:56:38 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 14:56:38 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Victor Davis Hanson The Scorching of California Message-ID: <885880139.1068051.1428418598815.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Here is another perspective on the drought (not mine): ?http://www.city-journal.org/2015/25_1_california-drought.html#.VNjsUvl3pi4.facebook ? Victor Davis Hanson The Scorching of California How Green extremists made a bad drought worse Winter 2015 In mid-December, the first large storms in three years drenched California. No one knows whether the rain and snow will continue?only that it must last for weeks if a record three-year drought, both natural and man-made, is to end. In the 1970s, coastal elites squelched California?s near-century-long commitment to building dams, reservoirs, and canals, even as the Golden State?s population ballooned. Court-ordered drainage of man-made lakes, meant to restore fish to the 1,100-square-mile Sacramento?San Joaquin River Delta, partly caused central California?s reservoir water to dry up. Not content with preventing construction of new water infrastructure, environmentalists reverse-engineered existing projects to divert precious water away from agriculture, privileging the needs of fish over the needs of people. Then they alleged that global warming, not their own foolish policies, had caused the current crisis.?Even as a fourth year of drought threatens the state, canal water from the Hetch Hetchy reservoir in Yosemite National Park keeps Silicon Valley and the San Francisco Bay Area a verdant oasis. This parched coastal mountain range would have depopulated long ago without the infrastructure that an earlier, wiser generation built and that latter-day regulators and environmentalists so casually deprecated. (See ?California?s Promethean Past,? Summer 2013.) Gardens and lawns remain green in Palo Alto, San Mateo, Cupertino, and San Francisco, where residents continue to benefit from past investments in huge water transfers from inland mountains to the coast. They will be the last to go dry.?I?grew up in the central San Joaquin Valley during the 1950s. In those days, some old-timers remembered with fondness when the undammed Kings River?s wild, white water would gush down into the sparsely populated valley. But most Californians never had such nostalgia. Past generations accepted that California was a growing state (with some 20 million people by 1970), that agriculture was its premier industry, and that the state fed not just its own people but millions across America and overseas. All of that required redistribution of water?and thus dams, reservoirs, and irrigation canals.?For 50 years, the state transferred surface water from northern California to the Central Valley through the California State Water Project and the federal Central Valley Project. Given these vast and ambitious initiatives, Californians didn?t worry much about the occasional one- or two-year drought or the steady growth in population. The postwar, can-do mentality resulted in a brilliantly engineered water system, far ahead of its time, that brought canal water daily from the 30 percent of the state where rain and snow were plentiful?mostly north of Sacramento as well as from the Sierra Nevada Mountains?to the lower, western, and warmer 70 percent of the state, where people preferred to work, farm, and live.?Everyone seemed to benefit. Floods in northern California became a thing of the past. The more than 40 major mountain reservoirs generated clean hydroelectric power. New lakes offered recreation for millions living in a once-arid state. Gravity-fed snowmelt was channeled into irrigation canals, opening millions of new acres to farming and ending reliance on pumping the aquifer. To most Californians, the irrigated, fertile Central Valley seemed a natural occurrence, not an environmental anomaly made possible only through the foresight of a now-forgotten generation of engineers and hydrologists.Just as California?s freeways were designed to grow to meet increased traffic, the state?s vast water projects were engineered to expand with the population. Many assumed that the state would finish planned additions to the California State Water Project and its ancillaries. But in the 1960s and early 1970s, no one anticipated that the then-nascent environmental movement would one day go to court to stop most new dam construction, including the 14,000-acre Sites Reservoir on the Sacramento River near Maxwell; the Los Banos Grandes facility, along a section of the California Aqueduct in Merced County; and the Temperance Flat Reservoir, above Millerton Lake north of Fresno. Had the gigantic Klamath River diversion project not likewise been canceled in the 1970s, the resulting Aw Paw reservoir would have been the state?s largest man-made reservoir. At two-thirds the size of Lake Mead, it might have stored 15 million acre-feet of water, enough to supply San Francisco for 30 years. California?s water-storage capacity would be nearly double what it is today had these plans come to fruition. It was just as difficult to imagine that environmentalists would try to divert contracted irrigation and municipal water from already-established reservoirs. Yet they did just that, and subsequently moved to freeze California?s water-storage resources at 1970s capacities.?All the while, the Green activists remained blissfully unconcerned about the vast immigration into California from Latin America and Mexico that would help double the state?s population in just four decades, to 40 million. Had population growth remained static, perhaps California could have lived with partially finished water projects. The state might also have been able to restore the flow of scenic rivers from the mountains to the sea, maintained a robust agribusiness sector, and even survived a four- or five-year drought. But if California continues to block new construction of the State Water Project as well as additions to local and federal water-storage infrastructure, officials must halve California?s population, or shut down the 5 million acres of irrigated crops on the Central Valley?s west side, or cut back municipal water usage in a way never before done in the United States.?When the drought began in autumn 2011, the average Californian barely noticed. Mountain reservoirs remained full throughout 2011 and much of 2012, thanks to ample rainfall in previous years. Though rain and snowfall plunged to as much as 40 percent below average in most inland counties, shortages affected only large agribusiness conglomerates on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley?a small group of corporate grandees with plenty of land and little public sympathy.?During that first year of drought,?quarrels over water?were mostly confined to farmers and environmentalists. Confident that stored surface water in mountain reservoirs would remain plentiful, the Greens insisted that the state continue to divert reservoir water away from agricultural usage?at roughly the same rate as during pre-drought years?in order to replenish rivers. In practical terms, however, the diversions meant that substantial amounts of stored snowmelt were released from mountain dams and allowed to flow freely to the Pacific Ocean. Farmers called that wasted water; environmentalists called it a return to a natural, preindustrial California. The Green dream was not simply river restoration and beautification, however. Bay Area environmentalists also believed that vastly increased freshwater inflows would help oxygenate the San Francisco Delta, thereby enabling the survival of the Delta smelt, a three-inch baitfish, while ensuring that salmon could be reintroduced into the San Joaquin River watershed.?Farmers mostly lost these early diversion battles. After all, the state?s reservoirs stood at or near capacity, previous wet years had recharged valley aquifers, and conventional wisdom held that the drought would probably end soon, anyway. Nevertheless, hand-painted protest signs began sprouting along Interstate 5, amid a few abandoned almond orchards, proclaiming a new ?dust bowl? and condemning liberal Bay Area officials, such as Representative Nancy Pelosi and Senator Barbara Boxer, for supporting the river diversions. In Fresno County, the Consolidated Irrigation District and others stopped almost all surface deliveries to their agricultural water users from the Pine Flat dam on the Kings River reservoir. The water masters of the Kings River had enough stored water at Pine Flat to keep the reservoir at mostly normal levels. By cutting off deliveries to farmers, authorities had the luxury of releasing water to refurbish the lower Kings River for habitat restoration.?I experienced the effects of these policies firsthand. My property contains a 130-year-old abandoned well that my great-great-grandparents dug by hand and lined with tin pipe. Throughout 2012, the water table in my front yard remained about 40 feet below the surface, and all through the drought, the well proved a reliable barometer of changing groundwater levels. No one likes paying irrigation taxes for surface water not delivered, but local farmers shrugged, turned on their standby pumps, and drew from the shallow aquifer. We got by during the drought?s first year with only moderately elevated electricity bills. Fifty miles to the west, however, farmers and agribusinesses on the Central Valley?s west side resorted to drilling deeper, sometimes in excess of 1,500 feet. Pumping brackish water from great depths is an unsustainable way to irrigate millions of acres of valuable croplands. The entire 5 million-acre west-side agricultural project that arose from desert scrub didn?t exist before the early 1960s?precisely because the region had neither an aquifer nor a water project to deliver surface irrigation water from northern and eastern California.?As the drought continued, the political debate heated up. Farmers reminded Bay Area Greens that they had no proof that the Delta smelt was suffering from a lack of fresh river water. Equally likely culprits for the fish?s plight were the more than 30 Bay Area and Stockton-area municipalities that dump oxygen-depleted wastewater into the baitfish?s habitat. The farmers noted the irony of using artificial reservoirs to ensure supposedly ?natural? year-round river flows for salmon and smelt. Before the construction of California?s modern dams, Sierra snowmelts didn?t necessarily ensure continually rushing rivers. Nineteenth-century spring floods into the valley usually were followed by a depleted late-summer Sierra snowpack and dry August river trickles. How odd, farmers thought, that environmentalists opposed new dams and reservoirs as ?unnatural,? and yet counted on existing reservoir water to maintain a dependable habitat for newly introduced salmon. Before the dams, nature simply didn?t operate that way.?In the winter of 2012, the drought entered its second year, but record-high agricultural commodity prices tempered the farmers? acrimony. Newly affluent customers in China and India?in addition to wealthy Japanese, Taiwanese, and South Korean consumers?fueled demand for premium California dairy products, wine, nuts and dried fruits, fresh fruits and vegetables, beef, and cotton. Raisin prices jumped from $900 per ton to more than $1,900 per ton. Some almond growers became millionaires overnight. When the per-pound price of nuts tripled, and new varieties of trees and new farming practices bolstered production to well over 3,000 pounds per acre, a once-?inefficient? family farmer with 40 acres could suddenly net $5,000 an acre. Given that harvesting almonds is mostly mechanized and requires little, if any, manual labor, growers embarked on planting sprees up and down the drought-stricken valley. If 40 acres could net $200,000, large conglomerates of 5,000 acres or more might see profits of $25 million annually. Pistachios and walnuts proved even more lucrative. For the first time in a quarter-century, Central Valley farmers saw the kind of prosperity associated with the Silicon and Napa Valleys.By 2013, however, with snowfall scant, some northern California reservoirs had fallen far below normal levels. Farms on the Central Valley?s eastern side?the ones with prior privileged access to local irrigation districts and shallow water tables?faced a second year without surface-water deliveries. After 12 months of steady pumping, their water tables weren?t so shallow any more. My old well dipped to 60 feet as the water table began dropping more than a foot per month. In past years, I could count on access to canal water to replenish the water table. Now, for the first time in the 140-year history of our farm, nature and man had cut off the water. The well went dry.?Meanwhile, on the west side, state and local officials warned farmers that they might receive far less than even the 10 percent of contracted surface-water delivery that they?d been promised. Nevertheless, environmentalists prevailed upon the courts to extend orders diverting freshwater reserves from irrigation canals to rivers and the ocean. The public remained indifferent: the state had survived two years of drought before, and cities still got their water allotments from shrinking northern and mountain reservoirs. In 2012 and 2013, man-made reservoirs in San Francisco and Los Angeles brimmed while the northern and mountain lakes that supplied them were just two-thirds full. Facing no threat of rationing, coastal Californians didn?t worry if a few hundred thousand acres of lucrative orchards simply shriveled up.?As 2013 wore on, climatologists, trying to project how long the drought might persist, warned state officials that their records only ran as far back as the late 1860s. California is a relatively new human habitat, and scientists can say little with certainty about the eons of natural history preceding the arrival of Spanish, Mexican, and American explorers. Tree-ring evidence suggests that past droughts had lasted 50 or even 100 years. Historically, drought may be the?norm?rather than the exception in California. This might explain why such a naturally rich state could support only a small population of indigenous people. Is coastal and central California, in its natural state, a mostly unsustainable desert for large, settled agrarian populations? Maybe modern Californians don?t fully appreciate the genius of their forefathers, who were prescient enough to see that, if huge quantities of water weren?t transferred from the wet northlands, the Sierras, and the Colorado River, then the cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles would be little more than arid coastal villages, analogous to lightly populated and perennially water-short Cayucos or Cambria, along Highway 1.Californians heaved a sigh of relief after a few days of heavy rain in November 2013, and some early snowfalls seemed to suggest that the drought would end in 2014. But the relief was premature; the dry spells returned. What rain and snow followed was too little and far too late. Even the snowpack in the American River watershed?a northern river system usually drawing on the greatest snowmelts?reached just 12 percent of its average. Soon, the huge man-made reservoirs in both the ordinarily wet north and the arid center of the state?Folsom, Millerton, New Melones, Orville Pine Flat, San Luis, Shasta, Trinity?dipped below half-full levels and, in some cases, plunged below 10 percent of capacity. By July 2014, the average storage level of reservoirs statewide was 13 percent. Across the state, surface-irrigation deliveries to farms and orchards fell to near zero.?Farmers engaged in another vigorous round of groundwater pumping in summer 2014. Water tables predictably plunged even further. Disaster struck the west side, as large agribusiness concerns drilled new wells to unheard-of depths of 2,000 feet and more, installing massive 300-horsepower electric pumps to bring up just enough brackish water to trickle over their thirsty crops. Panic ensued even on the east side, with its famous and once-shallow aquifer. Farmers complained about six-month-long waiting lists to deepen their wells. Instead of the usual 150- or 200-foot wells, farmers drilled to depths of 300 or 400 feet, and drew water from 150 feet. Pump installations were similarly backlogged, and pump sizes increased from the standard 15-horsepower models to 20- and 50-horsepower machines?all this to ensure that a farmer?s particular straw had the best chance of siphoning every last drop from an emptying common glass.?Such every-man-for-himself drilling came with its own attendant human foibles?bribing drillers to cut in front of the waiting list; violating decade-old pump-sharing easements; stealthily tapping into neighbors? pipeline systems; or charging exorbitant rates to give dry farmers access to working wells. Well-rig manufacturers had trouble keeping up with demand. Some entrepreneurs, eager to gouge desperate farmers, sought drilling machinery on the East Coast and overseas. Meanwhile, farmers understood that, with the commodities boom, an investment in permanent trees and vines might represent $15,000?$20,000 per acre and annual profits of over $5,000 per year. By 2014, keeping the orchard or vineyard alive, not just the current crop, became the aim. On the west side, some orchard owners began bulldozing older or less productive nut groves. Others tried to find just enough water to allow a final August or September harvest at record prices, before the exhausted trees were removed in the winter.?California?s huge urban reservoirs, however, remained full. Municipalities demanded that they receive all the final deliveries of state and federal surface water from the mountainous north and east. The Hetch Hetchy reservoir in Yosemite National Park still supplies almost 90 percent of the San Francisco Bay area?s daily water supplies. In a strange paradox, that water bypasses the San Joaquin River, into which environmentalists had diverted millions of acre-feet of irrigation water for fish. Even in 2014, as the state baked dry, environmentalists insisted on diverting what little mountain reservoir water remained to river-restoration efforts. Yet no environmentalist group has suggested that California tap Hetch Hetchy for habitat restoration in the same manner in which it has expropriated the water of farmers.?By late 2014, Pyramid and Castaic Lakes in southern California?part of the vast reserves controlled by the Southern California Metropolitan Water District?remained well above 90 percent of their capacities. But their sources in the distant north had almost no surface water left to give. The cities had drained and banked virtually all the state?s existing reservoirs. Indeed, so well banked are southern California?s project reservoirs that they have enough water to keep millions of customers well supplied through 2015, even as northern and central California communities dry up.In reaction to these ongoing disasters and fearing a fourth year of drought, the legislature and Governor Jerry Brown placed a $7.5 billion water bond on the November 2014 ballot. It passed, but only a third of the money will go to construction of reservoirs canceled in the 1970s and 1980s. Most of the bond?s provisions will fund huge new state bureaucracies to regulate access to groundwater and mandate recycling. The bond will essentially void more than a century of complex water law as the state moves to curb farmers? ability to pump water from beneath their own lands. Bay Area legislators who helped draft the bill failed to grasp that farmers bear the huge costs of drilling and pumping, not because they are greedy or insensitive to the environment but because the state?s population has doubled and its water infrastructure has not kept pace. A better way to regulate overdrafts of the water table would have been to increase vastly the amount of reservoir surface water for agriculture so that farmers would have no need to turn on their pumps. But legislators and policymakers let utopianism get in the way.Last summer, my two agricultural pumps worked from June to late August to keep 40 acres of grapevines alive during 100-degree days. Electricity and pump maintenance are costly. So are the annual irrigation district taxes I?ve paid the last three years for contracted?though undelivered?surface water from the system that my great-grandfather and other pioneers built themselves with horse-drawn scrapers at the turn of the twentieth century. This winter, I added my name to the waiting list to lower the pump bowls?the impellers deep in the well that force the water up through the casing to the surface?in anticipation of another year of drought.?If the drought does continue, vast tracts of west-side farmlands will turn to dust. California?s nearly $30 billion agricultural export industry?led by dairy, almond, and grape production?is in grave peril. Its collapse would crush the economic livelihood of the Central Valley, especially its Hispanic community. When the 5 million-acre west side goes dry, hundreds of thousands of people will lose their jobs in a part of the state where the average unemployment rate already hovers above 10 percent. Farmers will spend hundreds of millions of dollars to deepen their wells further and save what water they can. Everything they and their predecessors have known for a century will be threatened with extinction.?Water is to California as coal is to Kentucky?yet its use is being curtailed by those least affected, if affected at all, by the consequences of their advocacy. But environmentalists, who for 40 years worked to undermine the prudent expansion of the state?s water infrastructure, have a rendezvous with those consequences soon. No reservoir water is left for them to divert?none for the reintroduction of their pet salmon, none for the Delta smelt. Their one hope is to claim possession of the water in the ground once they?ve exhausted what was above it. Redistribution, not expansion of supplies, is the liberal creed for water, just as it is for wealth.As the Hetch Hetchy reservoir drains, Bay Area man-made storage lakes will necessarily follow. Another year of drought will deplete even southern California?s municipal reserves sooner rather than later. When Stanford professors and Cupertino tech lords cannot take a shower and find themselves paving over their suburban lawns and gardens, perhaps they, too, will see the value of reservoir water for people rather than for fish. The new dust bowl may soon see a different generation of Joads abandoning California for a wetter?and more prosperous?Midwest.Could California still save itself? New reservoirs to store millions of acre-feet of snowmelt could be built relatively quickly for the price of the state?s high-speed rail boondoggle. Latino voters?the state?s largest minority?might come around to the view that the liberal coastal elite?s obsession with environmental regulations leads to higher electricity rates, gasoline prices, and food costs, along with fewer jobs and economic opportunities. Barring that, there may be only two things left for California farmers to do: pray for the recent wet weather to continue; and, if it does, pray further that environmentalists do not send the precious manna from heaven out to sea.Victor Davis Hanson?is a contributing editor of?City Journal?and the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow in Classics and Military History at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at att.net Tue Apr 7 08:10:24 2015 From: kierassociates at att.net (Kier Associates) Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 08:10:24 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Victor Davis Hanson The Scorching of California In-Reply-To: <885880139.1068051.1428418598815.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <885880139.1068051.1428418598815.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000f01d07144$fa2ccfe0$ee866fa0$@att.net> ?When Stanford professors and Cupertino tech lords cannot take a shower and find themselves paving over their suburban lawns and gardens, perhaps they, too, will see the value of reservoir water for people rather than for fish.? This guy?s a piece of work, ensconced in his Hoover Institute ivory tower, lashing out at CA?s ?environmental elite? on behalf of the little people. Whadda brand. Bill From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 7:57 AM To: Env-trinity Subject: [env-trinity] Victor Davis Hanson The Scorching of California Here is another perspective on the drought (not mine): http://www.city-journal.org/2015/25_1_california-drought.html#.VNjsUvl3pi4.facebook Description: Image removed by sender. City Journal. Victor Davis Hanson The Scorching of California How Green extremists made a bad drought worse Winter 2015 In mid-December, the first large storms in three years drenched California. No one knows whether the rain and snow will continue?only that it must last for weeks if a record three-year drought, both natural and man-made, is to end. In the 1970s, coastal elites squelched California?s near-century-long commitment to building dams, reservoirs, and canals, even as the Golden State?s population ballooned. Court-ordered drainage of man-made lakes, meant to restore fish to the 1,100-square-mile Sacramento?San Joaquin River Delta, partly caused central California?s reservoir water to dry up. Not content with preventing construction of new water infrastructure, environmentalists reverse-engineered existing projects to divert precious water away from agriculture, privileging the needs of fish over the needs of people. Then they alleged that global warming, not their own foolish policies, had caused the current crisis. Even as a fourth year of drought threatens the state, canal water from the Hetch Hetchy reservoir in Yosemite National Park keeps Silicon Valley and the San Francisco Bay Area a verdant oasis. This parched coastal mountain range would have depopulated long ago without the infrastructure that an earlier, wiser generation built and that latter-day regulators and environmentalists so casually deprecated. (See ?California?s Promethean Past ,? Summer 2013.) Gardens and lawns remain green in Palo Alto, San Mateo, Cupertino, and San Francisco, where residents continue to benefit from past investments in huge water transfers from inland mountains to the coast. They will be the last to go dry. I grew up in the central San Joaquin Valley during the 1950s. In those days, some old-timers remembered with fondness when the undammed Kings River?s wild, white water would gush down into the sparsely populated valley. But most Californians never had such nostalgia. Past generations accepted that California was a growing state (with some 20 million people by 1970), that agriculture was its premier industry, and that the state fed not just its own people but millions across America and overseas. All of that required redistribution of water?and thus dams, reservoirs, and irrigation canals. For 50 years, the state transferred surface water from northern California to the Central Valley through the California State Water Project and the federal Central Valley Project. Given these vast and ambitious initiatives, Californians didn?t worry much about the occasional one- or two-year drought or the steady growth in population. The postwar, can-do mentality resulted in a brilliantly engineered water system, far ahead of its time, that brought canal water daily from the 30 percent of the state where rain and snow were plentiful?mostly north of Sacramento as well as from the Sierra Nevada Mountains?to the lower, western, and warmer 70 percent of the state, where people preferred to work, farm, and live. Everyone seemed to benefit. Floods in northern California became a thing of the past. The more than 40 major mountain reservoirs generated clean hydroelectric power. New lakes offered recreation for millions living in a once-arid state. Gravity-fed snowmelt was channeled into irrigation canals, opening millions of new acres to farming and ending reliance on pumping the aquifer. To most Californians, the irrigated, fertile Central Valley seemed a natural occurrence, not an environmental anomaly made possible only through the foresight of a now-forgotten generation of engineers and hydrologists. Just as California?s freeways were designed to grow to meet increased traffic, the state?s vast water projects were engineered to expand with the population. Many assumed that the state would finish planned additions to the California State Water Project and its ancillaries. But in the 1960s and early 1970s, no one anticipated that the then-nascent environmental movement would one day go to court to stop most new dam construction, including the 14,000-acre Sites Reservoir on the Sacramento River near Maxwell; the Los Banos Grandes facility, along a section of the California Aqueduct in Merced County; and the Temperance Flat Reservoir, above Millerton Lake north of Fresno. Had the gigantic Klamath River diversion project not likewise been canceled in the 1970s, the resulting Aw Paw reservoir would have been the state?s largest man-made reservoir. At two-thirds the size of Lake Mead, it might have stored 15 million acre-feet of water, enough to supply San Francisco for 30 years. California?s water-storage capacity would be nearly double what it is today had these plans come to fruition. It was just as difficult to imagine that environmentalists would try to divert contracted irrigation and municipal water from already-established reservoirs. Yet they did just that, and subsequently moved to freeze California?s water-storage resources at 1970s capacities. All the while, the Green activists remained blissfully unconcerned about the vast immigration into California from Latin America and Mexico that would help double the state?s population in just four decades, to 40 million. Had population growth remained static, perhaps California could have lived with partially finished water projects. The state might also have been able to restore the flow of scenic rivers from the mountains to the sea, maintained a robust agribusiness sector, and even survived a four- or five-year drought. But if California continues to block new construction of the State Water Project as well as additions to local and federal water-storage infrastructure, officials must halve California?s population, or shut down the 5 million acres of irrigated crops on the Central Valley?s west side, or cut back municipal water usage in a way never before done in the United States. When the drought began in autumn 2011, the average Californian barely noticed. Mountain reservoirs remained full throughout 2011 and much of 2012, thanks to ample rainfall in previous years. Though rain and snowfall plunged to as much as 40 percent below average in most inland counties, shortages affected only large agribusiness conglomerates on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley?a small group of corporate grandees with plenty of land and little public sympathy. During that first year of drought, quarrels over water were mostly confined to farmers and environmentalists. Confident that stored surface water in mountain reservoirs would remain plentiful, the Greens insisted that the state continue to divert reservoir water away from agricultural usage?at roughly the same rate as during pre-drought years?in order to replenish rivers. In practical terms, however, the diversions meant that substantial amounts of stored snowmelt were released from mountain dams and allowed to flow freely to the Pacific Ocean. Farmers called that wasted water; environmentalists called it a return to a natural, preindustrial California. The Green dream was not simply river restoration and beautification, however. Bay Area environmentalists also believed that vastly increased freshwater inflows would help oxygenate the San Francisco Delta, thereby enabling the survival of the Delta smelt, a three-inch baitfish, while ensuring that salmon could be reintroduced into the San Joaquin River watershed. Farmers mostly lost these early diversion battles. After all, the state?s reservoirs stood at or near capacity, previous wet years had recharged valley aquifers, and conventional wisdom held that the drought would probably end soon, anyway. Nevertheless, hand-painted protest signs began sprouting along Interstate 5, amid a few abandoned almond orchards, proclaiming a new ?dust bowl? and condemning liberal Bay Area officials, such as Representative Nancy Pelosi and Senator Barbara Boxer, for supporting the river diversions. In Fresno County, the Consolidated Irrigation District and others stopped almost all surface deliveries to their agricultural water users from the Pine Flat dam on the Kings River reservoir. The water masters of the Kings River had enough stored water at Pine Flat to keep the reservoir at mostly normal levels. By cutting off deliveries to farmers, authorities had the luxury of releasing water to refurbish the lower Kings River for habitat restoration. I experienced the effects of these policies firsthand. My property contains a 130-year-old abandoned well that my great-great-grandparents dug by hand and lined with tin pipe. Throughout 2012, the water table in my front yard remained about 40 feet below the surface, and all through the drought, the well proved a reliable barometer of changing groundwater levels. No one likes paying irrigation taxes for surface water not delivered, but local farmers shrugged, turned on their standby pumps, and drew from the shallow aquifer. We got by during the drought?s first year with only moderately elevated electricity bills. Fifty miles to the west, however, farmers and agribusinesses on the Central Valley?s west side resorted to drilling deeper, sometimes in excess of 1,500 feet. Pumping brackish water from great depths is an unsustainable way to irrigate millions of acres of valuable croplands. The entire 5 million-acre west-side agricultural project that arose from desert scrub didn?t exist before the early 1960s?precisely because the region had neither an aquifer nor a water project to deliver surface irrigation water from northern and eastern California. As the drought continued, the political debate heated up. Farmers reminded Bay Area Greens that they had no proof that the Delta smelt was suffering from a lack of fresh river water. Equally likely culprits for the fish?s plight were the more than 30 Bay Area and Stockton-area municipalities that dump oxygen-depleted wastewater into the baitfish?s habitat. The farmers noted the irony of using artificial reservoirs to ensure supposedly ?natural? year-round river flows for salmon and smelt. Before the construction of California?s modern dams, Sierra snowmelts didn?t necessarily ensure continually rushing rivers. Nineteenth-century spring floods into the valley usually were followed by a depleted late-summer Sierra snowpack and dry August river trickles. How odd, farmers thought, that environmentalists opposed new dams and reservoirs as ?unnatural,? and yet counted on existing reservoir water to maintain a dependable habitat for newly introduced salmon. Before the dams, nature simply didn?t operate that way. In the winter of 2012, the drought entered its second year, but record-high agricultural commodity prices tempered the farmers? acrimony. Newly affluent customers in China and India?in addition to wealthy Japanese, Taiwanese, and South Korean consumers?fueled demand for premium California dairy products, wine, nuts and dried fruits, fresh fruits and vegetables, beef, and cotton. Raisin prices jumped from $900 per ton to more than $1,900 per ton. Some almond growers became millionaires overnight. When the per-pound price of nuts tripled, and new varieties of trees and new farming practices bolstered production to well over 3,000 pounds per acre, a once-?inefficient? family farmer with 40 acres could suddenly net $5,000 an acre. Given that harvesting almonds is mostly mechanized and requires little, if any, manual labor, growers embarked on planting sprees up and down the drought-stricken valley. If 40 acres could net $200,000, large conglomerates of 5,000 acres or more might see profits of $25 million annually. Pistachios and walnuts proved even more lucrative. For the first time in a quarter-century, Central Valley farmers saw the kind of prosperity associated with the Silicon and Napa Valleys. By 2013, however, with snowfall scant, some northern California reservoirs had fallen far below normal levels. Farms on the Central Valley?s eastern side?the ones with prior privileged access to local irrigation districts and shallow water tables?faced a second year without surface-water deliveries. After 12 months of steady pumping, their water tables weren?t so shallow any more. My old well dipped to 60 feet as the water table began dropping more than a foot per month. In past years, I could count on access to canal water to replenish the water table. Now, for the first time in the 140-year history of our farm, nature and man had cut off the water. The well went dry. Meanwhile, on the west side, state and local officials warned farmers that they might receive far less than even the 10 percent of contracted surface-water delivery that they?d been promised. Nevertheless, environmentalists prevailed upon the courts to extend orders diverting freshwater reserves from irrigation canals to rivers and the ocean. The public remained indifferent: the state had survived two years of drought before, and cities still got their water allotments from shrinking northern and mountain reservoirs. In 2012 and 2013, man-made reservoirs in San Francisco and Los Angeles brimmed while the northern and mountain lakes that supplied them were just two-thirds full. Facing no threat of rationing, coastal Californians didn?t worry if a few hundred thousand acres of lucrative orchards simply shriveled up. As 2013 wore on, climatologists, trying to project how long the drought might persist, warned state officials that their records only ran as far back as the late 1860s. California is a relatively new human habitat, and scientists can say little with certainty about the eons of natural history preceding the arrival of Spanish, Mexican, and American explorers. Tree-ring evidence suggests that past droughts had lasted 50 or even 100 years. Historically, drought may be the norm rather than the exception in California. This might explain why such a naturally rich state could support only a small population of indigenous people. Is coastal and central California, in its natural state, a mostly unsustainable desert for large, settled agrarian populations? Maybe modern Californians don?t fully appreciate the genius of their forefathers, who were prescient enough to see that, if huge quantities of water weren?t transferred from the wet northlands, the Sierras, and the Colorado River, then the cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles would be little more than arid coastal villages, analogous to lightly populated and perennially water-short Cayucos or Cambria, along Highway 1. Californians heaved a sigh of relief after a few days of heavy rain in November 2013, and some early snowfalls seemed to suggest that the drought would end in 2014. But the relief was premature; the dry spells returned. What rain and snow followed was too little and far too late. Even the snowpack in the American River watershed?a northern river system usually drawing on the greatest snowmelts?reached just 12 percent of its average. Soon, the huge man-made reservoirs in both the ordinarily wet north and the arid center of the state?Folsom, Millerton, New Melones, Orville Pine Flat, San Luis, Shasta, Trinity?dipped below half-full levels and, in some cases, plunged below 10 percent of capacity. By July 2014, the average storage level of reservoirs statewide was 13 percent. Across the state, surface-irrigation deliveries to farms and orchards fell to near zero. Farmers engaged in another vigorous round of groundwater pumping in summer 2014. Water tables predictably plunged even further. Disaster struck the west side, as large agribusiness concerns drilled new wells to unheard-of depths of 2,000 feet and more, installing massive 300-horsepower electric pumps to bring up just enough brackish water to trickle over their thirsty crops. Panic ensued even on the east side, with its famous and once-shallow aquifer. Farmers complained about six-month-long waiting lists to deepen their wells. Instead of the usual 150- or 200-foot wells, farmers drilled to depths of 300 or 400 feet, and drew water from 150 feet. Pump installations were similarly backlogged, and pump sizes increased from the standard 15-horsepower models to 20- and 50-horsepower machines?all this to ensure that a farmer?s particular straw had the best chance of siphoning every last drop from an emptying common glass. Such every-man-for-himself drilling came with its own attendant human foibles?bribing drillers to cut in front of the waiting list; violating decade-old pump-sharing easements; stealthily tapping into neighbors? pipeline systems; or charging exorbitant rates to give dry farmers access to working wells. Well-rig manufacturers had trouble keeping up with demand. Some entrepreneurs, eager to gouge desperate farmers, sought drilling machinery on the East Coast and overseas. Meanwhile, farmers understood that, with the commodities boom, an investment in permanent trees and vines might represent $15,000?$20,000 per acre and annual profits of over $5,000 per year. By 2014, keeping the orchard or vineyard alive, not just the current crop, became the aim. On the west side, some orchard owners began bulldozing older or less productive nut groves. Others tried to find just enough water to allow a final August or September harvest at record prices, before the exhausted trees were removed in the winter. California?s huge urban reservoirs, however, remained full. Municipalities demanded that they receive all the final deliveries of state and federal surface water from the mountainous north and east. The Hetch Hetchy reservoir in Yosemite National Park still supplies almost 90 percent of the San Francisco Bay area?s daily water supplies. In a strange paradox, that water bypasses the San Joaquin River, into which environmentalists had diverted millions of acre-feet of irrigation water for fish. Even in 2014, as the state baked dry, environmentalists insisted on diverting what little mountain reservoir water remained to river-restoration efforts. Yet no environmentalist group has suggested that California tap Hetch Hetchy for habitat restoration in the same manner in which it has expropriated the water of farmers. By late 2014, Pyramid and Castaic Lakes in southern California?part of the vast reserves controlled by the Southern California Metropolitan Water District?remained well above 90 percent of their capacities. But their sources in the distant north had almost no surface water left to give. The cities had drained and banked virtually all the state?s existing reservoirs. Indeed, so well banked are southern California?s project reservoirs that they have enough water to keep millions of customers well supplied through 2015, even as northern and central California communities dry up. In reaction to these ongoing disasters and fearing a fourth year of drought, the legislature and Governor Jerry Brown placed a $7.5 billion water bond on the November 2014 ballot. It passed, but only a third of the money will go to construction of reservoirs canceled in the 1970s and 1980s. Most of the bond?s provisions will fund huge new state bureaucracies to regulate access to groundwater and mandate recycling. The bond will essentially void more than a century of complex water law as the state moves to curb farmers? ability to pump water from beneath their own lands. Bay Area legislators who helped draft the bill failed to grasp that farmers bear the huge costs of drilling and pumping, not because they are greedy or insensitive to the environment but because the state?s population has doubled and its water infrastructure has not kept pace. A better way to regulate overdrafts of the water table would have been to increase vastly the amount of reservoir surface water for agriculture so that farmers would have no need to turn on their pumps. But legislators and policymakers let utopianism get in the way. Last summer, my two agricultural pumps worked from June to late August to keep 40 acres of grapevines alive during 100-degree days. Electricity and pump maintenance are costly. So are the annual irrigation district taxes I?ve paid the last three years for contracted?though undelivered?surface water from the system that my great-grandfather and other pioneers built themselves with horse-drawn scrapers at the turn of the twentieth century. This winter, I added my name to the waiting list to lower the pump bowls?the impellers deep in the well that force the water up through the casing to the surface?in anticipation of another year of drought. If the drought does continue, vast tracts of west-side farmlands will turn to dust. California?s nearly $30 billion agricultural export industry?led by dairy, almond, and grape production?is in grave peril. Its collapse would crush the economic livelihood of the Central Valley, especially its Hispanic community. When the 5 million-acre west side goes dry, hundreds of thousands of people will lose their jobs in a part of the state where the average unemployment rate already hovers above 10 percent. Farmers will spend hundreds of millions of dollars to deepen their wells further and save what water they can. Everything they and their predecessors have known for a century will be threatened with extinction. Water is to California as coal is to Kentucky?yet its use is being curtailed by those least affected, if affected at all, by the consequences of their advocacy. But environmentalists, who for 40 years worked to undermine the prudent expansion of the state?s water infrastructure, have a rendezvous with those consequences soon. No reservoir water is left for them to divert?none for the reintroduction of their pet salmon, none for the Delta smelt. Their one hope is to claim possession of the water in the ground once they?ve exhausted what was above it. Redistribution, not expansion of supplies, is the liberal creed for water, just as it is for wealth. As the Hetch Hetchy reservoir drains, Bay Area man-made storage lakes will necessarily follow. Another year of drought will deplete even southern California?s municipal reserves sooner rather than later. When Stanford professors and Cupertino tech lords cannot take a shower and find themselves paving over their suburban lawns and gardens, perhaps they, too, will see the value of reservoir water for people rather than for fish. The new dust bowl may soon see a different generation of Joads abandoning California for a wetter?and more prosperous?Midwest. Could California still save itself? New reservoirs to store millions of acre-feet of snowmelt could be built relatively quickly for the price of the state?s high-speed rail boondoggle. Latino voters?the state?s largest minority?might come around to the view that the liberal coastal elite?s obsession with environmental regulations leads to higher electricity rates, gasoline prices, and food costs, along with fewer jobs and economic opportunities. Barring that, there may be only two things left for California farmers to do: pray for the recent wet weather to continue; and, if it does, pray further that environmentalists do not send the precious manna from heaven out to sea. Victor Davis Hanson is a contributing editor of City Journal and the Martin and Illie Anderson Senior Fellow in Classics and Military History at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 440 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Apr 7 13:23:00 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 20:23:00 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Greenwire: S. Calif. water district exerts heavy influence on legislative negotiations Message-ID: <791101407.1364727.1428438180833.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> As congressional talks continue over California's historic drought, one participant in the negotiations has been more influential than it has claimed. DROUGHT:? S. Calif. water district exerts heavy influence on legislative negotiations? Debra Kahn, E&E reporterPublished: Friday, March 27, 2015??As congressional talks continue over California's historic drought, one participant in the negotiations has been more influential than it has claimed.Metropolitan Water District, a consortium of 26 public agencies that supplies water to 19 million people in Southern California, sent Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Rep. Jim Costa (D-Calif.) proposals for managing the state's water that made it into bills that passed both houses last year, according to documents obtained through a California Public Records Act request.Emails between Met staff, Feinstein's staff and others also reveal extensive negotiations last year over a draft bill by Feinstein that never got introduced but has been under discussion again this session. Most of the proposals focused on tweaking the way Endangered Species Act protections are applied in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the source of water supplies for 25 million people and 3 million acres of farmland via two giant systems of canals and pumps.Met supplied the documents Dec. 5, 2014, in response to a request from environmental groups, which along with House Democrats were clamoring to be included in negotiations.The emails underscore the role of urban water districts in the negotiations. Much of the back-and-forth negotiations has been portrayed as agricultural contractors in the Central Valley pushing back against water reserved for endangered species via a set of much-litigated biological opinions, which kick in when chinook salmon or delta smelt are moving through the system, limiting the amount of water that the state and federal governments can pump to customers.But Met -- the largest supplier of drinking water in the country -- has also been a prime mover behind the congressional push, which drew a veto threat from President Obama last February and again in December, when the House passed bills from Rep. David Valadao (R-Calif.) that would have gone much further than the Feinstein bill in guaranteeing water deliveries for state and federal contractors. After months of negotiations last summer and fall between Feinstein, Costa and California's Republican House delegation, members withdrew after failing to get language included in the omnibus spending bill at the end of 2014, vowing to resume talks this year.Met has claimed limited involvement in the debate over the Feinstein bill, but the emails show otherwise.On Nov. 18, 2014, Met's general manager, Jeffrey Kightlinger, told his board members that the agency's involvement in the under-wraps Feinstein bill was limited. He emphasized that conversations with Feinstein's staff were "technical" and said he was ignorant of the bill's overall policy direction."I presume our input is not encouraging her to gut the Endangered Species Act in any way?" board member Paul Koretz asked."No, and frankly, most of our conversations have really been very technical, on issues -- impacts that would -- if you did a certain action, what would the impacts be potentially to the State Water Project, both pro and con, and those sorts of things," Kightlinger said. "So it's been pretty technical. She's keeping her policy cards close to her vest as to where she wants to go on policy, but her staff is doing a lot of reaching out to make sure the technical details are correct."Koretz asked again: "And as you said, we haven't seen anything to lead us to believe that the Endangered Species Act would be negatively impacted by this bill?""Not in my view, no," Kightlinger replied.The two-minute exchange between Koretz and Kightlinger didn't make it into Met's board meeting?minutes?the next month. On Dec. 9, the minutes were amended to reflect the exchange.Kightlinger said such an aside wouldn't normally be included in the minutes and that it was added in later at Koretz's request.He also said he stood by his statement that Met's involvement was "technical" rather than policy-oriented."What we looked at, I would consider pretty technical," he said, "where there was room for adaptability or flexibility within the biological opinions, which are, frankly, highly technical." A statewide powerhouse Met is the largest customer of the State Water Project, a massive midcentury system of canals and pumps that is intended to deliver more than a billion gallons per day from the delta to Southern California via a 440-mile aqueduct. It also takes 800 million gallons per day from the Colorado River, 240 miles away.This year, however, the drought has reduced delta deliveries by about two-thirds, leaving a gap of about 500,000 acre-feet to be filled by conservation and mandatory water pricing, set to be voted on next month by Met's board. Met is governed by a board of 37 members, appointed from its various member agencies, but its executive staff is in charge of day-to-day operations.Major players in the negotiations, according to the emails, were Met Assistant General Manager Roger Patterson; Westlands Water District General Manager Tom Birmingham; Met Special Projects Manager Brenda Burman, a former counselor to the Interior Department's assistant secretary for water and science and later deputy commissioner at the Bureau of Reclamation under President George W. Bush; and David Bernhardt, former Interior solicitor under Bush and a current attorney and lobbyist for Westlands, a major agricultural water contractor in the San Joaquin Valley.On Feb. 5, Metropolitan staff reviewed proposed bill language from Feinstein staff that would allow the National Marine Fisheries Service to modify import-export ratios for water coming into and leaving the delta, in order to allow water transfers that exceeded levels established to protect steelhead salmon in the San Joaquin River.Patterson?asked?Met lawyers to vet some bill text that Feinstein legislative assistant Felix Yeung sent to Patterson under the heading, "Your language.""Can you both take a look at this ASAP and confirm that you believe NMFS would have discretion under the BiOp to do this? It's intended to let them allow 1:1 pumping of any transfer water no matter what the underlying base ratio may be," Patterson wrote.The 2009 biological opinion, which protects endangered salmon in the delta, likely did not envision water transfers, so exceeding the ratio should be permitted, Met Deputy General Counsel Linus Masouredis wrote.The language showed up in Feinstein's?S. 2918, which passed the Senate on May 22 under a "hotline" procedure that did not allow any hearings (E&E Daily, May 23, 2014). It also appeared in Valadao's?H.R. 5781, which passed the House in December.In June, Burman sent Costa's chief of staff, Scott Petersen, a six-page?summary?of aspects of the Feinstein bill that Met supported and a list of additional proposed changes to ESA implementation, including placing an "indefinite hold" on parts of the biological opinion protecting salmon, such as restrictions on exports and river flows.Another example of the tweaks Met proposed concerned a provision in the biological opinion that limits withdrawals when smelt are near the pumps. Burman sent?language?to Feinstein and Costa staffers July 22, 2014, that would require the Interior Department to conduct modeling to see whether fish might be near the pumps, in addition to relying on manual surveys and measurements of water conditions when deciding whether to limit pumping."By requiring a reporting it is hoped that ... the Secretary will have to account for modeling and the presence or absence of fish in the river," Burman wrote to John Watts, Feinstein's legislative director.Watts then emailed them draft bill language on July 29, the day before he sent it to Obama administration wildlife officials for vetting. He also sent a draft to officials from two other major water interests in the Central Valley: the Kern County Water Agency and Paramount Farms, the massive, privately held fruit and nut grower that processes more than half of the pistachios grown in California, under the brand name Wonderful Pistachios."I would appreciate your thoughts on the attached draft water bill language, which I have developed working with Metropolitan and Westlands," he?wrote. Pushback from Obama officials The emails show a flurry of activity in September, after Feinstein gave Watts the green light in late July to share the bill with the Obama administration. They also show administration officials pushing back on the Feinstein draft bill in an attempt to enforce the ESA."The original language puts Reclamation and the Services in the position of potentially violating the measures in the opinions required to prevent jeopardizing the species," officials from the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service wrote in the revisions, which Watts?sent?to Westlands and Met staff on Sept. 6, 2014."I do think we have to respect the Administration's conclusion that a mini-jeopardy analysis would not work and would constitute a significant amendment to the ESA," Watts then?wrote?to Birmingham, Burman, Bernhardt and Patterson on Sept. 13, 2014. "We don't have to accept their substitute, however."Watts said that NMFS West Coast Regional Administrator Will Stelle's suggestion to work within the biological opinions might be more politically feasible."I believe we need to try this approach because it has two very significant and probably essential advantages: 1) It allows us to say that we are working with the BiOps rather than overriding them, which is politically essential; and 2) It helps protect us from enviro lawsuits that we are going outside the biops, requiring reconsultation," he wrote.Kightlinger said he stood by his statement that the draft bill wouldn't have weakened the ESA, despite the administration's findings. "My language was that there was nothing we have provided that in our view would amend or change the Endangered Species Act, and I don't believe there is," he said.An environmentalist who has been following the negotiations said the proposals were aimed directly at weakening the law. Several of Burman's suggestions, such as lifting flow restrictions in the San Joaquin River, were also sought in a 2009 lawsuit from Met, Westlands, Kern and others. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the existing regulations in December (E&ENews PM, Dec. 22, 2014)."It would definitely weaken protections for endangered species in the delta, there's no question about it," said Doug Obegi, a staff attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council. "Those are provisions that were litigated and the court upheld, and now Met is seeking to get Congress to waive those protections for endangered steelhead."Other emails that environmental groups obtained from Westlands also show Bernhardt and Birmingham working with Valadao's staff on the bill that passed the House in December 2014 (E&ENews PM, Dec. 9, 2014)."Where can I find the latest numbers for the amount of water that has been dumped into the ocean for fish etc?" Valadao's legislative director, Jessica Butler,?wrote?to Birmingham and Bernhardt on Dec. 8, 2014, at a House Rules Committee hearing the day before the bill passed the House.Met voted to?oppose?the first Valadao bill last March, however, on a motion from Koretz. Kightlinger said that wasn't inconsistent with Met's work on the bill."That is staff's job, to work with elected officials," he said. "Final positions on final bills are the board's prerogative." 'This wasn't just the technical points' A House Democrat who represents Northern California tribal Indian and farming constituencies, Rep. Jared Huffman, said he was surprised by Met's intimate involvement."It certainly confirms the type of input we know Sen. Feinstein and the Republicans were getting, but I am surprised to see the significant role that the Metropolitan Water District was playing behind the scenes," he said.Huffman, a former senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, pointed out that Met's involvement with the Feinstein bill could have led to a conference committee with Valadao and the other House Republicans, whose February bill went much further.H.R. 3964?would have undone a San Joaquin River restoration program that has been the object of a court settlement and intricate compromises between state and federal officials for decades, capped the delivery of water for environmental purposes, lengthened irrigation contracts and lifted certain environmental protections in area watersheds, among other controversial provisions (E&E Daily, Feb. 6, 2014)."This wasn't just the technical points they were submitting in isolation," Huffman said. "This was attached to a really big, nasty piece of legislation.""Everybody knows this was part of negotiations between Senator Feinstein and Valadao and the Republicans," he continued. "Whatever they may have been suggesting for Senator Feinstein, they knew it was going to be attached to something very controversial and very destructive, or else it could never have passed muster with the Republicans."Talks appear to have slowed down between Feinstein and the Northern California contingent. Huffman said he hasn't discussed the bill with Feinstein since a meeting in January with Northern California Democrats (Greenwire, Jan. 28).Feinstein's spokesman said he didn't have a timeline for when a bill might be introduced."Over the past year the senator and her staff met, emailed and spoke with dozens of agencies and groups about drought legislation, and those consultations continue," spokesman Tom Mentzer said in an email. "That back-and-forth is how bills get drafted, especially controversial bills like this one. Feedback is sought, applied when appropriate, and a bill slowly comes together.""I won't comment on specific conversations except to say they all share the same goal: developing an emergency bill (with a limited duration) that will help the whole state and improve conditions for fish and wildlife by prudently increasing water supplies -- all while not violating environmental laws such as the Endangered Species Act and the Clean Water Act," Mentzer added.Met officials have found more success in dealing directly with the federal agencies. Late last year, they successfully challenged FWS's calculation of the number of smelt that can legally be killed each year -- another metric defined in the 2008 biological opinion. That led to FWS more than doubling the amount that can be killed this water year, from 78 to 196 (Greenwire, Jan. 29). Burman proposed the same adjustment to Petersen on June 12, 2014.Birmingham and Kightlinger said they hadn't been in discussions over a drought bill this year. Kightlinger visited Washington, D.C., earlier this year and met with lawmakers including Feinstein, Huffman, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and Reps. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Grace Napolitano (D-Calif.), but discussed only the political chances of a bill, rather than specifics."We, Met, would like to see a bipartisan bill that parties can agree to," he said. "Historically, water has not been a partisan issue, but like many things these days, it's getting more and more partisan."Birmingham said the need for a legislative fix has only increased since last year's talks."I would observe that the drought has worsened and the need for some action is only exacerbated," he said. "It's my hope that some legislation providing congressional direction on how the existing biological opinions will be applied to the operations of the Central Valley Project and State Water Project during the ongoing crisis will be enacted."Twitter:?@debra_kahn?| Email:?dkahn at eenews.net? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Apr 8 07:26:58 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 14:26:58 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal: Drought Pressure Message-ID: <209725257.1930402.1428503218971.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_594940ce-dd8f-11e4-aef3-1b1f89accaf2.html Drought pressureBy AMY GITTELSOHN The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 8, 2015 6:15 am Drought graph Although last week Gov. Jerry Brown ordered water use reductions across the state, the two largest water suppliers in Trinity County are not immediately requiring their customers to cut consumption.Brown?s executive order came after the April 1 snow survey turned up the lowest snowpack ever recorded. Statewide the snowpack was 5 percent of average, and the snowpack for the Trinity River Basin was 6 percent of average. Although the mountains received some snow in the past week, the amounts still pale in comparison to the average.For the first time in state history, Brown directed the State Water Resources Control Board to implement mandatory water reductions in cities and towns across California to reduce water usage by 25 percent over 2013.From the Weaverville Community Services District, General Manager Wes Scribner said customers have been calling to see how this will affect them. Before he can answer that question, Scribner said, the state water board must meet and formulate regulations that carry out the governor?s mandate. The board is expected to consider proposed regulations May 1.?Until we see that we don?t have much to act on,? Scribner said, adding that when the district does, ?there will be plenty of notification for folks.?For example, he said one issue that needs to be clarified is if it is a 25 percent cut for the district as a whole or per capita, a number that can change ? particularly when residents from outside the district have purchased water from WCSD when their sources went dry.However, Scribner said, the district will probably go into Stage 1 of its water shortage policy which encourages customers to conserve. Technically, the district is nowhere near the threshold for Stage 1 which looks at usage versus supply and treatment capacity, but ?California has hit the threshold,? he noted. ?If it rained every week throughout the summer we?re still going to have some hard times.?The district might be better off than the rest of the state but ?we?re being proactive,? he said, and working with other agencies to find ways to be more efficient. Customers also are encouraged to keep track of their usage shown on their bills.In 2014 the average household connected to the WCSD used 575 cubic feet of water a month from the district in the winter and just under 2,500 cubic feet in the summer.From Trinity County Waterworks District #1 in Hayfork, General Manager Craig Hair said he had not yet read the governor?s declaration, but for the moment ?we are going to attack the drought like we would normally attack the drought? We sympathize with the governor?s plight of trying to make one size fit all for the whole state of California.?Last week he noted that if it rained over the weekend the district?s reservoir would be overflowing, and said it makes little sense to tell local customers they have to cut back ?because some guy in Bakersfield is out of water.?Hair said his board might decide differently, but at this point decisions are based on the local situation.The governor?s order also calls for replacement of 50 million square feet of lawns throughout the state with drought tolerant landscaping, cuts in water use by golf courses and other large landscapes, water conservation pricing and permanent monthly reporting by local water agencies of water usage, conservation and enforcement actions, and incentives for new technology to make the state more water efficient.The governor?s order is drawing fire from critics because it doesn?t include mandatory cutbacks for agriculture, which uses the vast majority of the state?s water supply.Brown has noted that some California farmers have already been denied irrigation water from federal surface supplies.According to a news release from Brown?s office, ?Agricultural water users ? which have borne much of the brunt of the drought to date, with hundreds of thousands of fallowed acres, significantly reduced water allocations and thousands of farmworkers laid off ? will be required to report more water use information to state regulators, increasing the state?s ability to enforce against illegal diversions and waste and unreasonable use of water under today?s order.??They delivered too much water in prior years to the agricultural customers,? responds Tom Stokely, water policy coordinator for the California Water Impact Network.?Certainly there needed to be a drought declaration, and there are some good things in it,? Stokely said. ?The glaring omission is there are no mandatory cutbacks for agriculture or any restrictions on the planting of new, permanent crops such as almonds, pistachios, grapes.?Almonds, the majority of which are sold overseas, use more water than all indoor usage in California, Stokely said, adding that annual crops make more sense in areas without a reliable water supply.Stokely said growing almonds is particularly a problem in areas south of the Delta where the trees require twice as much irrigation water as those in Chico, for example, which has cooler temperatures and more rainfall and groundwater.The low Trinity Reservoir, coupled with higher temperatures, will make it difficult to release water to the Trinity River that is cool enough for fish, Stokely said.Stokely said the situation would not be so bad if a minimum pool had been kept in Trinity Lake of 900,000 acre-feet as C-WIN has recommended. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Apr 8 10:11:06 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 17:11:06 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Governor Brown to Meet with Water, Environmental and Agricultural Leaders on Drought Today in Sacramento In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1015504956.2041500.1428513066122.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Begin forwarded message: Governor Brown to Meet with Water, Environmental and Agricultural Leaders on Drought Today in Sacramento #yiv2945814315 h1, #yiv2945814315 h2, #yiv2945814315 h3, #yiv2945814315 h4, #yiv2945814315 h5, #yiv2945814315 h6 {font-family:"arial black", arial, sans-serif;} | View this email in a web browser ??? | ??? Forward to a friend ??? | | | | | | | | | | MEDIA ADVISORY | Contact: Governor's Press Office | | Wednesday, April 8, 2015 | (916) 445-4571 | Governor Brown to Meet with Water, Environmental and Agricultural Leaders on Drought Today in Sacramento SACRAMENTO ? On the heels of the lowest snowpack measurement ever recorded last week and the first ever statewide mandatory water reduction order, Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. will meet with top agricultural, environmental and urban water agency leaders from across California today in Sacramento.??As Californians, we have to save water in every way we possibly can and we have to pull together,? said Governor Brown at last week?s snowpack measurement. ?We have to become more resilient, more efficient and more innovative and that?s exactly what we are going to do.?? When: Today, Wednesday, April 8, 2015. The final few minutes of the meeting will be open to coverage by credentialed media at approx. 2:15 p.m. Reporters must check in at 2:00 p.m. Where: California State Capitol, Governor's Office, Sacramento, CA 95814 ?For more than two years, the state's experts have been managing water resources to deal with the effects of the drought and prepare for the next one. Last week, Governor Brown announced the first ever 25 percent statewide mandatory water reductions and a series of actions to help save water, increase enforcement to prevent wasteful water use, streamline the state's drought response and invest in new technologies that will make California more drought resilient. Last year, the Governor proclaimed a drought state of emergency. The state has also taken steps to make sure that water is available for human health and safety, growing food, fighting fires and protecting fish and wildlife. Millions have been spent helping thousands of California families most impacted by the drought pay their bills, put food on their tables and have water to drink.?To learn about all the actions the state has taken to manage our water system and cope with the impacts of the drought, visit Drought.CA.Gov. Every Californian should take steps to conserve water. Find out how at SaveOurWater.com.?###? | | | Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. State Capitol Building Sacramento, CA 95814 | | | Forward | View?in?Browser | | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Apr 8 10:16:23 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2015 17:16:23 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Bacher: Governor to meet with water, "environmental" and agribusiness leaders about drought today In-Reply-To: <2A092304-26D9-40DC-B40A-C253F86660D0@fishsniffer.com> References: <2A092304-26D9-40DC-B40A-C253F86660D0@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <2105488592.2073492.1428513383874.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/08/1376390/-Governor-to-meet-with-water-environmental-and-agribusiness-leaders-about-drought-today? Governor to meet with water, "environmental" and agribusiness leaders about drought today by Dan Bacher Governor Jerry Brown will be be holding a meeting today in the Governor's Office at the State Capitol with "water, environmental and agricultural leaders" regarding the drought. The meeting is believed to be a response to widespread and scathing criticism in local and national ?media about the Governor's hypocrisy in mandating cities and counties to slash water use by 25 percent, while imposing no new restrictions on water use by agribusiness, who use 80 percent of the state's water while contributing only 2 percent of the state's annual economy. I called the Governor's Office to find out what groups and leaders would be meeting with the Governor and I'm waiting for a response. As usual, the Governor appears to be excluding Tribal leaders and fishermen - who are among those hardest hit by the record drought - from the meeting. The media advisory states, "On the heels of the lowest snowpack measurement ever recorded last week and the first ever statewide mandatory water reduction order, Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. will meet with top agricultural, environmental and urban water agency leaders from across California today in Sacramento."??As Californians, we have to save water in every way we possibly can and we have to pull together,? said Governor Brown at last week?s snowpack measurement. ?We have to become more resilient, more efficient and more innovative and that?s exactly what we are going to do.??The media is also excluded from the meeting, except for the final few minutes. "The final few minutes of the meeting will be open to coverage by credentialed media at approx. 2:15 p.m. Reporters must check in at 2:00 p.m.," according to the advisory.?The media advisory states, "For more than two years, the state's experts have been managing water resources to deal with the effects of the drought and prepare for the next one. Last week, Governor Brown announced the first ever 25 percent statewide mandatory water reductions and a series of actions to help save water, increase enforcement to prevent wasteful water use, streamline the state's drought response and invest in new technologies that will make California more drought resilient.? Last year, the Governor proclaimed a drought state of emergency. The state has also taken steps to make sure that water is available for human health and safety, growing food, fighting fires and protecting fish and wildlife. Millions have been spent helping thousands of California families most impacted by the drought pay their bills, put food on their tables and have water to drink."??There was no mention in the media advisory nor the Governor's Executive Order issued last week about the alarming fact that the oil industry annually use three times as much water as the entire city of San Francisco while Big Oil pollutes precious aquifers with fracking wastewater. After the State Water Resources Control Board announced that some California communities must cut water use by 35 percent or face fines of $10,000 a day, Ash Lauth of the Center for Biological Diversity, who will speak at the water board?s ?meeting today, issued a statement on behalf of Californians Against Fracking.??California communities have been ordered to make huge water cuts to fight drought, but the state?s plan lets the oil industry completely off the hook," said Lauth. "Even as Gov. Brown and state officials vow to leave no stone unturned, oil companies that use and contaminate huge amounts of water are getting a free pass. In one year, the oil industry uses three times as much water as the entire city of San Francisco."?"Fracking and other unconventional extraction methods permanently poison and remove fresh water from our water cycle every day. It is indefensible that our governor is allowing the oil industry to continue with business as usual," Lauth said.?"Gov. Brown must also stop oil companies from contaminating California?s underground water. Hundreds of oil industry disposal wells are dumping toxic oil waste into scores of protected aquifers across the state, but the Brown administration has shut down just 23 of these illegal wells," Lauth noted. Lauth revealed that these illegal disposal wells dump an average total of?27 million gallons of oil waste into protected aquifers! "Gov. Brown must stop the oil industry from polluting our precious water supplies, or California will bitterly regret his inaction in the dry decades ahead," Lauth concluded. Meanwhile, as agribusiness and the oil industry continue to use water during a record drought without the mandatory restrictions imposed upon people in the cities and counties of California, the Governor continues to push the construction of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to build the peripheral tunnels, the most environmentally destructive public works project in California history.? In the latest episode of the long saga of the BDCP, the Brown administration has chosen to drop the Habitat Conservation Plan section of the project. (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/07/1376237/-Why-did-DWR-drop-the-BDCP-Habitat-Conservation-Plan While Jerry Brown continues to gush about "green energy" and "climate change" at press conferences and other photo opportunities, his record on fish, water and the environment is arguably the worst of any Governor in recent California history.? To discover the truth about Governor Brown's environmental record, go to: http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/09/24/big-oils-favorite-governor-jerry-brown/?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Apr 9 09:33:29 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 16:33:29 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] On the Public Record Message-ID: <1641719662.2853717.1428597209168.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> You may need to go to the website to get all the graphics. TS http://onthepublicrecord.org ? Hard to defend. I have marked the almond acreage at the beginning and end of the 2006-2009 drought (700,000 acres at the beginning, 810,000 acres at the end). At the beginning of our current drought, almond acreage was 870,000 acres. In 2013, after two years of drought, it was up to 940,000 acres. It looks like the 2014 California Almond Acreage Report comes out at the end of April (here?s?2013). I will be excited to see a new total acreage. (Source) Let?s make this all explicit. Since this drought began, almonds have expanded by 70,000 acres. That?s 280,000 acft/year of new water demand for a snack that will be exported. That water will come from groundwater or from other farmers. At the same time, the California EPA is literally telling urban users to take five minute cold showers. If there is a lot of new acreage in 2014 and 2015, it is going to be difficult for the Brown administration to stay friends with them.A couple notes: Not-having this new almond acreage would not mean wet water for cities. But it would mean less overdraft of San Joaquin Valley groundwater.I should be explicit that I don?t love applying California?s water resources to alfalfa/silage for meat and dairy, nor wine grapes either. But I sense that most others are much more culturally attached to cheap meat and dairy, and also to wine, than they are to almonds. In my own life, I could readily accept all three (almonds, meat/dairy, wine) becoming rarer and more expensive.2 CommentsFiled under?UncategorizedAPRIL 7, 2015 ? : Why an almond?ban? Secretary of Agriculture Ross was fast with the defense of almonds, which I would hope would be the case since it has been a hot topic.? But it feels so right, so good to criticize almonds (and I have for years).??Why?a single-crop ban?1.? It is readily enforceable.? Visual inspection would be sufficient, the delineation is clear (almonds, no, everything else, yes).? The pain is contained to a very small segment of the population, some of whom are buffered by their wealth.2.? It would free up genuine wet water.? One million acres of almonds use four million acre-feet of water and even in California, four million acre-feet of water is real water.? That?s about the amount of annual overdraft in the San Joaquin Valley during this drought.3.? Almonds seem frivolous.? I like them myself, but they are just a snack.4.? The only justification for almonds is that they draw high prices, but that means that a public resource that everyone wants right now is being transformed to private profits for a few.? The?conserving public?isn?t getting to enjoy the use of that money in exchange for their sacrifice of water.5.? Almonds, especially the?half?quarter million acres of almonds planted since the start of the 2006 drought, feel like an arrogant fuck you to the rest of us.? The planters knew of drought and decided they?d go ahead, plant trees that must get water?and break the aquifers if they had to.?? Those are everyone?s aquifers, but again, not everyone?s enjoyment of almond profits.An almond ban doesn?t have to be all-or-nothing.? It could be ?no new trees in declining groundwater basins?.? It could be ?we?ll protect our historic almond industry in the Sac Valley but not expansion since 2006, since they must have known about drought?.? But it keeps getting mentioned because it makes a lot of intuitive sense.?? If the State Board does nothing on tree nuts, Secretary Ross will have to?keep giving?her practiced answers.15 CommentsFiled under?UncategorizedAPRIL 7, 2015 ? : My thoughts on Governor Brown?s reasons for not including agriculture in mandatory water?restrictions. Governor Brown lists three reasons in the ABC interview below. - The lack of delivery from the water projects and water rights curtailments of junior appropriators is already sufficient cutback. - It would end Californian food production and displace hundreds of thousands of people. - Our historical water rights system gives (some) farmers precedent. 1.? This argument doesn?t impress me much, because we know that farmers are still getting water.?They had a cheap surface water cutback, but replaced that supply with groundwater.? About?500,000 acres?out of 9,500,000 acres were fallowed.? The remaining 9,000,000 acres used water to keep permanent crops alive or finished other crops.? Growers paid more money for this water, or they increased their overdraft.? Their actual cutback was 500,000acres/9,500,000acres = 5.2%.? I?d be happy to grant that growers deficit irrigated, or watered the very minimum to keep crops alive, so that percent might be higher, even 8% or 9%.? That?s about in line with urban water conservation last year.? The water right curtailments and lack of project water are not imposing a burden on agriculture whole disproportionate to the burden urban users shouldered last year.? We will know that agriculture has matched the 25% cuts being imposed on urban users because 2.4 million irrigated acres will be fallowed.2a.? Brown said ?Of course we could shut it off,? said Brown.??If you don?t want to produce any food and import it from some other place.?? I will never understand why agriculture is discussed as a toggle, either on or off.? If we cut back some ag water, all the other growers will refuse to grow food in solidarity?? You could still have A LOT OF AGRICULTURE, even if you cut back A LOT.? That?s because there is a WHOLE LOT now.??Ag could cut back the 2.4 million irrigated acres just with tree nuts and alfalfa.? California could still supply literally every other thing it grows now, every single leaf of spinach.2b.? Brown mentioned displacing hundreds of thousands of growers (because if one water district* gets cut off, every other grower in the state leaves as well.? The growers, united, will never be divided.).???I note that growers have been?drawing down groundwater?so that personal and municipal wells are going dry.? This fastidiousness about driving people from their homes is not reciprocated.? But look, if it is going to be very hard on farmworkers, we could help them by ? giving them fat cash.? We can come up with money more readily than we can create water.3. Our historical water rights system.? My guess is that until they (Gov Brown and the State Board) are absolutely forced to it, they will not take this on.? Partly out of respect for history and law, partly because where would you start, partly because the lawsuits would start. But Gov. Brown knows full well they are an unfair, convoluted mess.? Two more years of drought and emergency powers will get turned on the water rights system too**.*I?propose they start with?Dudley Ridge Water District, which has not one resident and is wholly owned by?a few ?corporations.**Here?s what you do, State Board.?Spend the two years getting ready to put the next system in place. Don?t even glance at the existing system. Grant every person a headright of?30gppd that travels with them.? Cities can administer the aggregate, based on population.? Figure out what instream flows should be.? Decide which five million acres?should be farmed and grant those lands 3.5 acft/acre.? In years with more water than that total, users can buy more directly from the State.4 CommentsFiled under?UncategorizedAPRIL 7, 2015 ? : What Governor Brown has said about not requiring agricultural water?restrictions. There?are?almost?too many?editorials?and posts?to link?to, decrying agriculture?s exemption from the mandatory water use restrictions that came out April 1st.? I want to think about why Governor Brown is doing this, but I?d like us to work from the same texts.? So far as I have seen, here are his own words about why agriculture has been exempted.From?ABC news: Brown said farmers have already been denied irrigation water from federal surface supplies, and they?ve had to leave hundreds of thousands of acres unplanted.?Of course we could shut if off,? said Brown.??If you don?t want to produce any food and import it from some other place, theoretically you could do that. But that would displace hundreds of thousands of people and I don?t think it?s needed.?Brown pointed out, there are farmers with ?senior? water rights.? ?Some people have a right to more water than others,? said Brown.??That?s historic, that?s built into the legal framework of California. And yes, if things continue at this level that?s probably going to be examined.? A nicely done piece in the Western Farm Press: To the premise that agriculture is getting a ?free ride? in the Governor?s order, Cowin said, ?Ag water use has been significantly affected during this drought? The state board (Marcus? board) has implemented curtailments on some water rights holders throughout the Central Valley and elsewhere, so Ag water use is definitely being affected here.?To a similar question, Marcus responded: ?They (farmers)?are already cut back under much harsher circumstances?through the seniority (water rights) system.?To yet another question, Cowin openly disagreed with a reporter?s question and premise, saying: ?We?are?asking Ag water users to conserve water. In fact, the enforcement in this case includes curtailing water available to them.?CDFA Secretary Ross likewise defended the thrifty practices farmers have employed when irrigating crops.Ross defended almond growers, who in recent months have been on the receiving end of some rather brutal attacks for irrigation water use.Without skipping a beat, Ross pointed out that almonds are grown in California: - ?Because markets are available; - ?Because demand continues to increase; - ?Because of the availability and price of land and water; and - ?Because of the lack of labor needed to produce tree nuts in a marketplace that is moving towards more automation. I am going to assume his executives are representing Governor Brown?s administration appropriately, and that these reflect Governor Brown?s thinking as well.? So, let?s go over these reasons.Leave a commentFiled under?UncategorizedMARCH 27, 2015 ? : How will 3 million acres of irrigated land go out of?production? Between groundwater overdraft, urban growth and climate change decreasing useful precip, I predict that 3 million acres of irrigated agriculture in California will go out of production in the next few decades. What I can?t predict is how they will go out of production. Here are some ways it could happen: - The State could offer to buy agricultural land at five times market rate, from anyone who wants to sell. Or the State could buy out entire water districts, so that it owns contiguous land. - The State could do nothing, let wells fail and let growers eat their losses individually, wherever they are. Counties would pay for the costs of scattered abandoned lands. - Water districts could plan for continued shortages, identifying the lands that will not get water, allowing the land along entire laterals to go dry. The remaining farmers could pay compensation to the farmers who will not receive water. - The State could identify 6 million acres of prime ag land that it wants to support. It could offer that acreage the assurance of water during droughts or monetary support in dry years in exchange for growing fruits and veggies. It could forbid groundwater pumping for ag use outside the 6 million acres. - The State could hasten the failure of the 3 million acres by forbidding groundwater overdraft, billing farmers for the costs of subsidence, and banning almond orchards. - The State could offer to buy out lands during generational change. There are lots of ways this could happen.? Only some of them have horrible outcomes for everyone.? Some of them have costs in money and some of them have costs in human suffering.? Some of them concentrate wealth among the already wealthy and some of them support middle class farming towns.? When I am pessimistic, I am not pessimistic that the land will go out of production.??That is inevitable.?I am pessimistic that refusing to face that fact means that the collapse will be catastrophic, disorderly?and borne by individuals, instead of planned, orderly and borne by all of us.? I am pessimistic that the taboo of describing a poorer future means that we won?t do the work to create the least bad outcome.4 CommentsFiled under?UncategorizedMARCH 27, 2015 ? : No really. What would it mean to go from 9.5M irrigated acres to 6M irrigated acres in?California? What does it mean if one-third of irrigated acres in California go out of production? Well, depends on your perspective. First, it does not mean the end of agriculture in California, because two-thirds of irrigated agriculture would persist. That?s 6 million acres of irrigated agriculture, which is rather a lot.Does it mean that your fruits and veggies will get more expensive? Does it mean that non-Californians will never have an almond again? Should you be hoarding wine? I don?t know. That depends on how the transition happens. The only thing that looks inevitable to me is that meat and dairy will become much more expensive. Relatively cheap feed, like alfalfa and silage, is the underpinning for cheap meat and dairy. I don?t see how those can remain cheap, nor how meat&dairy can withstand the way resource consumption intensifies with each step up the food chain.Will the agricultural economy collapse? It doesn?t have to. Some two-thirds of it will remain, probably where the water resources were richest in the first place. The Sacramento Valley, the coastal valleys, Yolo, the northeast side of the San Joaquin Valley will be able to keep farming. Places that are poor now will become poorer until they are abandoned or find new industries.?Would retiring lands really suck for the people who are now farming them? It could. Again, it depends on how it happens. But many of the problems caused by farms going out of production are problems of poverty. Those can be addressed with things that may be more available than water, like re-training for other careers or monetary support or funding for re-location.What about the empty barren land, with poisonous salt dirt-devils swirling everywhere? That?s the Salton Sea, you guys. In the San Joaquin Valley, it would return to scrub. Not every inch of land has to be farmed.4 CommentsFiled under?UncategorizedMARCH 27, 2015 ? : Going from 9.5ish million irrigated acres to 6ish million irrigated acres. WILL WE ALL?DIE? Yes. Your best hope is that the end comes quickly, probably in a flood or heat wave or maybe from invasive insects and West Nile.1 CommentFiled under?UncategorizedMARCH 27, 2015 ? : Why I think 3 million acres of irrigated land will go out of production by, say,?2040. It is my contention that about three million irrigated acres in California will go out of production in the next few decades. My estimate is the highest I have seen.?I break it down as follows: annual overdraft in the SJV is between 4.5-5MAF. When that stops, either because groundwater management agencies bring the basins into balance or because groundwater will drop too low to economically pump, about 1.5M acres will not have irrigation water available to them.I believe the droughts we are seeing now will be our future normal climate and we will receive very little useable precip. I believe urban users will use political power to claim more of what we do get and to protect adorable fishies. That gets me another million acres.I believe the Delta will succumb to sea level rise, storm tides and floods on the Sacramento River. That?s another 300,000 acres.?I add these and round up, and arrive at 3 million irrigated acres retired, down from our current 9.5ish million irrigated acres.?Here is Dr. Burt,?guessing that?1 to 1.5 million irrigated acres will go out of production. The PPIC/U.C. Davis crew must have a prediction, but I couldn?t find it handily. I?ll put it in this post if someone points me to it.4 CommentsFiled under?UncategorizedMARCH 20, 2015 ? : Yes, very important. The Fresno Bee?tells us: In a sign of this dry time, Sacramento Valley rice growers offered to fallow some of their fields and sell a more valuable harvest: Feather River water.Farmers in our parched western San Joaquin Valley bid for the water as they fight to keep almond and pistachio trees alive.They lost to a consortium led by Metropolitan Water District of Southern California that included the Kern County Water Agency, Kings County, and water districts on the Central Coast and in the Santa Clara and Napa valleys. Sacramento River Valley rice grower Bryce Lundberg, an executive of Lundberg Family Farms, sits on the Western Canal Water District Board. which is among the nine agencies that intend to sell water to the consortium.This was his assessment: ?When a group representing 18 million people come to call, it is important to listen to them. Being able to spread (water) to the most critical needs is good policy. A very targeted or directed use doesn?t make as much sense.? I recently saw myself described as ?a wonderful blogger who has just a few blind spots about political constraints.?? (I was tremendously flattered.)? It is true.? I am not concerned about political constraints, for the same reason Mr. Lundberg knows that the rice growers must sell to L.A..? I do not believe any political constraints can stand up to the self-interest of the urban water users in California.? A tipping point will come and when it does, 38 million of the 39 million people who live here will realize that words on paper are the only thing standing between them and the water they want.? They have the power to re-write those words,?by initiative?or through the legislature.It could be an initiative for an overhaul of the water rights system.? The legislature could revise?Article 10 of the California Constitution, or point to another body to propose the revision (as they did with the Delta Stewardship Commission for the co-equal goals and the California Water Commission to define the public benefit parts of water storage that should be paid for by all of us).? But if you ask me which I believe in more: that urban users will adopt inconvenient behaviors to conserve water or that urban users will vote to revise water rights in their favor, I would bet on the latter without hesitation.? It is just a matter of time.Continue reading??6 CommentsFiled under?UncategorizedMARCH 4, 2015 ? : -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Apr 10 07:29:53 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 14:29:53 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] California farmers mount PR campaign to counter backlash over water use Message-ID: <1542540277.284104.1428676193884.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> California farmers mount PR campaign to counter backlash over water use BY DAVID SIDERS AND DALE KASLERDSIDERS at SACBEE.COM04/09/2015 8:10 PM 04/09/2015 10:24 PM - Story - Comments When Gov. Jerry Brown announced his unprecedented water use reduction order last week, California farmers were largely spared.They quickly developed another problem: Bad PR.At issue was the apparent disconnect between Brown?s focus on urban water use and the fact that agriculture ? not cities or towns ? accounts for roughly 80 percent of all water used by people in California.Newspaper and television stations hammered on the statistic, while critics counted gallons of water required for different foods. The almond, an especially profitable and water-heavy crop, became a national symbol of California?s water problems, forcing growers to fight back by promoting the nutritional value of their food.Members of the California Water Alliance, a Hanford-based group of agricultural interests, called their consultant in dismay.?All of a sudden it?s ?Farmers use 80 percent of the water,? ? said the consultant, Hector Barajas. ?It caught a lot of farmers by surprise.?In an effort to push back, industry officials began meeting in recent days with politicians, business people and journalists. They posted graphics online showing an alternate interpretation of agriculture?s water use, and they plan to run Internet ads.On the total water use numbers themselves, there is broad agreement. According to the Public Policy Institute of California, about 9 million acres of farmland in the state are irrigated, representing about 80 percent of all water used by people.But that figure excludes roughly 50 percent of all water in California dedicated for environmental purposes, and farmers complain some water in the ecologically sensitive Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is off-limits to them.On Thursday, Matt Sparks, a spokesman for House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy of Bakersfield, distributed a Washington Examiner editorial lambasting protections for Delta smelt.Jeffrey Mount, a water expert at the PPIC, said that while stringent environmental standards have affected the agriculture industry?s access to water, ?the problem is it?s grossly overstated.? More than half of California?s so-called ?environmental water? occurs in rivers in the state?s North Coast, far from agricultural users, he said.?There is no denying the fact that in human applications of water ... 80 percent of that goes to agriculture,? Mount said, ?You can?t change that.?Farmers argue that so-called ?environmental water? should be taken into account when calculating total water use, putting agriculture?s consumption at closer to 40 percent.Paul Wenger, president of the California Farm Bureau Federation, made this case to reporters outside a drought forum in Sacramento on Thursday.But with numbers, Wenger said, ?It?s just so hard, you know, once that snowball starts going down the hill ... it?s pretty hard to get in front of it and divert it.?While Wenger spoke, Dave Kranz, a spokesman for the federation, said 80 percent is ?a statistic that?s used as a weapon.? He suggested that instead of saying a certain amount of water is used for agriculture, say that water is ?used to produce food.?Wenger fears that if the drought persists, farmers will be vilified, potentially giving rise to efforts to restrict their water rights.?If we?re in a 10-year drought or a longer drought,? said Wenger, a walnut and almond farmer, ?with the rhetoric that we?re seeing today, we would see water rights re-appropriated.?He said he voiced his concerns at a meeting Brown called Wednesday with water and farm officials and environmental groups at the Capitol. Wenger said Brown?s executive secretary, Nancy McFadden, was sympathetic, volunteering that the administration was ?getting beat up on this 80 percent number.?The meeting came just days after Brown was asked about agriculture?s heavy water use on ABC?s ?This Week.?Brown, who ordered a 25 percent reduction in urban water consumption, said of the 80 percent statistic, ?Yeah, you bet it?s true.?But the Democratic governor went on to defend farmers, who he said have already been punished with diminished state and federal water allocations. Farmers have fallowed thousands of acres of fields.In the ABC interview, Brown said farmers are ?not watering their lawn or taking longer showers. They?re providing most of the fruits and vegetables of America.?Felicia Marcus, chairwoman of the State Water Resources Control Board, said Thursday that ?it?s understandable that people want to point fingers at first.?But she said California?s farms are ?something to be valued? and that if ?you like fruit and vegetables, you like agriculture.?This feeling is widely held outside of the administration, as well. Agriculture is so prominent in California that it has an advantage in any public relations war over water use, said Barbara O?Connor, a political analyst and retired communications professor at Sacramento State.?It?s part of the Golden State,? she said. ?It?s part of our economy. We have farm to fork up here. People are into it emotionally.?But O?Connor said pressure may build if the drought persists. Until then, she said, the public is unlikely to turn on agriculture.?When restrictions on water use in cities become much more rigid and all the palm trees start to die in the medians and people are pulling out their yards, then we can talk again,? she said. ?But right now, no ... I think the average person treasures (agriculture). It?s part of our legacy.?Call David Siders, Bee Capitol Bureau, (916) 321-1215. Follow him on Twitter @davidsiders.http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Apr 10 08:23:32 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 15:23:32 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Cheap Water for Agriculture Worsens California Water Crisis Message-ID: <2145624931.312375.1428679412200.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.sanjoseinside.com/2015/04/09/cheap-water-for-agriculture-worsens-california-water-crisis/ ? Cheap Water for Agriculture Worsens California Water Crisis By?Mark Hertsgaard?@markhertsgaard/?22 hours ago22 Pistachios and almonds have made the desert boom, but it's taking its toll on the state's ecology.???I?ve been smiling all the way to the bank,? pistachio farmer John Dean said at a conference hosted earlier this month by Paramount Farms, the world?s largest almond and pistachio processor. Paramount is owned by Stewart Resnick, a Beverly Hills billionaire known for his sprawling agricultural holdings, controversial water dealings and millions of dollars in campaign contributions to California politicians.The record?drought, now entering its fourth year in California, has alarmed the public, left some rural communities without drinking water and led Gov. Jerry Brown last week to impose the first mandatory water restrictions in the state?s history. But the governor?s executive order required cutbacks only from the urban sector that uses roughly 20 percent of California?s developed water; the agricultural sector, which uses 80 percent, was required only to formulate ?plans? for coping with future drought.Responding to criticism about letting agriculture off easy, Brown and his aides pointed out that farmers have already been cut back. In February, U.S. officials announced that agriculture?s allocation of federal water supplies in California would be cut to zero in 2015. State water allocation to agriculture will be only 20 percent in 2015. And these reductions come on top of earlier cutbacks in 2014.Yet despite such cutbacks, farmers like Dean and Resnick are enjoying record profits?and increasing the acreage planted in alfalfa, almonds and other notoriously water-intensive crops?thanks in part to infusions of what experts call dangerously underpriced water.Resnick, whose legendary marketing flair included hiring Stephen Colbert to star in a 2014 Super Bowl commercial, told the conference that pistachios generated an average net return of $3,519 per acre in 2014, based on a record wholesale price of $3.53 a pound. Almonds, an even ?thirstier? crop, averaged $1,431 per acre.Stevens Creek Reservoir has nearly dried up due to the drought.Agriculture is the heart of California?s worsening water crisis, and the stakes extend far beyond the state?s borders. Not only is California the world?s eighth largest economy, it is an agricultural superpower. It produces roughly half of all the fruits, nuts and vegetables consumed in the United States?and more than 90 percent of the almonds, tomatoes, strawberries, broccoli and other specialty crops?while exporting vast amounts to China and other overseas customers.But agriculture consumes a staggering 80 percent of California?s developed water, even as it accounts for only 2 percent of the state?s gross domestic product. Most crops and livestock are produced in the Central Valley, which is, geologically speaking, a desert. The soil is very fertile but can only thrive if massive irrigation water is applied.Until recently, agriculture?s 80 percent share of state water consumption has rarely been mentioned in most political and media discussions of California?s drought. Instead, coverage concentrates on the drought?s implications for people in cities and suburbs, which is where most journalists and their audiences live. Thus, recent headlines warned that state regulators have ordered that restaurants serve water only if customers explicitly request it and homeowners water lawns no more than twice a week. The?San Jose Mercury News?pointed out that these restrictions carry no enforcement mechanisms, but what makes them a sideshow is simple math: During a historic drought, surely the sector that?s responsible for 80 percent of water consumption?agriculture?should be the focus of public attention and policy.The other great unmentionable of California?s water crisis is that water is still priced more cheaply than it should be, which encourages over-consumption. ?Water in California is still relatively inexpensive,? Heather Cooley, director of the water program at the world-renowned Pacific Institute in Oakland, told me.One reason is that much of the state?s water is provided by federal and state agencies at prices that taxpayers subsidize. A second factor that encourages waste is the ?use it or lose it? feature in California?s arcane system of water rights. Under current rules, if a property owner does not use all the water to which he is legally entitled, he relinquishes his future rights to the unused water, which may then get allocated to the next farmer in line.Lawmakers have begun, gingerly, to reform the water system, but experts say there remains far to go. For years, California was the only state in the arid West that set no limits on how much groundwater a property owner could extract from a private well. Thus nearly everyone and their neighbors in the Central Valley have been drilling deeper and deeper wells in recent years, seeking to offset reductions in state and federal water deliveries. This agricultural version of an arms race not only favors big corporate enterprises over smaller farmers, it threatens to collapse the aquifers whose groundwater is keeping California alive during this drought and will be needed to endure future droughts.Last fall, the legislature passed and Gov. Brown signed a bill to regulate groundwater extraction. But the political touchiness of the issue?agricultural interests lobbied hard against it?resulted in a leisurely implementation timetable. Not until 2040 or beyond will sustainable practices be in place.There are practical solutions to California?s drought, but the lack of realistic water prices and other incentives has slowed their adoption. A shift to more efficient irrigation methods could reduce agricultural water use by 22 percent, an amount equivalent to all the surface water Central Valley farmers lacked due to drought last year, according to an analysis that Cooley co-authored with Robert Wilkinson, a professor at the University of California Santa Barbara and Kate Poole, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council.While nut exports help the balance of trade, the use of groundwater could put the state at risk for future droughts.The Brown administration has endorsed better water efficiency?and put a small amount of money where its mouth is. Conservation is the number one priority in the governor?s Water Action Plan, and the drought measures he advanced in 2014 included $10 million to help farmers implement more efficient water management. An additional $10 million was allocated as part of the $1.1 billion drought spending plan Brown and bipartisan legislators unveiled last week. Already more than 50 percent of California?s farmers use drip or micro irrigation, said Steve Lyle, the director of public affairs at the California Department of Food and Agriculture; the new monies will encourage further adoptions.Nevertheless, underpriced water has enabled expanded production of such water-intensive crops as alfalfa, which is by far the largest user of agricultural water in California?and often is exported to China. Rice, perhaps the thirstiest of major crops, did see its production area decrease by 25 percent in 2014. But pasture grass, which is used to fatten livestock, and many nut and fruit products have seen their acreage increase. Resnick told the Paramount Farms conference that the acreage devoted to pistachios had grown by 118 percent over the last 10 years; for almonds and walnuts the growth rates were 47 and 30 percent, respectively.One striking aspect of California?s water emergency is how few voices in positions of authority have been willing to state the obvious. To plant increasing amounts of water-intensive crops in a desert would be questionable in the best of times. To continue doing so in the middle of a historic drought, even as scientists warn that climate change will increase the frequency and severity of future droughts, seems nothing less than reckless.Yet even a politician as gutsy and scientifically informed as Brown tiptoes around such questions. I asked Brown if in this time of record drought California should begin pricing water more realistically and discouraging water-intensive crops. Responding on the governor?s behalf, spokesman Lyle skipped the water-pricing question. On crop choices, he cited a reply Brown recently offered to a similar question: ?Growing a walnut or an almond takes water, having a new house with a bunch of toilets and showers takes water. So how do we balance use efficiency with the kind of life that people want in California? ?We?re all going to have to pull together.??California Has One Year of Water Left, Will You Ration Now?? asked the headline of a widely discussed opinion piece NASA scientist Jay Famiglietti published last month in the?Los Angeles Times. The headline overstated the situation somewhat, and editors soon corrected it to clarify that California has one remaining year of?stored?water, not one year of total water. As Famiglietti was careful to state, California?s reservoirs today contain enough water to supply a year of average consumption. So if California endures a fourth year of drought, the only way to keep household taps and farmers? irrigation lines flowing will be to summon to the surface still greater volumes of groundwater. But that strategy can?t work forever; worse, the longer it is pursued, the bigger the risk that it collapses aquifers, rendering them irretrievably barren.California is caught between the lessons of its history and the habits of its political economy. Droughts of 10 years duration and longer have been a recurring feature in the region for thousands of years, yet a modern capitalist economy values a given commodity only as much as the price of that commodity in the marketplace. Current pricing structures enrich a handful of interests, but they are ushering the state as a whole towards a parched and perilous future.The price of water, however, is not determined by inalterable market forces; it is primarily a function of government policies and the social forces that shape them. Elected officials may dodge the question for now, but the proper price of water seems destined to become an unavoidable issue in California politics.?As our water supply gets more variable and scarce in the future, we?re going to have to look at how we price water so it gets used more efficiently,? said Cooley of the Pacific Institute. ?In some ways we?ve come a long way in California?s water policy and practices over the past 20 years. But if you look into a future of climate change and continued [economic] development, we can and need to do much better.?This article was adapted from one that originally appeared in The Daily Beast; copyright 2015 Mart Hertsgaard.Mark Hertsgaard has reported on politics, culture and the environment from more than 20 countries and has authored six books, including?HOT: ?Living Through the Next Fifty Years on Earth. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Apr 10 10:07:36 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 17:07:36 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] political cartoon In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1930395880.389488.1428685656307.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> DARYL CAGLE, CAGLECARTOONS.COM? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Fri Apr 10 08:49:18 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 08:49:18 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?iso-8859-1?q?Article_Submission=3A_California_Wat?= =?iso-8859-1?q?er_Restrictions_MUST_Include_Big_Ag=2C_Big_Oil_and_Nestl?= =?iso-8859-1?q?=E9!?= In-Reply-To: References: <00d001d0735d$a1982580$e4c87080$@org> Message-ID: <1E616021-0B1D-47F5-978E-48AA882A76ED@fishsniffer.com> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/09/1376701/-California-Water-Restrictions-MUST-Include-Big-Ag-Big-Oil-and-Nestl California Water Restrictions MUST Include Big Ag, Big Oil and Nestl?! by Dan Bacher The mainstream media and state officials have for years tried to portray California as the "green" leader of the nation. In reality, California suffers from some of the greatest environmental degradation of any state in the nation, since corporate agribusiness, the oil industry and other big money interests control the majority of the state's politicians and exert inordinate influence over the state's environmental policies. California is currently in a state of emergency, with NASA scientists saying that California has only about one year of water left in reserves, according to Food and Water Watch. This is largely due to the gross mismanagement of California's reservoirs, rivers and groundwater supplies, during a record drought, to serve the 1 percent. California Governor Jerry "Big Oil" Brown's recent water restrictions on cities and counties are woefully inadequate. Big agribusiness, oil interests and bottled water companies continue to deplete and pollute California's precious groundwater resources that are crucial for saving water. It's clear that the severity of this drought calls for much more than just individual action like cutting back on showers. Sooner or later we have to stop subsidizing corporate agribusiness, growing almonds and other export crops on toxic land, soil that should have never been irrigated, with cheap water and other subsidies. The idea of big corporate growers "suffering" during the drought is a classic example of the "Big Lie" that has been spread by agribusiness, the Brown administration and Big Ag Astroturf groups. At a press conference in Sacramento on April 8 after meeting with water agency and agribusiness leaders, Governor Brown said that the "key is to get the water and not point fingers" during the drought. Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta, responded, "We have already sent a tweet asking him get the water for whom? Westlands? Paramount Farms?" Natural Resources Secretary John Laird claims that "everybody is a soldier in the fight" to address the drought. Yes, everybody except those planting almonds in the drought! According to the "On the Public Record blog (http://onthepublicrecord.org ), almond acreage in California has expanded by 70,000 acres, a total of 280,000 acre feet per year of new water demand: "I have marked the almond acreage at the beginning and end of the 2006-2009 drought (700,000 acres at the beginning, 810,000 acres at the end). At the beginning of our current drought, almond acreage was 870,000 acres. In 2013, after two years of drought, it was up to 940,000 acres. It looks like the 2014 California Almond Acreage Report comes out at the end of April (here?s 2013). I will be excited to see a new total acreage. Let?s make this all explicit. Since this drought began, almonds have expanded by 70,000 acres. That?s 280,000 acft/year of new water demand for a snack that will be exported. That water will come from groundwater or from other farmers. At the same time, the California EPA is literally telling urban users to take five minute cold showers. If there is a lot of new acreage in 2014 and 2015, it is going to be difficult for the Brown administration to stay friends with them." You can take action NOW to stop corporate agribusiness, big oil companies and Nestle and other bottled water companies from depleting California's precious water supplies during a record drought by going to: https://secure3.convio.net/fww/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=2011&s_src=taf_sp&sp_ref=113679618.63.12411.f.50225.4 On March 20, environmental and human rights activists, holding plastic ?torches? and ?pitchforks,? formed human barricades at both entrances to the Nestl? Waters bottling plant in Sacramento at 5:00 a.m., effectively shutting down the company's operations for the day. To read the complete story, go to: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/27/1373887/-Activists-Shut-Down-Nestl-Water-Bottling-Plant-in-Sacramento -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Apr 11 12:30:14 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2015 19:30:14 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Mercury News editorial: Jerry Brown's lame response to California's drought Message-ID: <595076849.953526.1428780614948.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_27769766/mercury-news-editorial-jerry-browns-lame-response-californias ? Mercury News editorial: Jerry Brown's lame response to California's drought California is in a drought of historic proportions with no end in sight. Scientists and political leaders, including Gov. Jerry Brown, agree. The governor called an official state of emergency way back in January 2014 -- but you wouldn't know it from his actions since.?Lame doesn't begin to describe Brown's failure to show leadership on this threat to the state's long-range future that's easily as dire as the massive budget deficit he inherited in 2011.?For example: - A governor who was serious about conservation would be offering tens of millions of dollars in incentives to urban water users to replace water-wasting toilets, shower heads, dishwashers and washing machines with state-of-the-art, low-flow products.Instead, Brown's Water Resources Control Board is requiring restaurants to fill customers' water glasses only if they ask and telling hotels to offer guests only one towel during their stay unless they request a fresh one. Oh, the pain of sacrifice. - A governor who was serious about conservation would be helping farmers finance drip-irrigation systems and ordering immediate restrictions on groundwater pumping to protect California's long-term water needs. Only 40 percent of California farmers now use low-volume systems -- and 80 percent of the state's water goes to agriculture. Reducing the use of flood irrigation in the Central Valley is the state's greatest water-saving opportunity.AdvertisementInstead, Brown last week offered up $660 million from funds approved nearly a decade ago to be used on flood control projects. Yes, that's a drought response, since parched land combined with ground subsidence from overpumping makes some areas more prone to flooding -- but it is not a water-saving strategy. It's money that should have been spent by now. - A governor who was serious about conservation would have ornamental lawns in his cross hairs. The green expanses at corporate campuses, look-don't-touch home lawns and other grassy places where no kids play nor families picnic are an embarrassment in a state where, even in wet years, it doesn't rain from May to October. Parks, golf courses and ballfields should stay green, but using only recycled water.?Instead, Brown's Water Resources Control Board is telling water agencies like the Santa Clara Valley Water District to limit watering lawns to two times a week or hit owners with a $500 fine -- but allocating no money for enforcement. Agencies like this don't maintain personnel or systems to deal with enforcement, and the governor knows it. He's still relying on Californians' goodwill. And we know how well that's worked over the past year, when his 20 percent reduction goal was widely greeted with yawns.Water experts and environmentalists are at a loss to explain the governor's uncharacteristic caution, if not indifference. But conspiracy theorists are all over it. Try this out: If California's urban and ag interests make major gains in conservation -- which we all know are broadly possible -- that will undercut their willingness to pay for the massive, $25 billion Delta twin-tunnels Brown wants to build to ship water to the Central Valley and Southern California.More likely, Brown is distracted by other priorities and has been slow to refocus on something that's not a flashy legacy project like the tunnels or high-speed rail. But this generally forward-thinking, environmentally aware governor -- one of the smartest politicians in state history -- has to realize that the longer we wait to get started, the more draconian limits on water use need to be, and the more development will take place with huge lawns.He said last week he's considering additional measures. Think fast, governor. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Apr 11 12:31:49 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2015 19:31:49 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: Trinity Green 2015 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1126585162.953916.1428780709289.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Friday, April 10, 2015 12:14 PM, Piper McDaniel wrote: Hello all, The Watershed Center is pleased to host Trinity Green 2015, a best management practices workshop followed by a musical performance by Woven Roots!The workshop will provide up to date information about land and water use compliance, waterconservation, the new State Water Boards Compliance Program, and bestmanagement practices. For more information about the State Water Boards Compliance Program, please find the attached article from this month's WRTC column in the Trinity Journal.? The Trinity Green line-up has an amazing set of speakers featuring: ?Hezekiah Allen of theEmerald Growers AssociationThomas Leroy ofPacific Watershed AssociatesJosh Smith of TheWatershed Center The State Water Boardon the new Cannabis Cultivation Compliance Program?April 25thNorthern Delights in Hayfork5:00pm$10 at the doorProceeds to benefit the Watershed CenterFor more information visit www.thewatershedcenter.com orcontact Piper, the event coordinator at 530-628-4206Help keep our lands and communities healthy! Please share this with anyone who may be interested! The more who attend, the better it is for our community. Also more fun on a dance floor.?Hope to see you there! --Piper?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Apr 12 12:40:18 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2015 19:40:18 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Mercury: Brown considers removing guarantee to restore Delta Message-ID: <1562434890.1303692.1428867618591.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://oaklandtribune.ca.newsmemory.com/publink.php?shareid=1e5b5a5a0 Brown considers removing guarantee to restore Delta?Project?s future at risk if governor alters 50-year ecological commitmentBy Paul Rogersprogers at mercurynews.comGov. Jerry Brown has billed his $25 billion plan to build two massive tunnels under the Delta as a way to not just make it easier to move water from north to south, but also increase the reliability of water supplies and bring back salmon and other endangered species.But now the Brown administration is proposing a major and politically risky change: dropping a 50-year guarantee to restore the Sacramento-San JoaquinRiver Delta?s environment. A centerpiece of the project, the environmental plan included $8 billion to preserve 100,000 acres of wetlands and dozens of other restoration efforts.The dramatic course correction, whose details have not yet been made public, comes after biologists at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and other federal agencies told the state they won?t issue permits for the environmental plan. The reasons, the biologists say, is that the state cannot prove it will restore salmon, smelt, sturgeon and other wildlife struggling for survival in the Delta.Losing the guarantee of 50 years ofSeeDELTA,?Page 9MAJOR CHANGE TO DELTA RESTORATION PLAN?Original plan:?$25 billion proposal to build two massive tunnels under the Delta to move water, increase reliability and bring back endangered speciesRisky revision:?May drop 50-year guarantee to preserve Delta environment after biologists say state can?t prove it will restore salmon (above), smelt, wildlifeSACRAMENTO BEE ARCHIVESDelta?Continued from Page 1environmental restoration would create a substantial political problem for one of Brown?s signature projects.First, it would be easier for environmentalists and other opponents to describe the twin-tunnel plan as little more than a water grab by Southern California, a perception that could make it untenable to Northern Californians.At the same time, it would alsobehardertogainsupport from water districts around the state ? whom Brown is counting on to pick up the $17 billion cost to build and operate the tunnels. That?s because the 50-year ?habitat conservation plan? was supposed to guarantee them reliability from endangered species lawsuits and decisions by the federal government that have limited Delta pumping in recent years to protect endangered fish.Richard Stapler, a spokesman for the California Natural Resources Agency, confirmed Friday that the state in the next few months will release an addendum to the project?s environmental impact report that reflects the proposedchange.Stapler insisted that efforts?to restore endangered salmon and other species in the Delta will still be part of the project. ?We will be taking a broader look and more thoughtful approach to habitat restoration,? he said.But asked if that means the roughly $8 billion in the plan now earmarked for environmental restoration will still be guaranteed up front, he acknowledged: ?We still don?t have a determination as to that piece of it.?The governor on Saturday downplayed the issue. ?I think it?s kind of a technical point,? Brown told reporters at a Colusa County cook-off. ?Somehow it satisfies the federal fish and other authorities, so that?s good with me.?The two tunnels each would be 40 feet wide and 35 miles long. They would take water from the Sacramento River north of Sacramento and move it under the Delta to state and federal pumps in Tracy.The pumps send water down the State Water Project and federal Central Valley Project to 25 million Californians from Silicon Valley to San Diego ? and to 3 million acres of Central Valley farmland.The Brown administration says the tunnels will not provide more water than California now takes from the Delta. But by movingthe intake structures north, supporters say, the plan will make the water more reliable by reducing reliance on the huge pumps, which grind up and kill fish and make parts of the Delta run backward.Environmentalists say that without the 50-year environmental guarantee up front in a legally binding document, promises that the Delta will be restored after the tunnels are built mean little.?I?m reminded of whatWimpy in the old Popeye cartoons used to say: ?I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today,?? said Jonas Minton, water policy adviser for the Planning and Conservation League.Environmentalists say the solution to the Delta?s collapsing wildlife, water quality and fisheries is for cities and large Central Valley farms to take less water from the Delta. Water supplies can be boosted, they say, by more conservation, more waterrecycling, drip irrigation and other ways. ?Why are they wasting more of the public?s money pursuing the worst half of a failed project?? Minton asked.Over the past eight years, California?s major water districts have paid $240 million to fund studies of the tunnels plan. Among them: the Santa Clara Valley Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, and Westlands Water District in Fresno.This year, water districts are being asked to kick in more money for planning. But questions are growing.?I think that it would be a concern for the public if the twin tunnels project would move ahead without the long-term environmental protections in place,? said Barbara Keegan, a board member of the Santa Clara Valley Water District. ?The project has been defined as having two co-equal goals ? improving water supply reliability and restoring the environment. And if we are proceeding with one goal and not the other, obviously that?s going to be an issue.?The state?s largest water agency, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which provides water to 19 million people from Los Angeles to San Diego, was hoping the 50-year plan would fly, said GeneralManager Jeff Kightlinger.Although he still supports the project, it will now be harder to fund, Kightlinger said, because rather than having a 50-year guarantee that districts could take water from the Delta more reliably, water agencies could be essentially back to a year-toyear situation in which the pumps can be turned down any time by federal agencies and courts if endangered fish are harmed.?The goal was to do something better than what we are doing today,? he said. ?This would not meet that goal. So that?s something I know our board is going to have to take a hard look at. We?re going to have to really scrub that and say does it really make sense to reinvest this kind of money in a system and not really know what you are getting??Farm water groups also are increasingly perturbed.?The construct of using a 50-year habitat conservation plan is done. It?s off the table,? said Jason Peltier, Westlands? deputy general manager. ?The simple fact is that we don?t have a viable project. We have never seen the state develop a plan that?s affordable and improves water reliability and supply.?Contact Paul Rogers at 408-920-5045. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Apr 12 14:09:00 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2015 21:09:00 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: Hoopa Tribe Civil Engineer Position In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <732953238.1327228.1428872940899.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> ?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 Sunday, April 12, 2015 1:45 PM, Sean Ledwin wrote: Hi Tom, Could you please send forward the below message and attachments to the Trinity listserve? Thanks, Sean HVT FISHERIESCivil EngineerJob Description?Job Title: Civil Engineer?Department: Fisheries Habitat Division?Salary Range: Approximately $50-85k DOE?Deadline: 4/28/15Contact: ?Sean Ledwin, hvtsean at gmail.com, 530-625-4451 x 14? SUMMARYThis position would serve as a Civil Engineer to assist with river andwatershed restoration design and construction projects for the HoopaValley Tribe. The Hoopa Valley Fisheries Department develops fisheriesrestoration projects throughout the Trinity River basin, often incollaboration with the Bureau of Reclamation, NOAA Fisheries, USFWS,the State of California, Trinity County, BLM, USFS, the Yurok Tribe andenvironmental organizations. The Department has 30 employees andmanages over $4 million in annual funding.ESSENTIAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIESThis position will serve as Civil Engineer to assist with river andwatershed restoration planning, design, and construction projects for theHoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries Program.Duties include development, design, and oversight of construction ofchannel and floodplain rehabilitation projects, large wood design andplacement, salmonid and Pacific lamprey passage design at barriers, roadupgrades and decommissioning, water infrastructure improvements, andother duties as assigned.This individual will be expected to assist with integratingmultidisciplinary information aimed at improving restoration practices andcollaborate with an existing consultancy and partner organizations.Assisting in building capacity for construction activities within other tribaldepartments (Hoopa Roads, Forestry, etc) and self-initiated projectdevelopment is also expected.This position requires supervising subordinate staff.?QUALIFICATIONS To perform this job successfully, an individualmust be able to perform each essential duty satisfactorily. Therequirements listed below are representative of the knowledge, skill,and/or ability required. Reasonable accommodations may be made toenable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions.?? Skills in project management, engineering coordination, andconstruction oversight?? Skills in construction engineering including: cost estimating,project layout, and surveying?? Experience with AutoCAD Civil 3D or equivalent?? Experience with Hydraulic modeling tools, 1D or 2D, HEC RASor equivalent?? Skills in Topographic Surface Modeling?? Skills in grant proposal development and contract management? Demonstrated ability with ArcGIS?? Knowledge of ESA, NEPA, CEQA, and FEMA regulatorypermitting and complianceEDUCATION and/or EXPERIENCEMaster?s degree in engineering with an emphasis ecological restoration orwater resources plus three years relevant professional experience; orBachelor?s degree in engineering plus five years relevant professionalexperience.?COMMUNICATION SKILLSMust have ability to effectively present information in one-on-one andgroup situations to technical audiences, policy makers, and otheremployees of the organization. Must be able to effectively participate inexternal technical teams of engineers and scientists.?ANALYTICAL SKILLSMust have the ability to read, write and comprehend complex instructions,technical correspondence, and memos. Must be able to manipulatedatabases, geospatial information, and utilize complex software.REASONING ABILITYApply common sense understanding to carry out instructions furnished inwritten, oral and diagram form. With ability to deal with problemsinvolving several concrete variables in standardized situations.?CERTIFICATES, LICENSES, REGISTRATIONSCurrent professional civil engineering licensure in the State of Californiaor ability to obtain within 12 months of hire preferred.?PHYSICAL DEMANDS The physical demands described here arerepresentative of those that must be met by an employee to successfullyperform the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodationsmay be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform theessential functions.While performing the duties of this job, the employee is frequentlyrequired to walk and stand. The employee is occasionally required to sit,reach with hands and arms, climb or balance, stoop, kneel, crouch, orcrawl, talk and hear. The employee must occasionally lift and/or move upto 50 pounds.?WORK ENVIRONMENT The work environment characteristicsdescribed here are representative of those an employee encounters whileperforming the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities toperform the essential functions.?CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENTAll applicants are subject to the Tribe?s Drug and Alcohol Free WorkPlace Policy including pre-employment, random, and for cause drugscreening.Employees are subject to an introductory period of 6 months.Performance evaluations will be conducted mid-way through theintroductory period, upon completion of introductory period, and then onan annual basis upon achieving regular classification.For more information and to get application materials, please contact SeanLedwin, Habitat Division Lead, at 530-625-4451 x 14 orhvtsean at gmail.com. -- Sean LedwinHabitat Division LeadHoopa Tribal Fisheries 530-625-4451 x 14 hvtsean at gmail.com? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: HVT Civil Engineer Position Description_Final.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 184629 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: EmploymentApplication.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 504587 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Apr 13 08:07:12 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 15:07:12 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] George Skelton LA Times: In California, rights to water exceed the supply Message-ID: <2050968389.1846505.1428937632106.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-cap-drought-water-20150413-column.html ?Capitol Journal? In California, rights to water exceed the supply - Politics and Government - Scientific Research ADDRESS: George Skelton LOS ANGELES TIMESgeorge.skelton?@latimes.com? @latimesskeltonBrown's drought edict makes big TV but only small water savings. Crops use 80% of developed H20. He doesn't touch them. He cuts 25% of 20%. Sprinklers irrigate farmland near Bakersfield. ?The state has over-allocated water in many, if not most, river basins,? UC Davis researchers found. (Michael Nelson, EPA)Water rights exceed average natural runoff on 16 major rivers, UC Davis researchers foundIt's arguable whether California has enough water to meet its actual needs. But it clearly does not have enough to match people's expectations. And one reason is simple.Government historically has over-promised ? not exactly a new concept.In the last century, the state has handed out rights to five times more surface water than our rivers produce even in a normal year.On some major river systems, especially in the parched San Joaquin Valley, the over-allocation is jaw-opening. On the San Joaquin River itself, people have rights to nearly nine times more water than flows down from the Sierra. On the Kern, it's six times. On the Stanislaus, four.Chronicling California's droughtWater rights exceed average natural runoff on 16 major rivers, UC Davis researchers found last year. And they were only counting so-called junior rights ? those granted after 1914, the last time the Legislature updated California's convoluted water allocation system.Stronger pre-1914 "senior" and riparian (waterside) rights weren't included in the study. So that makes the over-promising even more egregious."The state has over-allocated water in many, if not most, river basins," researchers Ted Grantham and Joshua Viers wrote for the UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences."After 100 years, California's water rights system is struggling to adapt to 21st Century realities of increasing water stress, changing climate and societal demands for water supply security and a healthy environment."lRelated? - POLITICS - Thirsty crops should require state regulation SEE ALL RELATED8The situation, the UC experts continued, "is increasingly creating conflicts between water users and confusion for water managers trying to figure out whose supplies should be curtailed during a drought."There's heated conflict between fellow farmers ? those in the semi-arid San Joaquin Valley and others in the more lush Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, California's main water hub. There's bitter fighting between the farming and fishing industries over river flows needed for irrigating orchards and salmon spawning. And urban users are starting to wade in since they've been told to tighten their spigots by 25%.Many ask why agriculture wasn't included in Gov. Jerry Brown's mandatory water reductions? It gulps 80% of water used by humans; urban dwellers just 20%.After 100 years, California's water rights system is struggling to adapt to 21st Century realities of increasing water stress.- Ted Grantham, Joshua Viers, UC Davis Center for Watershed SciencesThe ag industry is countering and spinning. No, it asserts, when all California water is figured, the environment gets roughly 50%, farms 40% and communities 10%. Same difference. Agriculture uses four times as much water as towns and cities.The state entity responsible for dividing up the water ? based on politicians' edicts and water rights ? is the Water Resources Control Board, headed by Felicia Marcus.The fact that water rights greatly exceed water is a problem "more of perception than reality," Marcus says.That problem is the worst in the farm belt, especially the dry west side of the San Joaquin, where motorists on Interstate 5 see inflammatory billboards denouncing the "Congress-created Dust Bowl." They protest Congress acting to restore salmon runs and protect endangered fish.cComments - I've disagreed with George on lots of things, but he hit this one dead on. And Jerry needs to be exposed as the poser he is.HUDDYS REVENGEAT 7:32 AM APRIL 13, 2015 ADD A COMMENTSEE ALL COMMENTS17The reality is that entitlement to water is conditional. It depends on how much is flowing. When a river is running low, a farmer with junior rights is not going to be allowed to draw out much. But the water board soon will also begin crimping growers with senior and riparian rights."Water rights holders do understand," Marcus says, "although their understanding may be different than the rhetoric they put out there."Some growers, however, "have an assumption of what their water right is based on what they think it is," she continues. "People can have an exaggerated sense of their right. They believe they are not getting their fair share. This is challenging in the political world."I asked Phil Isenberg, former chairman of the Delta Stewardship Council, which is overseeing an attempted re-plumbing of the estuary, how big a problem is created by rights exceeding water."Perception is reality," he answered, and " 'paper water,' " as some courts have called it, is a very big deal."If you have some semi-official sounding 'right,' well, why not believe that you are entitled to whatever water you want?"Isenberg, a longtime politico and still a council member, added: "It is almost impossible to reform something that cannot be understood by a well-intentioned citizen. Water rights can barely be understood by water rights attorneys."Ellen Hanak, a water expert at the Public Policy Institute of California, points out that when all these rights were granted, "we were not thinking about what the environment needed." Later, she says, "we found that in a number of streams and lakes we were shortchanging the critters that live there."And despite added protections, she continues, "there have been tremendous cutbacks in environmental regulations in order to make water available for agriculture and urban users."A bigger problem of inflated expectations is created by contracts with the huge state and federal water projects, Hanak says. Deliveries are based on available water. For an irrigation district to receive 100% of what's contracted for, she says, it has to be a flood year."People think getting 50% is terrible," she adds. "They don't know that 50% is normal."This year growers supplied by the State Water Project will receive only 20% of what they've requested. Federal customers without senior rights are expecting nothing.So that leads to more over-pumping of ground water and plunging aquifers, as the land sinks a foot a year in some spots.It's a murky mess. And it calls for forceful political leadership ? something stronger than "turn off the lawn sprinkler" and "don't always flush."Twitter: @LATimesSkelton -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Apr 13 09:09:01 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 16:09:01 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: Fire Ecology Hiking Tour In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1872573648.1879716.1428941341622.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Monday, April 13, 2015 8:58 AM, Piper McDaniel wrote: Hello all,? Come out for an exciting day of hiking and prescribed fire ecology!? Weaverville Fire Science Field Tour April 22, 2015 (Earth Day!) 10 am ? 3 pm?Are you interested in the role of fire in local forests? Have you ever wondered why Oregon Mountain burns so often? Are you curious about fire ecology, or interested in learning more about prescribed fire and forest health? If so, join us in the field on April 22 to learn more about fire science and management in the Weaverville area.This field tour is free of charge and open to all who are interested. We will start the day with a short hike in the Oregon Mountain area, where we will learn about the 2014 wildfire there and how a previous prescribed burn aided in slowing the fire and protecting the town of Weaverville. We will also learn about the Trinity Strategic Prescribed Fire Plan, including details on local implementation, partnerships, and planning. We will end the day with a visit to some research sites on the west side of Trinity Lake, where researchers are exploring the role of fire in managing forest plantations.To sign up, email Lenya at lquinndavidson at ucanr.edu by April 20, 2015?Feel free to contact Piper at the Watershed Center with questions: 530-628-4206Hope to see you there,Piper? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Mon Apr 13 09:44:08 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 09:44:08 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] NPR: Beyond Almonds - A Rogue's Gallery of Guzzlers in California's Drought Message-ID: <007d01d07609$10b0a660$3211f320$@sisqtel.net> Who's your drought-provoking villain of choice? http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2015/04/12/398757250/beyond-almonds-a-rogues-gallery-of-guzzlers-in-californias-drought Beyond Almonds: A Rogue's Gallery of Guzzlers In California's Drought April 12, 2015 7:19 AM ET Dan Charles Dan Charles Twitter California is parched. Wells are running dry. Vegetable fields have been left fallow and lawns are dying. There must be some villain behind all this, right? Of course there is. In fact, have your pick. As a public service, The Salt is bringing you several of the leading candidates. They have been nominated by widely respected national publications and interest groups. There's just one problem: Not all of these shady characters live up to their nefarious job description. Let us explain. 1. Almonds Both Slate and Mother Jones have reported that almonds are sucking California dry. Each innocent-looking nut, we learn, robs the land of an entire gallon of water. All told, California's almonds consume three times more water than the entire city of Los Angeles. And their thirst is growing, year by year. California's farmers continue to convert new swaths of land to almond orchards. Case closed? Maybe not, Grist retorts. Almonds get a lot of attention because production of them has been booming. And it's true that they do consume more water, per acre, than many other crops (though not all). Vineyards use much less water than almonds, and most vegetables also require less irrigation. But that's only if you calculate water use in gallons per acre or gallons per pound of product. There's a different, and probably better, way to calculate water efficiency. How about water consumption per unit of value created? Gallons used per dollar of production, say. By that measure, almonds look just great, because they are so valuable. So there's a very good argument that almonds are exactly what California's farmers should be growing with their precious water. There is one problem with almonds, though. They're trees. They last for years, and they need water every single year, whether it's wet or dry. Farmers who've devoted their land to production of almonds (or walnuts and pistachios) can't easily adapt to water shortages. Letting the trees die would be a catastrophe, so they sometimes pay exorbitant prices or dig ever-deeper wells. Water experts like Jay Lund, from the University of California, Davis, say that in the future, California should take care to maintain a healthy mix of trees and annual crops like vegetables. In drought years, farmers could then decide not to plant their tomato fields, freeing up water for their trees. 2. Cows If you look at this presentation by Blaine Hanson, an irrigation expert also of UC-Davis, one thing jumps out. The agricultural product that truly dominates water use in California isn't almonds. It's alfalfa, plus "other forages," such as irrigated pasture and corn that's chopped into a cattle feed called silage. These forage crops consume more water per acre than almonds, and they also cover nearly twice as much land. And where do those products go? Primarily, they feed California's enormous (though shrinking) herd of milk-producing cows. Unlike almonds, forage crops don't bring particularly high prices. And they grow just fine in other places, too, such as the Midwest. So why should California sink its scarce water into such crops? It mainly results from the long tradition of dairy farming in the state. But abandoning milk production would entail considerable economic dislocation. Also, these crops have remained viable because many farmers are guaranteed ample supplies of cheap water. Those in the Imperial Valley, a major alfalfa producer, get water from the Colorado River. Which leads us to ... 3. Laws and the politicians who make them. Where to start? With the founding of the republic, maybe. When Europeans and other outsiders settled this continent, they operated under the basic rule of first-come, first-served. People who settled land got to claim it. And in much of the West, if they built a dam to irrigate their fields, they acquired a permanent legal right to that water. There were very few questions asked about how that water should be used, or what it should cost. That basic idea remains in force, although the system for delivering water has been transformed by large, government-financed networks of aqueducts and canals. And hidden inside this legal framework are several characters that arouse strong suspicions. 4. Cheap water For the most part, farmers don't have to outbid anyone for their water. They get it, or they don't, depending on the priority of their legal claim to it. Typically, they get that water for the cost of delivering it. This means that they don't have a pressing need to conserve that water, for instance, by switching into crops that make better, more economic, use of the water. A limited market for water is now developing, which sets higher prices on water. It's driving farmers to treat their irrigation water more like the precious commodity that it really is. 5. Free water This is the water that farmers pump from wells on their land. It's not exactly free, because it costs money to drill the well and pump the water, but farmers are legally free to use as much as they wish. As a result, farmers have been racing to empty their aquifers, draining the water in them at an astounding rate. California has now adopted a plan which is supposed to eventually stop this, but it won't fully take effect for many years. 6. Fish These are the villains of choice in parts of California's agricultural community. California's environmental authorities have stepped into the water allocation game, asserting that the state's endangered wildlife have rights to water that trump the claims even of the earliest settlers. As a result, in drought years, farms are getting less water ? much less, in many cases, than state authorities originally promised to deliver. This is why some farmers complain, passionately, about a "man-made drought." 7. Exports According to some reports, California's farmers are exporting vast amounts of water to places like China, adding to the state's water shortage. These are not literal water exports, but "virtual water" in products like alfalfa or almonds that took a lot of water to produce. Upon closer examination, though, this villain doesn't look quite so guilty. As Lund from UC Davis points out, alfalfa and almonds are the exceptions to the rule. If one counts all agricultural commodities, California imports far more virtual water than it exports. Its imports of corn, meat, lumber and cotton all required huge amounts of water. Okay, time to pick one. Who's your drought-provoking villain of choice? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 3983 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Mon Apr 13 10:46:59 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:46:59 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] LATimes: Food-water-footprint Message-ID: <00d401d07611$d802d410$88087c30$@sisqtel.net> Use the website to interactively select different food items for a meal and see what their water use is. http://graphics.latimes.com/food-water-footprint/ 624 gallons of water were used to make this plate By Kyle Kim, Jon Schleuss and Priya Krishnakumar April 7, 2015 California's crippling drought has prompted conservation efforts, such as replacing grass lawns and minding how long you leave the tap water running. But what about the food on your plate? Agriculture uses 80% of California's water supply, and producing what you eat can require a surprising amount of water. Select items from the menu to create your plate: Protein Starch Fruits/vegetables Drink BeefChickenChickpeasEggsGoatLambLentilsPeasPorkSoy burger PastaPotatoesRiceWheat bread ApplesArtichokesAsparagusAvocadosBananasBlackberriesBlueberriesBroccoliBruss els sproutsCabbageCarrotsCauliflowerCherriesCranberriesCucumberEggplantGrapefrui tGrapesKaleLettuceMangoesOkraOnionsOrangesPeachesPearPineapplesRaspberriesSp inachSquashStrawberriesTomatoesWatermelon Apple juiceBeerGrape juiceGrapefruit juiceMilkOrange juicePineapple juiceSoy milkSparkling wineWine Give me a random plate 624 gallons (Commercial U.S. production) Pork: ounces 330.0 gallons Rice: ounces 97.6 gallons Asparagus: ounces 162.6 gallons Apple juice: ounces 33.8 gallons Apple juiceporkriceasparagus http://graphics.latimes.com/static/img/food-water-footprint/plate-new.png Fruits and vegetables: 162.6 gallons Drink: 33.8 gallons Starch: 97.6 gallons Protein: 330 gallons How much water is used to produce your food? Cutting animal products from our diet can significantly help water conservation efforts, but water policies focus on sustainable production rather than sustainable consumption, water management expert Arjen Y. Hoekstra says in a recent report. According to data of U.S. averages for production from the Water Footprint Network, a Dutch nonprofit research group Hoekstra co-founded, animal products demand considerably higher amounts of water than do most other food types. The selected foods below provide a representative example based on common diets. Fruits and vegetables Drink Starch Protein http://graphics.latimes.com/static/img/food-water-footprint/legend.jpg For the record: The value for soy milk has been corrected. The original value was for the soy bean ingredient, not the actual water footprint of final soy milk product. How the foods compare: Apple juice 4.23 gallons/oz. Apples 3.34 gallons/oz. Artichokes 5.92 gallons/oz. Asparagus 20.32 gallons/oz. Avocados 9.05 gallons/oz. Bananas 5.71 gallons/oz. Beef 106.28 gallons/oz. Beer 1.96 gallons/oz. Blackberries 4.22 gallons/oz. Blueberries 5.64 gallons/oz. Broccoli 2.44 gallons/oz. Brussels sprouts 2.44 gallons/oz. Cabbage 2.26 gallons/oz. Carrots 0.93 gallons/oz. Cauliflower 2.44 gallons/oz. Cherries 12.22 gallons/oz. Chicken 16.61 gallons/oz. Chickpeas 76.07 gallons/oz. Cranberries 2.12 gallons/oz. Cucumber 3.17 gallons/oz. Eggplant 1.69 gallons/oz. Eggs 11.73 gallons/oz. Goat 41.35 gallons/oz. Grape juice 2.78 gallons/oz. Grapefruit 3.74 gallons/oz. Grapefruit juice 2.27 gallons/oz. Grapes 3.12 gallons/oz. Kale 2.26 gallons/oz. Lamb 84.68 gallons/oz. Lentils 71.28 gallons/oz. Lettuce 0.85 gallons/oz. Mangoes 28.5 gallons/oz. Milk 5.48 gallons/oz. Okra 7.76 gallons/oz. Onions 1.19 gallons/oz. Orange juice 4.11 gallons/oz. Oranges 2.48 gallons/oz. Pasta 16.6 gallons/oz. Peaches 4.69 gallons/oz. Pear 2.7 gallons/oz. Peas 44.53 gallons/oz. Pineapple juice 6.36 gallons/oz. Pineapples 1.4 gallons/oz. Pork 41.25 gallons/oz. Potatoes 2.98 gallons/oz. Raspberries 4.22 gallons/oz. Rice 16.26 gallons/oz. Soy burger 21.84 gallons/oz. Soy milk 2.1 gallons/oz. Sparkling wine 4.28 gallons/oz. Spinach 1.39 gallons/oz. Squash 1.92 gallons/oz. Strawberries 1.24 gallons/oz. Tomatoes 0.95 gallons/oz. Watermelon 1.79 gallons/oz. Wheat bread 14.44 gallons/oz. Wine 3.48 gallons/oz. Additional Credits Lorena I?iguez Elebee, Len DeGroot, Raoul Ranoa, Anthony Pesce, Thomas Suh Lauder Photos by Anne Cusack and Kirk McKoy, Los Angeles Times Methodology U.S. averages are derived from weighted totals (in cubic meters per metric ton) of multiple farming methods, including grazing and industrial production. Totals were converted to U.S. gallons per ounce (weight). Beverage values were additionally converted into fluid ounces using the USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference. All food items are assumed as fresh (unfrozen) and do not include water for cooking. Data for sheep meat in the U.S. are unavailable and global averages were used instead. Food items were selected if typically eaten as part of a main meal. Some were omitted for simplicity (i.e., squash versus pumpkin). Nuts are available in the data but not included. Sources: WaterStat, Water Footprint Network, Enschede, the Netherlands. M.M. Mekonnen and A.Y. Hoekstra (2010), "The Green, Blue and Grey Water Footprint of Crops and Derived Crop Products," and "...of Farm Animals and Animal Products," Value of Water Research Report Series No. 47 and 48, UNESCO-IHE, Delft, the Netherlands. L.A. Times reporting Download the data (5.7 MB) More graphics from the Los Angeles Times: Peas 44.53 gallons of water needed to produce one ounce Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | About Our Ads | ? 2015 | About This Site -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 11355 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10450 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14203 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 9473 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10719 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 11737 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image007.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 13214 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image008.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 15076 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image009.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 8587 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image010.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 12083 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image011.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 15361 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image012.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 13445 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image013.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 13401 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image014.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 37107 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image015.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 9819 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image016.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 12138 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image017.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10176 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image018.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10154 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image019.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 20304 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image020.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 11155 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image021.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10805 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image022.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14747 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image023.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 13940 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image024.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 17158 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image025.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 9827 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image026.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14993 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image027.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14073 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image028.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14144 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image029.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 13511 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image030.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 11295 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image031.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 38746 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image032.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 12485 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image033.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14789 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image034.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14182 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image035.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 11452 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image036.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 15539 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image037.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 13166 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image038.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 13410 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image039.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 12010 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image040.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 9951 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image041.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10673 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image042.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 12389 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image043.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 12977 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image044.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 17110 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image045.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 12267 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image046.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 13689 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image047.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10204 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image048.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 20885 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image049.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 22111 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image050.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 21182 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image051.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 19462 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image052.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 16681 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image053.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 18791 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image054.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 18037 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image055.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 16101 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image056.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 15792 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image057.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 16414 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image058.png Type: image/png Size: 84134 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image059.png Type: image/png Size: 80798 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image060.png Type: image/png Size: 97456 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image061.png Type: image/png Size: 117317 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image062.png Type: image/png Size: 189509 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image063.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 17563 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bgutermuth at usbr.gov Mon Apr 13 13:50:59 2015 From: bgutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F.) Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 13:50:59 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] TRRP Flow and Gravel Recommendations for spring 2015: 4/16/15 6:30 pm at the Trinity PUD Message-ID: Sorry for any cross postings - [image: Inline image 1] Hope to see you there - Best - Brandt Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Scientist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S. Main ST. Weaverville CA 96093 530.623.1806 Voice http://www.trrp.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image.png Type: image/png Size: 152765 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: DisplayAd_Public Meeting_2015 Restoration Flow Schedule.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 39997 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Apr 14 08:23:28 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 15:23:28 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Thomas Elias: Both logic and illogic in Brown's drought plans Message-ID: <136088566.2755268.1429025008273.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/opinion/columnists/tom-elias/thomas-elias-both-logic-and-illogic-in-browns-drought-plans_77025671 ? Thomas Elias: Both logic and illogic in Brown's drought plans 6:00 PM, Apr 13, 2015There is both sense and nonsense in the $1 billion drought relief package announced by Gov. Jerry Brown in a parched Sierra Nevada Mountains. But the rationale behind the single largest part of the package is fundamentally contradictory.Brown says California must be ready for new and lasting, drier realities, then bases the most expensive part of his plan on weather patterns he previously said are most likely things of the past.Authorized spending on all this now comes to $1.7 billion, including almost $700 million Brown proposed and the Legislature approved last year, most of it not yet spent.But Brown has taken heat over the fact that his emergency rationing plan does not force farms to cut use of surface water or lower pumping of groundwater. Leaving farmers? groundwater out of the order, of course, exposes the weakness of the ballyhooed underground water regulations Brown signed into law last year ? a law that will lack teeth for more than 10 years.This all leaves plenty to question. One big question is why the plan includes only about $270 million ? just over 15 percent of the package funding ? for helping develop new sources of freshwater, including innovative desalination methods other than the hyper-expensive and power-sucking reverse osmosis technique now in use in a few places. Brown has not yet spoken about that.But he has talked about why he included $660 million for new flood control projects ? essentially building dams and reservoirs and lining some streams with concrete, a la the Los Angeles and Santa Ana rivers, where activists regularly push to remove concrete and return streams to their natural state.The governor cited the danger of ?extreme weather events,? caused by climate change, even though the only changes so far in California?s weather from global warming have been extended dry periods.But the state already has an extensive system of flood control channels and huge reservoirs designed to capture and control floodwaters.Existing reservoirs are so low now there is little imminent danger they will overflow in the foreseeable future.Essentially, Brown and the Legislature are focusing on old technology to solve new problems.If the current measures are a way to justify shoring up levees in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta area, fine, but say so. Don?t sell them as something quite different.Email Thomas at: tdelias at aol.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Tue Apr 14 09:54:58 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 09:54:58 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Photo Essay: Zeke Grader, Legendary Fish Advocate, Honored at Sausalito Gathering In-Reply-To: <58ae5-c19-552d3a0b@list.demandprogress.org> References: <58ae5-c19-552d3a0b@list.demandprogress.org> Message-ID: <8FD6CF42-5111-405A-965D-DEF39991E684@fishsniffer.com> http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/04/13/18771060.php http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/12/1377266/--Fishery-Legend-Zeke-Grader-PCFFA-Executive-Director-Honored-At-Sausalito-Gathering Photo: Representative Jared Huffman and Zeke Grader display the Congressional Proclamation honoring Zeke for four decades of advocating for fishery conservation. Photo by Dan Bacher. 800_zeke_and_jared.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Zeke Grader, Legendary Fish Advocate, Honored at Sausalito Gathering by Dan Bacher Hundreds of people attended an event honoring Zeke Grader, Executive Director of The Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman's Associations (PCFFA) and The Institute for Fisheries Resources (IFR) on Friday, April 10, at the Bay Model in Sausalito. A number of special guests spoke at the celebration, including Representative Jared Huffman. Congressman Mike Thompson and former Congressman and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta gave moving video tributes in recognition of Zeke?s many accomplishments, while members of his family told stories about Zeke?s adventures growing up in Fort Bragg, California. Probably the most entertaining moment of the evening was when Linda Sheehan of the Earthlaw Center and her daughter, Maddie Sheehan, who is the Bingham Fellow at the Institute for Fisheries Resources, performed a humorous song about ?Zeke, Our Hero,? to the accompaniment of a ukulele. Zeke is so respected that people who were sometimes at odds with him, such as representatives of environmental NGOs who pushed through the privately funded Marine Life Protection (MLPA) Initiative, were there to honor him, as well as agency and water board officials that he has often clashed with. Charter boat skippers, recreational anglers and a who?s who of the fishing and environmental communities of California attended the event. I have known Zeke for 30 years and admire him for his understanding of the big picture of fisheries and conservation in California and across the world. We both spoke together at an environmental forum in Oakland several years ago on the threats to fish, rivers and the ocean. We worked closely together for the passage of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA) of 1992, for the removal of Klamath dams, against the peripheral tunnels, against the approval of genetically engineered salmon, against the privatization of the oceans, and most recently, in the campaign opposing Governor Jerry Brown?s Proposition 1 water grab. Zeke's organization also participated in the protests against the WTO meeting in Seattle in 1999, as well as the protests and forums at the WTO Agricultural Ministerial in Sacramento in June 2003. Whenever I wanted to get a good quote for a story, I would call Zeke. One of his best quotes was in 2006 when the Bush administration was trying to close down the salmon season in a cynical move to allegedly ?protect? Klamath River. Zeke famously pointed out that without efforts to address the root causes of the salmon fishery's decline, ?Putting fish back into a river that's killing them makes as much sense as tossing virgins into a volcano." I also called Zeke last year about his take on a bill sponsored by Senator Hannah Beth Jackson to protect a marine protected area, the Vandenberg State Marine Reserve, from oil drilling, due to loopholes in both the California Coastal Sanctuary Act and the Marine Life Protection Act Initiative. Grader, who supported the bill, pointed out how the very need for the bill "highlights what a failure the MLPA Initiative was.? ?If these are true marine protected areas, they why are we allowing drilling and other insults to the ocean in them?? asked Grader. ?The whole MLPA Initiative was a phony process that provided an opportunity for Big Green and government bureaucrats to write press releases claiming these were ?protected areas? when in reality the fishermen and Tribes got screwed. We should have bans on oil drilling in all of the marine protected areas." Grader started as a youngster in the family seafood distribution and marketing business, the Grader Seafood Company in Fort Bragg, where in order to protect their resources, they began to think about sustainability in California - back in the 1950s. The salmon restoration effort toward sustainability started in California around 1956. ?If it wasn't for this early initiative, we might not have salmon in this state, because development pressures would have just destroyed the fish had there not been a consortium of commercial and sport fishermen,? commented Mary Jane Schramm, a spokesman for NOAA Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary. ?There weren?t many conservationists or fishery biologists around back then.? Zeke Grader spoke at the event with usual great sense of humor. ?My parents allowed me to be a free range child and they allowed me to pursue a free range career. My job was very easy and fun," he stated. Zeke said he will be now breaking in his replacement as Executive Director, Tim Sloane. ?This has been an incredible run,? said Zeke.?This battle is not over year and we need to stay strong fighting.? Congressman Mike Thompson commented in his video address, ?As head of the PCFFA, he went to work defending fishing families. He was instrumental in the creation of the salmon stamp that has helped put back millions of salmon into the rivers and ocean.? He also described Zeke?s incredible work ethic. ?I could call him from Washington and Zeke would already be in his office at 5 am. If a fishing family in Eureka needed help, Zeke would get on the road at 2:00 am and come back to work in the office the same day,? said Thompson. Zeke and members of fishing groups and Indian Tribes also accompanied Thompson to dump hundreds of dead, rotting salmon in front of the Secretary of Interior?s Office in Washington DC in September 2002 when the Bush regime killed over 80,000 salmon on the Klamath, according to Thompson. ?Zeke is an effective advocate for fishery families because he knows everything,? quipped Thompson. ?Zeke, you put two lifetimes of work into one! Enjoy your well-earned retirement.? Congressman Jared Huffman gave a history of Zeke?s accomplishments including stopping the expansion of offshore oil drilling the North Coast, the passage of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act, and the lawsuit/settlement compelling the restoration of the San Joaquin River below Friant Dam. Zeke, a lawyer, was one of the original plaintiffs in the lawsuit when Huffman was a lawyer for NRDC. Huffman focused on Zeke?s famous appearance on the Sean Hannity Show in 2009, when he crushed the shameless supporter of subsidized mega- farmers in a debate. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IOf-11wmlY_ Hannity wanted to interview an ?environmental wacko,? but instead they got Zeke Grader, a defender of thousands of fishing industry jobs and the fish that they depend on, said Huffman. ?Sean Hannity barely got a word in,? quipped Huffman, before he read part of the transcript of the show. Zeke said, "Sean, I think what you have to realize is we're not just talking about the Delta smelt - we're also talking about salmon. These salmon are food - they provide jobs for people. You need to come up and provide some balance here. I want you come up to the North Coast, the place where I'm from, Fort Bragg, not one of your studios, Sean. You come up to Eureka and visit with the unemployed fishermen there and give this some balance. Because let me tell you - the Delta smelt did not cause the problem with those farmers." Huffman also pointed out how when Zeke was asked to sign on to a letter by environmental NGOs, he would ask them ?if the letter is tough enough.? ?If wasn?t tough enough, he wouldn?t sign it,? said Huffman. Mary Jane Schramm pointed out that few people know that in addition to advocating for healthy fishing practices and sustainable uses of fisheries habitat, Zeke championed legislation to protect Great White Sharks, as a means of keeping this important predator as a natural system of "checks and balances" for seal and sea lion populations, which compete with fishermen for salmon and other fish. Zeke has also worked with the Gulf of the Farallones National Marine Sanctuary to ensure that the local fishing community is valued as a Maritime Heritage resource, according to Schramm. As somebody who has worked with Zeke for over 30 years on numerous issues, I salute him as a true modern day environmental hero with a no- nonsense attitude. Zeke, a former Marine, has served as a relentless defender of fishing families not only in California but across the world, and developed a close working relationship with Indian Tribes and recreational anglers, as well as with environmentalists and human rights activists. I wish the best to Zeke and his family in his retirement! The PCFFA, a federation of 25 different port and fishermen's marketing associations from San Diego to Alaska, is the largest trade association of commercial fishermen on the West Coast. Grader has been its executive director for over three decades and has been involved in the fishing industry his entire life. ?Zeke and family by Dan Bacher Monday Apr 13th, 2015 6:55 PM 800_zeke_and_family.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Zeke Grader, Executive Director of the PCFFA, is surrounded by his family at the event honoring him in Sausalito on April 10. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Zeke speaks by Dan Bacher Monday Apr 13th, 2015 6:55 PM 800_zeke_horizontal.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Zeke speaks briefly after the program of speakers honoring him. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Linda Sheehan by Dan Bacher Monday Apr 13th, 2015 6:55 PM 800_linda_sheehan.jpg original image ( 3456x5184) Linda Sheehan and her daughter, Maddie Sheehan, sing a song about Zeke Grader, "Our Hero." Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Felix Smith by Dan Bacher Monday Apr 13th, 2015 6:55 PM 800_felix_smith.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Felix Smith, Save the American River Association Board Member and the US Fish and Wildlife Service biologist who was the whistleblower in the Kesterson Wildlife Refuge scandal, was one of hundreds of people who attended the program honoring Zeke Grader. Photo by Dan Bacher. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_zeke_and_jared.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 243562 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_zeke_and_family.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 308939 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_zeke_horizontal.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 228493 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_linda_sheehan.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 251624 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_felix_smith.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 289572 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Apr 14 11:48:10 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 18:48:10 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Daily Kos: Brown's Twin Tunnels Plan Abandons Fish Protection, Public Participation Message-ID: <1002176694.2914849.1429037290775.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/14/1377595/-California-s-Twin-Tunnels-Plan-Abandons-Fish-Protection-Public-Participation?detail=hide# ?MON APR 13, 2015 AT 08:28 PM PDT Brown's Twin Tunnels Plan Abandons Fish Protection, Public Participation byDan BacherFollow - ? - ? - 6 Comments / 6 New Governor Jerry Brown has finally admitted what most Californians have known all along ? the ?conservation? and ?habitat restoration? components of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan have been nothing but a "green mask" for the twin tunnels water grab, potentially the most environmentally destructive public works project in California history.On April 13, Restore the Delta (RTD), a coalition of anti-tunnels organizations and individuals, and the Center for Biological Diversity responded to the governor?s abandonment of the pretense of ?conservation? and ?restoration? and move to permit a ?tunnels only? Bay Delta Conseration Plan, as reported in the San Jose Mercury News, Contra Costa Times and other media outlets. (http://www.mercurynews.com/...)According to Paul Rogers in the Mercury News:"Gov. Jerry Brown has billed his $25 billion plan to build two massive tunnels under the Delta as a way to not just make it easier to move water from north to south, but also increase the reliability of water supplies and bring back salmon and other endangered species.But now the Brown administration is proposing a major and politically risky change: dropping a 50-year guarantee to restore the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta's environment. A centerpiece of the project, the environmental plan included $8 billion to preserve 100,000 acres of wetlands and dozens of other restoration efforts." Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta (RTD), noted that for eight years, Californians had been told that the Bay Delta Conservation Plan was going to serve what became law in 2009 ? the so-called ??co-equal goals of restoring the Delta and providing water supply reliability.??Our position has been that these co-equal goals are irreconcilable because the Delta watershed has been over subscribed five times,? said Barrigan-Parrilla. ?The BDCP planning process culminated in a 40,000-page plan and corresponding EIR/EIS, which cannot be permitted by Federal fish agencies because it failed to meet science-based standards for recovery of fisheries.?She emphasized, ?Proponents of the BDCP are lamenting that, after 8 years and $240,000,000, they do not have a viable project. Even proponents now admit the BDCP was supposed to do something better, but it does not meet the ?better? standard,? said Barrigan-Parrilla. ?The Center for Biological Diversity also responded to the Brown administration?s revelation that the twin tunnels project to divert water from the San Francisco Bay-Delta to Southern California and industrial agribusinesses ?no longer includes provisions to protect habitat for endangered salmon and smelt and more than 50 other imperiled species."?The new plan is a giant step backward,? said Chelsea Tu, a staff attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. ?If it goes through, this massive project?s boosters will be able to build these tunnels without having to do anything to protect our wildlife and waters ? and will neatly sidestep input from the public.??This backdoor process will waste more taxpayer money and kill more Delta species like endangered salmon and smelt,? she stated.She noted that since 2007 state and federal water contractors and public agencies have spent more than $240 million just in planning the so-called Bay Delta Conservation Plan, which would "green-light" the water export tunnels in exchange for promised measures intended to "benefit" the Delta environment.?The new plan would be subject to review only under Section 7 of the federal Endangered Species Act, which could only require federal wildlife agencies to determine whether it will harm 21 wildlife species that are listed or proposed to be listed under the Act,? she added.?Under the previous approach, the Bay Delta Conservation Plan planned to protect 57 imperiled species. A Section 7 consultation would only take place among federal agencies and would likely not contain mandatory mitigation requirements or a public participation process," she concluded.There is no doubt that construction of the giant tunnels will hasten the extinction of Central Valley Chinook salmon, Delta and longfin smelt and numerous other fish species, as well as imperiling salmon and steelhead populations on the Trinity and Klamath rivers. ?Every scientific panel, ranging from the Independent Delta Science Board to the National Academy of Sciences, has criticized the flawed "science" behind the twin tunnel plan. ?Last year, the state and federal governments decided to delay the proposed project following the 43-page comment letter by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) slamming the Bay Delta Conservation Plan?s draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS).The California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA) said the controversial plan to construct two 35-mile long tunnels under the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to divert Sacramento River water to ?agricultural plantations? in the deserts of southern California ?was placed on life support? when the California Department of Water Resources announced that a revised EIR/EIS would be delayed until sometime in 2015.?BDCP?s friends and family anxiously expressed hope that an infusion of additional millions of dollars and months of treatment would enable the project to recover,? quipped Bill Jennings, CSPA Executive Director. ?However, the EPA comments coming on top of some 4,500 pages of searing reviews by municipalities, counties and water agencies that would be adversely impacted by the project, almost 2,000 pages of highly critical comments by environmental and fishing organizations, hundreds of pages of harsh analyses by government agencies and stinging comments from many thousands of California citizens reveal that BDCP is suffering from a congenital terminal illness. (http://www.indybay.org/...) ?The recent abandonment of the pretense of ?restoration? and ?conservation? under the BCCP is part of a larger pattern by the Brown administration, a regime that has pushed some of the most anti-fish and anti-environmental policies of any adminstration in California history. This is a huge story that the mainstream media and most of the alternative media have failed to cover. ?For more information about Brown?s many anti-environmental policies, go to:?http://www.eastbayexpress.com/...?http://www.counterpunch.org/...?or?http://www.alternet.org/... ORIGINALLY POSTED TO?DAN BACHER?ON MON APR 13, 2015 AT 08:28 PM PDT. ALSO REPUBLISHED BY?CALIFORNIA POLITICS. TAGS - Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) - California - Corporate Greenwashing - Drought - Environment - Jerry Brown - Marine Life Protection Act Initiative - Peripheral Tunnels - Water -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Apr 14 18:24:22 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 01:24:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] NY Times Editorial: Making Sense of Water Message-ID: <60853011.3195658.1429061062677.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Making Sense of Water | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | Making Sense of WaterCalifornia must make agriculture pay its fair share. | | | | View on www.nytimes.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | ? The Opinion Pages? |?CONTRIBUTING OP-ED WRITER? Making Sense of Water APRIL 14, 2015Continue reading the main storyMark BittmanContinue reading the main storyShare This Page - Email - Share - Tweet - Save - More Continue reading the main storyContinue reading the main storyContinue reading the main storyThis story is included with an NYT Opinion subscription. Learn more ?BERKELEY, Calif. ? Almost every number used to analyze California?s drought can be debated, but this can be safely said: No level of restrictions on residential use can solve the problem. The solution lies with agriculture, which?consumes more than its fair share.That doesn?t mean homeowners can?t and shouldn?t cut back.But according to estimates by the Public Policy Institute of California, more water was used to grow almonds in 2013 than was used by all homes and businesses in San Francisco and Los Angeles put together. Even worse, most of those almonds are then exported ? which means, effectively, that we are exporting water. Unless you?re the person or company making money off this deal, that?s just nuts. Mark Bittman Nutrition, agriculture and health policy. - McDonald?s Turns ?Progressive??APR 8 - Stop Making Us Guinea Pigs?MAR 25 - Why Not Utopia??MAR 20 - Feeding Kids Well?MAR 11 - How Should We Eat??FEB 25 See More ?California produces more than 400 commodities in many different climates, so it?s difficult to generalize about agriculture. Many farmers are cutting back on water use, planting geographically appropriate crops and shifting to techniques that make sense,?like ?dry? farming. Others, however, are mining water as they would copper: When it runs out, they?ll find new ways to make money.So the big question is not, ?How do we survive the drought?? ??which could well be the new normal?? but, ?How do we allocate water sensibly?? California grows fruits and vegetables for everyone; that?s a good thing. It would be an even better thing, however, if some of that production shifted to places like Iowa, once a leading grower of produce. That could happen again, if federal policy subsidized such crops, rather than corn, on some of that ultra-fertile land.California also grows alfalfa (which uses more water in total?than any other crop ? yes, more than almonds) that?then gets shipped to China. It grows lettuce in the desert, and other crops in places that make no sense. The state has also become the biggest dairy producer in the country; at least a part of that industry would work better back east, where both water and land are available. That everyone in California needs to conserve water is a no-brainer. But a relatively small adjustment in agricultural use could make this drought look like a period of abundance. Properly managed, there is more than enough water for everything important. Improperly managed, as it has been for more than 100 years, there is a crisis.It won?t be easy to rationalize water use in the face of powerful water-dependent interests; though agriculture is a surprisingly minuscule part of the state?s gross domestic product, it?s a big political force. But Gov.?Jerry Brown?and the State Water Resources Control Board have the authority to do what it takes, as the constitution says ?waste or unreasonable use? are to be prevented.The system is arcane, allowing some people and entities to get surface water nearly free. (This system, involving ?senior,? as in inherited, water rights, has never been successfully challenged.) Others, sometimes including cities, can pay 100 times more.Continue reading the main storyContinue reading the main storyContinue reading the main storyIn most areas, groundwater for landowners is ?free,? as long as you can dig a well that?s deep enough. This has led to a race to the bottom: New, super-deep wells, usually drilled at great expense, are causing existing shallower wells, often owned by people with less money, to run dry.That?s more than unfair: Groundwater that?s built up over a millennium is being removed too rapidly to be recharged, and in some cases the land is sinking as the water-saturated layers beneath it go dry. Those layers will most likely never be replenished, making this a form of environmental suicide.Continue reading the main story RECENT COMMENTS Pottree ?4 hours agoRarely, if ever, have I agreed so completely with an ediitorial opinion. Thanks you, MB.There is weather and climate science at work in our... Ferrington ?5 hours agoI farm in California. I also raise beef and sheep for personal consumption. My wife and I produce about half of our vegetables.We use drip... C. Davison ?5 hours agoAh, the good and bad of water. During the HUGE flood of 1955 that encompassed 2/3rds of Northern CA, men with rifles were patrolling the... - SEE ALL COMMENTS Knowing this, Brown has announced mandatory cutbacks of an average of 25 percent in residential water use. He hasn?t said much about agriculture, but he must. He needs to see this crisis as an opportunity to rationalize the system.Last September, Brown signed the state?s first bill to manage groundwater; the most important groundwater basins are due to be ?in balance? ? that is, recharged at a sustainable rate ? by 2040. That?s probably too late.It would be better to have a national policy preventing profit-making from public water and to encourage agriculture where it?s more naturally supported by the climate. But until that happens, Brown should challenge senior water rights, strictly regulate the pumping of groundwater, and perhaps even stop irrigation entirely on lands where growing water-intensive crops makes no sense.When I arrived here a few months ago, an old friend who moved here in the 1980s came for dinner and scolded me for my dishwashing technique: ?Turn that water off; there?s a drought.?I almost pointed that my use of water was trivial compared with ... well, nearly everyone else?s. But I shut up. After all, every drop really does count. Wise use and conservation ? not new dams, not?desalination?? are the answers, and conservation means common sense should take precedence over profiteering.Joe Nocera is off today.A version of this op-ed appears in print on April 14, 2015, on page A23 of the?New York edition?with the headline: Making Sense of Water.?Order Reprints|? Today's Paper|Subscribe Mark Bittman Nutrition, agriculture and health policy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bgutermuth at usbr.gov Wed Apr 15 07:29:26 2015 From: bgutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F.) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 07:29:26 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] TRRP Flow and Gravel recommendations for 2015 Message-ID: I am not sure that this was posted so I am resending in this simple format to the list serve. Hope to see you here. *Trinity River **Restoration Program* *Informational Meeting* *Thursday, April 16, 2015* *Trinity Public Utility District (PUD)* *Weaverville 6:30-8:00pm* Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) technical staff will be available the evening of April 16th at the Trinity Public Utility District (PUD), 26 Ponderosa Lane, Weaverville, CA to describe the science behind the flow and gravel recommendations. The recommendations were provided to the Trinity Management Council at their quarterly public meeting on March 25-26, 2015. Community members are encouraged to attend in order to learn about the technical recommendations and to plan for the 2015 restoration flow releases. For further information, please contact Ms. Michele Gallagher, TRRP office, P.O. Box 1300, Weaverville, CA 96093 at 623-1804 or e-mail magallagher at usbr.gov. Sincerely- Brandt Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Scientist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S. Main ST. Weaverville CA 96093 530.623.1806 Voice http://www.trrp.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Apr 15 08:05:08 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 15:05:08 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Mother Jones: Here's The Real Problem With Almonds Message-ID: <645040049.3608560.1429110308024.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> The water usage chart can show total water usage for each crop and the amount of water exported by crop. http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/04/real-problem-almonds Here's The Real Problem With Almonds The nut apologists missed some important facts.?By?Tom Philpott?and?Julia Lurie?|?Wed Apr. 15, 2015 6:00 AM EDTSocial Title:?5 Reasons That Almonds Really Are a Big Problem?Social Dek:?The nut apologists missed some important facts.?Almonds: crunchy, delicious, and...the center of a nefarious plot to suck California dry? They certainly have used up a lot of ink lately?partly inspired by our?reporting?[1]?over?[2]?the?past year?[3]. California's drought-stricken Central Valley churns out?80 percent of the globe's almonds?[4], and since each nut takes a gallon of water to produce, they account for close to?10 percent?[5]?of the state's annual agricultural water use?or more than what the entire population of Los Angeles and San Francisco use in a year.As?Grist?s?[6]?Nathanael Johnson put it, almonds have become a scapegoat of sorts?"the poster-nut for human wastefulness in California's drought." Or, as Alissa Walker put it in?Gizmodo[7], "You know, ALMONDS, THE DEVIL'S NUT." It's not surprising that the almond backlash has inspired a backlash of its own. California agriculture is vast and complex, and its water woes can't hang entirely on any one commodity, not even one as charismatic as the?devil's nut?almond.And as?many?[8]?have?[9]?pointed out, almonds have a lot going for them?they're nutritious, they taste good, and they're hugely profitable for California. In 2014, almonds brought in a whopping $11 billion to the state's economy. Plus, other foods?namely, animal products?use a whole lot more water per ounce than almonds.So almonds must be worth all the water they require, right? Not so fast. Before you jump to any conclusions, consider the following five facts:1. Most of our almonds end up overseas.?Almonds are the second-thirstiest crop in California?behind alfalfa, a superfood of sorts for cows that sucks up 15 percent of the state's irrigation water.?Gizmodo's Walker?along with many others?wants to shift the focus from almonds to the ubiquitous feed crop, wondering, "Why are we using more and more of our water to grow hay?" Especially since alfalfa is?a relatively low-value crop?about a quarter of the per-acre value of almonds?and about a fifth of it is exported.It should be noted, though, that we export far more almonds than alfalfa: About two thirds of California's almond and pistachio crops are sent overseas?a de facto export of California's overtapped water resources.2. While alfalfa fields are shrinking, almond fields are expanding?in a big way.?The drought is already pushing California farmers out of high-water, low-value crops like alfalfa and cotton, and into almonds and two other pricey nuts, pistachios and walnuts. This year, California acreage devoted to alfalfa is expected to?shrink 11 percent?[10]; and cotton acres look set to?dwindle to their lowest level since the 1920s?[11].Meanwhile, the market is pushing almonds and other nuts in the opposite direction. At a recent confab in California's nut-rich, water-challenged San Joaquin County, Stuart Resnick, chief of Paramount Farms, by far the?state's largest nut grower?[12], explained why in a speech, as documented by an?account?[13]?in the trade journal?Western Farm Press. Almonds, he said, deliver farmers an average net return of $1,431 per acre. Pistachios, another fast-expanding nut hotly promoted by the Paramount farming empire, net even more: $3,519 per acre.Given that Paramount reportedly manages 50,000 acres of combined almonds and pistachios, it's safe to say there's big profits in growing those nuts. And the company, which also buys and processes nuts from other farmers and sells them under the Wonderful brand, plans to expand by fifty percent in the next five years. Currently the company farms 30,000 acres on its own and buys pistachios from farms occupying another 100,000 acres. By 2020, the company's "goal is 150,000 partner acres, 33,000 Paramount acres," which would be a 40 percent jump in just five years. And that's on top of the 118 percent expansion in pistachio acres over the past decade, according to figures Resnick delivered at the conference.3. Unlike other crops, almonds always require a lot of water?even during drought.??Annual crops like cotton, alfalfa and veggies are flexible?farmers can fallow them in dry years. That's not so for nuts, which need to be watered every year, drought or no, or the trees die, wiping out farmers' investments.Already, strains are showing. Back in 2013, a team led by US Geological Survey hydrologist Michelle Sneed?discovered?[14]?that a?1,200-square-mile swath of the southern Central Valley[15]?a landmass more than twice the size of Los Angeles?had been?sinking?[16]?by as much as 11 inches per year, because the water table had fallen from excessive pumping. In an interview last year, Sneed told me the ongoing exodus from annual crops and pasture to nuts likely played a big role.4. Some nut growers are advocating against water regulation?during the worst drought in California's history.?"I've been smiling all the way to the bank,"?one pistachio grower told the audience at the Paramount event, according to the?Western Farm Press?account?[13]. As for water, that's apparently a political problem, not an ecological one, for Paramount. "Pistachios are valued at $40,000 an acre," Bill Phillimore, executive vice president of Paramount Farming, reportedly told the crowd. "How much are you spending in the political arena to preserve that asset?" Apparently, he meant: protect it from pesky regulators questioning your water use. He "urged growers to contribute three quarters of a cent on every pound of pistachios sold to a water advocacy effort,"?Western Farm Press?reported.5. Mostly, it's not small-scale farmers that are getting rich off the almond boom.?With their surging overseas sales, almonds and pistachios have drawn in massive financial players hungry for a piece of the action. As we?reported last year?[1], Hancock Agricultural Investment Group, an investment owned by the Canadian insurance and financial services giant Manulife Financial, owns?at least 24,000 acres?[17]?of almonds, pistachios, and walnuts, making it California's?second-largest nut grower?[12]. TIAA-CREF, a large retirement and investment fund that owns?37,000 acres?[18]?of California farmland, and boasts that it's one of the globe's top five almond producers.Then there's?Terrapin Fabbri Management,?[19]?a private equity firm that "manages more than $100 million of farm assets on behalf of institutional investors and high net worth clients" and says it's "focused on capitalizing on the increasing global demand for California?s agricultural output." In a?piece?[20]?late last year,?The Economist?pointed out that Terrapin had "bought a dairy company and some vineyards and tomato fields in California, and converted all to grow almonds, whose price has soared as the Chinese have gone nuts for them." The magazine added that "such conversions require up-front capital"?e.g., to drop wells?"and the ability to survive without returns for years." Those aren't privileges many small-scale farmers enjoy.Source URL:?http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/04/real-problem-almondsLinks: [1] http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/01/california-drought-almonds-water-use [2] http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2014/07/lay-off-almond-milk-ignorant-hipsters [3] http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/02/wheres-californias-water-going [4] http://www.almonds.com/sites/default/files/content/attachments/2013_almanac.pdf [5] http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/05/_10_percent_of_california_s_water_goes_to_almond_farming.html [6] http://grist.org/food/making-almonds-the-droughts-scapegoat-thats-nuts/ [7] http://gizmodo.com/seriously-stop-demonizing-almonds-1696065939 [8] http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2015/04/12/398757250/beyond-almonds-a-rogues-gallery-of-guzzlers-in-californias-drought [9] http://www.vox.com/2015/4/14/8407155/almonds-california-drought-water [10] http://www.capitalpress.com/Nation_World/Nation/20150407/western-hay-growers-face-challenges [11] http://goldrushcam.com/sierrasuntimes/index.php/news/local-news/2835-california-cotton-acreage-may-be-lowest-since-the-1920s [12] http://www.growingproduce.com/fruits/2013-top-nut-growers/ [13] http://westernfarmpress.com/tree-nuts/paramount-farms-touts-record-pistachio-return-future?page=1 [14] http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2013/5142/ [15] http://www.capradio.org/articles/2013/11/22/usgs-study-1200-square-miles-of-central-valley-land-is-sinking/ [16] http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-groundwater-20150318-story.html#page=1 [17] http://haig.jhancock.com/pdf/spring_summer_2014.pdf [18] https://www.tiaa-cref.org/public/assetmanagement/insights/commentary-perspectives/perspectives/withstanding-historic-drought [19] http://www.terrapinpalisades.com/investment_funds.html [20] http://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21637379-hardy-investors-are-seeking-way-grow-their-money-barbarians-farm-gate -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Apr 15 08:07:14 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 15:07:14 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Boxer-McCarthy Feuding Public -- Boxer Not in Drought Talks In-Reply-To: <013401d07724$f1325500$d396ff00$@erols.com> References: <013401d07724$f1325500$d396ff00$@erols.com> Message-ID: <1808390080.3594610.1429110435249.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer lashed out Tuesday at a fellow Californian, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, calling his legislative efforts to address the state?s drought crisis ?destructive? and divisive. Boxer said McCarthy, the No. 2 House Republican, could learn a lesson on leadership from Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown, who has been working closely with water stakeholders in the state.Boxer and McCarthy have been trading barbs over the water issue for months. But McCarthy recently stepped up his attacks after Brown ordered the first-ever mandatory water reductions in state history. As recently as Monday, the GOP leader blasted Boxer for ?blowing up? bipartisan drought negotiations last year between him and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). ? ?April 14, 2015, 04:52 pm Boxer slams McCarthy's 'small measure' drought fix By Scott Wong Greg Nash Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer lashed out Tuesday at a fellow Californian, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, calling his legislative efforts to address the state?s drought crisis ?destructive? and divisive.Boxer said McCarthy, the No. 2 House Republican, could learn a lesson on leadership from Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown, who has been working closely with water stakeholders in the state.Boxer and McCarthy have been trading barbs over the water issue for months. But McCarthy recently stepped up his attacks after Brown ordered the first-ever mandatory water reductions in state history. As recently as Monday, the GOP leader blasted Boxer for ?blowing up? bipartisan drought negotiations last year between him and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).Boxer fired back at McCarthy in a brief interview with The Hill.McCarthy has ?insisted on pitting the farmers against urban users, suburban users and fishermen, and anyone who cares about our beautiful state. So he is destructive in the way he is approaching this,? said Boxer, the top Democrat on the Environment and Public Works Committee.?We need to come together and unify, and all the stakeholders have to. And I?m not going to be a party to any move to divide our state,? she continued. ?We have to be united, as Jerry Brown is leading us, as opposed to Kevin McCarthy. ... He should take a lesson out of Jerry Brown?s book.?McCarthy said the state's GOP delegation is continuing to work with Feinstein on legislation that would divert water from northern California to the agriculture-rich Central Valley and store it for times of drought.Boxer?s opposition to McCarthy?s bipartisan efforts last year ?harmed all Californians,? he told reporters in a briefing Monday in his office.Boxer, who will retire after 2016, said she?ll have no part in McCarthy?s drought legislation. Last year, she said, McCarthy only wanted to hold "secret" meetings and denied her request to include water stakeholders.And she accused McCarthy of overstating the impact of his legislation, dismissing it a ?small measure.??His penchant is to divide our state, turn one group against another, one portion of the state against another, make the case that farmers ? who get 80 percent of all the water ? should get more and take it away from fisherman, who are struggling as much as farmers are,? Boxer said in the interview.?We are in this together. I will not be supporting any type of legislation that hurts the majority of our state.? ? ??? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 39937 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 48338 bytes Desc: not available URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Thu Apr 16 11:54:54 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 11:54:54 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Governor to discuss water "conservation" today as Big Ag, Big Oil get off the hook In-Reply-To: <3CFCB9BC-D5FD-4BE0-ADDD-DC4DA54CE44F@fishsniffer.com> References: <3CFCB9BC-D5FD-4BE0-ADDD-DC4DA54CE44F@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <194AC89C-3571-4554-BE69-3C277ADDD0D2@fishsniffer.com> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/16/1378201/-Governor-to-discuss-water-conservation-today-as-Big-Ag-Big-Oil-get-off-the-hook Governor to discuss water "conservation" today as Big Ag, Big Oil get off the hook by Dan Bacher After convening agribusiness, urban water agency and corporate "environmental" NGO leaders to discuss the drought last week, Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. will hold another closed door meeting in Sacramento today. A media advisory from the Governor's Office claims that Brown will "gather officials" from the landscape, golf, home and garden, spa and pool, cemetery and mortuary, building and manufacturing, retail, restaurant and hospitality industries in Sacramento today to discuss the business community?s efforts to conserve water. ?The key challenge here ? aside from getting the water ? is to be able to collaborate together,? said Governor Brown at last week?s meeting. ?We?re going to rise to the occasion as Californians first and as members of different groups second.? As was the case in last week's meeting, only the final few minutes of the meeting, including time for questions, will be open to coverage by "credentialed media" at approx. 3:00 p.m. The location will be the California State Capitol, Governor's Office, Sacramento, CA 95814 According to the advisory: "Earlier this month, Governor Brown announced the first ever 25 percent statewide mandatory water reductions and a series of actions to help save water, increase enforcement to prevent wasteful water use, streamline the state?s drought response and invest in new technologies that will make California more drought resilient. This order included measures to help: replace lawns with drought tolerant landscaping and old appliances with more water and energy efficient models; cut water use at campuses, golf courses, cemeteries and other large landscapes; prevent potable water irrigation at new developments unless water-efficient drip systems are used; and stop watering of ornamental grass on public street medians. Within days of the Governor?s order, the State Water Resources Control Board released its framework to achieve the mandatory water reductions and the California Energy Commission approved new water appliance standards to save billions of gallons of water per year. Yesterday, the California Department of Water Resources announced that due to the severe drought it will install an emergency, temporary rock barrier across a Sacramento San Joaquin Delta channel to help prevent the saltwater contamination of water that 25 million Californians depend on. These measures build on unprecedented action by the State Water Resources Control Board over the past year to prohibit other wasteful water use and encourage Californians to conserve, including strict limits on outdoor irrigation (two days a week in much of California) and bans on hosing down outdoor surfaces, decorative water fountains that don't recirculate water and car washing without an automatic shut- off nozzle. Bars and restaurants are also now required to only serve water upon request and hotels must ask guests staying multiple nights whether linens and towels need to be washed. Governor Brown proclaimed a drought state of emergency in January 2014 and for more than two years, the state?s experts have been managing water resources to deal with the effects of the drought, which include severely curtailed water supplies to agricultural producers, farmworker job losses due to fallowed fields, drinking water vulnerability in communities across California, heightened fire danger and threats to endangered and threatened fish and wildlife. To learn about all the actions the state has taken to manage our water system and cope with the impacts of the drought, visit Drought.CA.Gov. Every Californian should take steps to conserve water. Find out how at SaveOurWater.com." Not mentioned in the Governor's media advisory was the fact that agribusiness uses 80 percent of California water while oil companies and Nestle Waters and other water bottling companies continue to drain and pollute California aquifers during a record drought. The mainstream media, state officials and corporate ?environmental? groups have for years tried to portray California as the ?green? leader of the nation. In reality, California suffers from some of the greatest environmental degradation of any state in the nation, since corporate agribusiness, the oil industry and other big money interests control the majority of the state?s politicians and exert inordinate influence over the state?s environmental policies. At an Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) event at the Crest Theatre in Sacramento last week, Natural Resources Secretary John Laird claimed that ?everybody is a soldier in the fight? to address the drought. Yes, everybody except those planting almonds in the drought! According to the ?On the Public Record? blog, almond acreage in California has expanded by 70,000 acres, a total of 280,000 acre feet per year of new water demand: ?I have marked the almond acreage at the beginning and end of the 2006-2009 drought (700,000 acres at the beginning, 810,000 acres at the end). At the beginning of our current drought, almond acreage was 870,000 acres. In 2013, after two years of drought, it was up to 940,000 acres. It looks like the 2014 California Almond Acreage Report comes out at the end of April (here?s 2013). I will be excited to see a new total acreage. Let?s make this all explicit. Since this drought began, almonds have expanded by 70,000 acres. That?s 280,000 acft/year of new water demand for a snack that will be exported. That water will come from groundwater or from other farmers. At the same time, the California EPA is literally telling urban users to take five minute cold showers. If there is a lot of new acreage in 2014 and 2015, it is going to be difficult for the Brown administration to stay friends with them.? It?s clear that the severity of this drought calls for much more than just individual action like cutting back on your showers or flushing your toilet less. California water restrictions must include corporate agribusiness, Big Oil and Nestle and other bottling companies during the drought. To take action, go to: http://sandiegofreepress.org/2015/04/california-water-restrictions-must-include-nestle-big-ag-and-big-oil/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Thu Apr 16 16:27:43 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 16:27:43 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] PPIC Water Policy Center: Five Things You Need to Know About Water Message-ID: <009d01d0789c$f0ded0f0$d29c72d0$@sisqtel.net> http://www.ppic.org/common/logo.png http://www.ppic.org/common/tagline.png http://www.ppic.org/common/blogHeader.png http://www.ppic.org/content/images/OrovilleRiver_drought_DWR.jpg Five Things You Need to Know About Water http://www.ppic.org/main/blog_detail.asp?i=1736 Ellen Hanak April 06, 2015 http://www.ppic.org/content/images/ev-imgHanakWPCLaunch0415-embed.jpgWe marked the launch of the PPIC Water Policy Center by convening a panel of leading experts to discuss key issues in state water policy. Participants were Richard Frank, director of the California Environmental Law and Policy Center at the UC Davis law school; Matthew Rodriquez, secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency; and Karen Ross, secretary of the California Department of Food and Agriculture. Moderating the conversation was Lois Kazakoff, deputy editorial page editor at the San Francisco Chronicle. We invite you to watch the full presentation and discussion. Before the panel discussion, I gave a brief opening talk called "Five Things You Need to Know About Water." Here is a summary of the five points: Water is complicated. There are no silver bullet solutions to California's water problems-whether it be desalination, new reservoirs, or conservation. We need to be thinking about combining a lot of different tools and strategies. This also means that there are almost always unintended consequences, even for solutions that seem like no brainers. As an example, there's a lot of public interest-and funding-now available for increasing local drought resilience by reusing treated wastewater. However, more water reuse often means less treated wastewater gets returned to rivers and streams, where it provides important environmental benefits and supplies for downstream communities. This doesn't mean we shouldn't be doing these projects, but it does mean we need to be aware of the consequences and trade-offs. We have to go after more than the low-hanging fruit. The low-hanging fruit types of solutions tend to be incremental and piecemeal in nature. This is fine for things that can change incrementally, like improving water use efficiency. But some tough problems-like meeting the co-equal goals of water supply reliability and ecosystem sustainability in the Delta-will require tough, expensive, and politically difficult solutions. Water solutions almost always have both winners and losers. This is obvious in a case like the Delta, where it's simply not possible to find a fix that will make everyone better off. That's because every available option involves tradeoffs in which at least one party doesn't fare as well, whether it's farmers in the Delta, farmers in the San Joaquin Valley, urban residents south of the Delta, or the Delta's native fish and wildlife. It's also true for projects that people like to think of as win-win, such as flood protection projects that move levees back to make more room for rivers. These projects also improve wildlife habitat, but they usually cost more than traditional flood control projects. As a society, we can aim for solutions that get the most benefits per dollar spent, but we also need to consider how to soften the blow if some groups are disproportionately bearing the costs. Crises create hardship, but also opportunity. In particular, crises create openings to achieve major reforms that might not be possible in normal times. Thanks to a string of crises-and to bold action by leaders at the local, state, and federal levels-California is now experiencing a period of extraordinary change in water policy: In 2007, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, we enacted legislation that doubled the federal standard of flood protection for cities in the Central Valley. In 2009, in the third year of drought, we adopted a legislative package that required more conservation, better water use reporting, and a new governance structure for the Delta. In 2014, in the midst of a much more severe drought, we enacted historic legislation that empowers and requires local agencies to sustainably manage our threatened groundwater basins. Much work lies ahead to effectively implement all of these reforms, and more big changes will be needed in other areas, such as finding ways to fill critical funding gaps in our water system. It's hard work, but it's not hopeless. We've been making progress in addressing some key challenges, including improving the reliability and quality of our water supplies, and preparing to weather droughts and floods. Perhaps the toughest-and most conflict-ridden-challenge we face in California water is reversing the decline of our native aquatic ecosystems, which have been failing despite several decades of well-intentioned environmental laws and investments. But even here, one can point to promising approaches. There's the example of Putah Creek, where the reintroduction of natural, variable flow patterns-albeit with just a fraction of the water nature used to provide-has favored the return of native species. There's also the example of the Knagg's Ranch in the Yolo Bypass, where leaving fields flooded a little longer before planting rice is making it possible to fatten up young salmon before they make their way back to the ocean, giving them a better chance of survival. These are creative examples from the playbook of "reconciliation ecology," a pragmatic approach to managing our ecosystems alongside continued human uses of water and land resources. These five immutable facts about California water guide the work of our center. California needs to ground policy decisions in reliable, non-partisan, science-based diagnoses of problems and potential solutions. That's how we-along with our research partners throughout the state-hope to contribute to a better water future. TOPICS: Water TAGS: Delta, drought, ecosystems, floods, water quality, water supply back to blog home Share Previous Post Next Post News and analysis of California policy issues from PPIC Subscribe by Email by RSS -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 6435 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 2257 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 4193 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 820924 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 72450 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Apr 17 16:36:41 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 23:36:41 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] LA Times: California faces fight over historic water rationing plans Message-ID: <1109166813.5522169.1429313801725.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-drought-comments-20150415-story.htmlCalifornia faces fight over historic water rationing plans By?BETTINA BOXALL?AND?MATT STEVENScontact the reporters Towns and agencies complain to the state that the plan to force water cuts is unreasonableMore than 200 letters leveling criticisms at a plan to force Californians to slash urban water use by 25% make it clear just how difficult it will be for regulators to enforce Gov. Jerry Brown's unprecedented mandate.In the week since the State Water Resources Control Board announced its proposal to cut water use statewide, tiny rural towns, huge urban water agencies and suburban districts submitted a raft of comments calling the board's conservation targets unfair and, in some cases, unattainable.Citing factors ranging from previous water-saving efforts to wildfire risk and the need of water for coffee shops, they argue the proposed cuts are too much.With his well nearly dry, a farmer draws on his resolveTheir grievances are aimed at a framework the state water board unveiled last week to comply with Brown's historic April 1 order requiring a 25% cut in overall urban water use across California over the next year. The proposal assigns individual targets to more than 400 local water agencies, which have been told they will have to chop water use by anywhere from 10% to 35% or face fines of up to $10,000 a day.Brown issued his order in the fourth year of severe drought that has depleted reservoirs and caused a surge in well pumping that has driven groundwater levels to historic lows in parts of the Central Valley.lRelated? - POLITICS - State water regulator flexes new muscle in response to drought SEE ALL RELATED8Under the state board proposal, the steepest cuts would fall on cities with the highest rates of per-capita water consumption during September of last year. They include small rural communities, along with such affluent enclaves as Newport Beach and Beverly Hills.Cities with the lowest per-capita use that month, including Santa Cruz and Seal Beach, would have to cut the least.One of the most consistent themes from Southern California agencies that commented on the framework is that the region has for years been a leader in water conservation, whereas some parts of the state are only now getting serious about it."Yet the [board] now considers a proposal that treats agencies with a history of saving water the same as others that are only now beginning to meter water used by their consumers," wrote Jeffrey Kightlinger, general manager of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.We cannot just turn off water at 20-35% and expect the trees and bushes to thrive.- Neil Nagata of Nagata Brothers Farms in San Luis ReyThe proposed cutbacks "punish those who have conserved and reward communities that did not make such early and sustained commitment to conservation," wrote Kimberly Thorner, general manager of the Olivenhain Municipal Water District in northern San Diego County.Southern California farmers who get supplies from urban water districts said their businesses would be "devastated." "We cannot just turn off water at 20-35% and expect the trees and bushes to thrive," wrote Neil Nagata of Nagata Brothers Farms in San Luis Rey near Oceanside. "If I do not produce a crop, I will not have any income to continue farming at all."cComments - @Relieved to live HERE Actually not, there are millions of gallons of water that are routed the sea, (the LA river is just one example). That water can be used for a number of non-potable applications.THX.1138AT 3:57 PM APRIL 17, 2015 ADD A COMMENTSEE ALL COMMENTS51Desert Water Agency General Manager David K. Luker wrote that a 35% water-use reduction would mean a $10.1-million loss in revenue for the water supplier, which serves Coachella Valley resort communities such as Palm Springs."A customer came to our office this week and asked us who he should file suit against when his property value decreases because the landscaping that he has invested tens of thousands of dollars in has died," Luker wrote.That will not be a problem in Compton, where Deputy Director of Public Works Chad Blais wrote that the community's water use was already low because many residents can't afford basic services."If you drive through the City of Compton most of the front yards are brown," Blais wrote. "Therefore, the prospect of achieving an additional 20% reduction from this community is not feasible."Another voice of discontent came from largely poor, rural Central Valley communities that are surrounded by cropland.California tightening water-use rules for urinals, faucets amid droughtA 25% reduction in local residential usage would make a tiny dent in the area's overall consumption, because most of the water is sucked up by "farms, duck hunting clubs and newly planted pistachio orchards," complained John E. Burchard, general manager of the Alpaugh Community Services District in Tulare County.The public works director of Kerman, a town of about 13,500 residents in Fresno County, wrote: "Our community is completely surrounded by agriculture and how is it equitable for the city to drastically reduce its use of water while the adjacent farmers are allowed to pump for 24 hours per day?"The California Chamber of Commerce expressed concern that deep cuts would hurt some water-dependent businesses, including coffee shops."Beverage manufacturers, bottlers, coffee shops, industries like micro chip processors and food processors for example would be put in jeopardy if 25 percent of their water usage were cut or if they had to pay significantly more for their water," wrote policy advocate Valerie Nera.In an email, state water board spokesman George Kostyrko said the draft regulations, scheduled for release Friday, will "reflect the thoughtful comments we receive to the framework."The board is expected to adopt the regulations next month. Implementation of the regulations is expected to begin sometime before June 1.matthew.stevens at latimes.combettina.boxall@latimes.comTimes staff writers Tony Perry, Geoffrey Mohan and Ryan Menezes contributed to this article. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Apr 20 12:42:25 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 19:42:25 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Mercury News editorial: Jerry Brown needs new water strategy -- no tunnels Message-ID: <1544157011.581933.1429558945268.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Mercury News editorial: Jerry Brown needs new water strategy -- no tunnels | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | Mercury News editorial: Jerry Brown needs new water stra...The combination of the drought emergency and the imminent removal of environmental elements from Brown's twin tunnel plan make it urgent for the governor to f... | | | | View on www.mercurynews.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | ? Mercury News editorial: Jerry Brown needs new water strategy -- no tunnels Mercury News EditorialPOSTED: ? 04/17/2015 01:29:22 PM PDT11 COMMENTS|?UPDATED: ? 2 DAYS AGOCalifornia needs Gov. Jerry Brown's leadership to deal with the worst drought in state history.The state has to reset its water priorities to match both current and worst-case long-term needs. But Brown can't make that happen as long as he clings to his $25 billion, twin-tunnel proposal to carry Delta water south.?The Bay Delta Conservation Plan has deeply divided crucial players in high-stakes water politics, many of whom view it as another Northern California/Southern California water war. And now that the Brown administration is poised to remove the "Conservation" part -- the 50-year guarantee to restore Delta wetlands and habitat to keep the estuary healthy -- all that's left is the massive tunnel project. It is dead in the murky, barely habitable water.So this is an opportunity. The drought not only justifies but requires a shift of strategy based on the deepening emergency. Other BDCP supporters, including the Santa Clara Valley Water District, should urge him in that direction. Let's not spend more money on a losing proposition.With the tunnels set aside, Brown could focus his political clout on developing and implementing cheaper, quicker, more efficient ways to conserve water -- that's the main thing now -- and offer long-term solutions to water-starved Central Valley farmers and urban Southern California areas.AdvertisementRestoring the Delta ecosystem has to be at the core of California's water policy because so much of our fresh water comes from it -- about half of Silicon Valley's supply. This generation cannot destroy the largest estuary west of the Mississippi. And the only way to sustain it is to get more water flowing through it, not less, a premise ratified by a National Academy of Sciences study from 2011.California needs to conserve water for the long term. There's no shortage of ideas, just of leadership to make them happen.This is where we need Jerry Brown.Here are just a few things he could do through the state budget and his power of persuasion: - Capture, clean and recycle more water. The state should build more and better wastewater recycling plants and raise the height of some reservoirs to capture what little rain we get.Nearly 5 million acre feet of water a year flows into the ocean when it could be captured and recycled. Recycling plants are cheaper and less environmentally harmful than desalination plants. Aggressive recycling, conservation and diversifying of sources helped San Diego cut its reliance on water purchased from the Metropolitan Water District by 45 percent since the last drought. Cities such as San Jose and its water plant partners that already aggressively recycle could do so much more with state help to rely less on Delta water. - Make creative water bargains between urban and rural areas.?Agriculture uses 80 percent of California's available water supply, but nearly 60 percent of farms don't have drip or other efficient irrigation that can produce most crops with 40 percent less water. Farmers can't afford the systems. Urban water districts could offer them subsidies and low-cost loans to install drip, and in return receive a portion of the water saved at a discounted rate.?City dwellers need to conserve as well; it has to be a way of life. But the big water-saving opportunities are in farm irrigation. The state could broker deals and offer incentives. - Here's a simple one: Spend money already allocated to shore up the levees around the Delta.The complexity of water politics dwarfs every other California issue. The specter of a very long drought cries out for a leader who can unite the players rather than driving them apart. Jerry Brown can be that leader. But he has to set aside the $25 billion tunnels first.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Apr 20 13:24:57 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 20:24:57 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Comstock: Groves & Fishes Message-ID: <1160599380.661643.1429561497218.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.comstocksmag.com/longreads/groves-fishes Groves & Fishes There is water war brewing between farmers and fishermanBACKLONGREADSAPR 20, 2015By Alastair Bland? ?In 2008, salmon fisherman Mike Hudson was told he could not go to work. That year, months after one of the lowest recorded spawning returns of Central Valley fall-run Chinook, the commercial fishery was shut down. The season remained almost entirely closed for three years while fishermen collected disaster relief paychecks and waited for Chinook numbers to rebuild.Now, as the state faces the most serious water shortage emergency in its history, environmentalists and fishermen are outraged that California farmers are still planting orchards in the bone-dry San Joaquin Valley. This region is irrigated with Sacramento River water, and critics say farmers are taking too much. Last fall, thousands of salmon were unable to spawn in the low and lethally warm water exiting Shasta Dam, and a recent field survey by California Department of Fish and Wildlife found several native fish species on the verge of extinction.But Hudson thinks he has a solution: State and federal water managers, he says, should crack down on farmers with the same sorts of regulations used to manage fisheries. ?Fishermen already have individual quotas, and crab and lobster fishermen have trap limits,? Hudson explains. ?So why couldn?t we make production quotas for each farmer, and maybe impose tree limits?? Hudson also thinks commercial production of certain crops should be prohibited in particularly dry regions ? an agricultural rendition of no-fishing marine reserves.But such ideas seem a long way off. Gov. Jerry Brown called this month for mandatory 25-percent cutbacks on urban water use statewide. But California?s agriculture industry, which uses on average 80 percent of water consumed by Californians, was not asked to make any new sacrifices.Of course, many farmers have already been hit hard by the drought. Fields have gone brown, and orchards have turned into graveyards of gray, skeletal trees. But the region is also lush with newly planted almond orchards, and overall acreage of the state?s most valuable tree crop has grown during the drought.Leaders of the state?s agriculture industry have complained that many farmers will receive no surface water this year. However, such cutbacks do not necessarily reduce the net agricultural use of water. Last year, just 5 percent of the state?s irrigated land, mostly low-value field crops, was fallowed, according to Jeff Michael, director of the Center for Business and Policy Research at the University of the Pacific in Stockton.Farmers are able to stay in business through dry years by using groundwater, which in California can be legally pumped from the earth without restrictions. Because many groundwater basins are directly connected to surface watersheds, pumping water from wells may be little different than dipping a hose into a river or lake.This free-for-all use of subsurface reservoirs has undermined serious efforts to restrict total water use, according to water policy analyst David Zetland. ?It?s like managing the right side of the car but not the left,? says Zetland, a U.C. Davis doctoral graduate and the author of Living with Water Scarcity. ?You can?t do that. They?re connected.?Emergency cutbacks from federal suppliers have left Jim Jasper, a farmer in Newman, with no surface water deliveries for the second year in a row. He had to uproot 400 acres of almonds last year and in March pulled out 30 acres of citrus. Jasper is in a particularly tight spot. He says the water under his property is too salty to apply directly to his trees but that if he received just several hundred acre feet of surface water, he could at least keep his orchards alive.?Endangered species wouldn?t disappear if they shared just a little water with almond growers,? says Jasper, who farms about 2,000 acres. He would like to see more reservoirs built and existing ones made larger to contain deluges of rain and runoff when El Ni?o events bring them to California. He says the growth of profitable farming industries should be encouraged and supported, not limited to protect native species.Another almond farmer, Tom Frantz, disagrees. ?Especially on the west side [of the San Joaquin Valley], they planted way too many permanent crops,? says Frantz, who has 36 acres of trees near Bakersfield. ?They?re going to complain and cry and scream if their bottom line gets cut, but they don?t have much of an argument for getting more water. Freshwater has to run through the Delta ecosystem. We can?t sacrifice that. All forms of life have value.?Whether lawmakers should step in to decide how much farmers grow and what crops they can plant is becoming increasingly debated. Jeffrey Mount, a senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California, says he and his colleagues do not believe farmers should be restricted in such a way. Farmers know best what to grow, Mount says, and it makes no financial sense for them to take business advice ? or orders ? from regulators in Sacramento. Some people have defended farmers, saying that growers should be allowed to plant trees as they please since they are the ones taking the risk.?But that risk spills out onto others through groundwater depletion, loss of reservoir storage and constant appeals by water districts to weaken environmental protections because [farmers] want more water,? says UOP?s Michael.Signs staked into the earth beside Interstate 5 north of Bakersfield reflect the tensions of the local populace. ?Water Equals Jobs,? some signs read. Others warn that reduced deliveries will mean higher food prices. A few posters even characterize the drought as an act of Congress. ?But politicians have not caused rain to stop falling. Rather, a massive ridge of high pressure the size of the Andes has taken shape off the West Coast several years in a row, deflecting away storm systems and leaving California gasping for a drink. 2013 was the driest year in the state?s recorded history. 2014 was not much better. While some of Northern California?s major reservoirs now contain more water than they did one year ago, the near absence of snowpack in much of the Cascades and Sierra Nevada could soon magnify the effects on fish, wildlife, cities and farms like never before.Water contracts between government suppliers and farmers, written and signed decades ago, call for cutting off deliveries during drought to farmers in more recently established agricultural zones ? like those in the western San Joaquin Valley. Jasper, for example, is contracted to receive as much as 6,000 acre feet from the Bureau of Reclamation, though he has rarely received a full delivery.?Their contracts clearly said they could be cut to zero in a dry year,? says Tom Stokely of the California Water Impact Network. Stokely feels the planting of vast orchards, which must be watered every year, in a region that usually receives just several inches of annual rainfall has been a monumental mistake. ?Why should we have to bail them out for making poor business decisions?? Stokely wants to see hundreds of thousands of acres of the San Joaquin Valley permanently retired from agricultural use.California?s almond industry has taken a beating by media in the past several years, mainly because it appears the crop is using an unfair share of California?s water supply. Some orchards have perished recently, but as a whole, the almond industry ? which uses 3 million acre feet or more of water each year, or about one third the state?s urban and industrial use ? is thriving. Bearing acreage increased from 840,000 acres in 2013 to 860,000 in 2014, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Yield and acreage forecasts for 2015 were not yet available at the time of press.Mike Wade, executive director of the California Farm Water Coalition, does not agree with allegations that farmers have overplanted in the San Joaquin Valley. Almonds, he points out, represent just ten percent of irrigated cropland. Wade believes struggling farmers in the San Joaquin Valley could be allocated more of the water that is currently reserved as a minimum environmental baseline to support fish populations. That water, he explains, doesn?t seem to help fish populations that have dwindled to the brink of extinction. Factors besides flow reductions are probably at play, Wade says.But in the fall of 2014, a lack of water in the middle reaches of the Sacramento River caused severe salmon mortality. Biologists believe 95 percent of the eggs laid and fertilized by endangered winter-run Chinook were killed when water outflow from Lake Shasta, which had been mostly drained, became too warm. The fall run, which forms the backbone of the fishing industry, is also believed to have taken a hard hit. To protect whatever fish may have survived, fishery managers may close or shorten the salmon fishing season in 2016, when fish born last year have become large enough to bite a hook.?Farmers are getting record crops, and we?re looking at getting shut down in 2016, and who knows when the season will be reopened?? says Hudson, the fisherman in Berkeley. But total almond yield will probably dip some this year, and farmers like Jasper, watching the earth crack and their trees die, have little sympathy for California?s native fish.?[Environmentalists] want to sacrifice agriculture to save the salmon fishery,? Jasper says. ?But you can farm salmon. It?s not like we?d have no salmon to eat if [the salmon fishing] industry dried up.? COMMENTS David Zetland (not verified)???7 hours ago - REPLY Surely, Mr Jasper sees the irony in his comment: We can get food from other farmers (in places with water) too... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Apr 20 14:22:25 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 21:22:25 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: NEPA for Long-Term Plan for Protecting Late Summer Adult Salmon in the Lower Klamath River In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1253160404.722595.1429564945214.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Friday, April 17, 2015 11:13 AM, "Murillo, David" wrote: ??To All, Reclamation will begin the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review process to evaluate the environmental effects of implementing a Long-Term Plan for Protecting Late Summer Adult Salmon in the Lower Klamath River (Plan). As part of this review, Reclamation is making the draft Plan available to the public on April 17, 2015.? The environmental review will include assessing impacts to water supply and power generation, fisheries, tribal trust resources, including tribal trust fisheries, and other resources. The draft Plan can be accessed here?:?http://www.usbr.gov/mp/kbao/lt-plan.html?.? An initial draft of this plan was distributed to stakeholders in late December and Reclamation received several comments.? These comments were considered in revisions to the current draft Plan. As Reclamation initiates the NEPA process, it is expected that a notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Plan will be filed with the Federal Register in the near future. Stakeholder coordination and public scoping sessions are anticipated later this summer. Scoping meetings and public review will provide continued opportunity for involvement by the stakeholders and public consistent with NEPA guidelines. It is anticipated at this point that a Record of Decision will be signed prior to any need for a flow augmentation action in 2016.? In recognition that the EIS will not be completed prior to any augmentation flows needed in 2015, Reclamation will also pursue a separate environmental review for the 2015 action. Central Valley Project water service contracts include a provision in Article 19 requiring that the contracting officer communicate, coordinate, and cooperate regarding actions ?which will or may materially affect the quantity or quality of Project Water Supply, and Project financial matters including, but not limited to, budget issues.? and other related requirements.? This communication, along with a link to the draft Plan, fulfills, in part, this requirement. Further communication will be forthcoming as the NEPA review commences. Since the significant die-off of adult salmon returning to the lower Klamath River in 2002, Reclamation has been consulting with tribes and other partners to implement protective actions to help prevent a recurrence. While other means have been researched and considered, the primary protective action thus far has been the release of additional water from Trinity Reservoir to augment flows in the lower Klamath River during the adult return period, generally extending from mid-August through late September. Thanks David G. Murillo Bureau Of Reclamation Mid Pacific Regional Director Office ?# 916-978-5000 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Mon Apr 20 09:01:42 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 09:01:42 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Commission approves fishing closure on Sacramento River section In-Reply-To: References: <49486-36de-5534fc10@list.credoaction.com> Message-ID: <91E0FE01-2F3E-489E-A435-F9072F4438DA@fishsniffer.com> http://www.fishsniffer.com/blogs/details/commission-approves-fishing-closure-on- http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/18/1378544/-Commission-approves-fishing-closure-on-Sacramento-River-section Winter Chinook photo courtesy of CDFW. Commission approves fishing closure on Sacramento River section by Dan Bacher The California Fish and Game Commission on April 17 unanimously approved a controversial emergency regulation by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) to close 5.5 miles of spawning habitat in the Sacramento River above the city of Redding to protect winter-run Chinook salmon from around April 27 to July 31. The Commission also approved "enhanced protective measures" included in the ocean sport and commercial fisheries regulations for the 2015 season that were adopted by the federal Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) last week. ?We are taking proactive measures on two fronts to protect these endangered fish both in the ocean and on their natal spawning habitat,? said CDFW Chief of Fisheries Stafford Lehr. ?The fishing communities have stepped forward to support these measures and work towards long-term sustainability of the resource. None of us wanted to be in this situation, but heading into a fourth year of extreme drought calls for extreme measures.? Lehr pointed out that 95 percent of winter run Chinook eggs and juvenile fish perished last year, due to high water temperatures on the Sacramento River. The Department estimates that 3,015 winter Chinook have returned to the Sacramento this year. To help keep the population of winter run Chinook surviving during the drought, Lehr said the Department and federal government are tripling the population of winter Chinook smolts that they will release into the river from the Livingston Stone conservation hatchery to 660,000 fish this season. "We're trying to develop an 'ark' for the salmon," by holding wild adults, spawning them and raising the young fish, he explained. The emergency regulation closes all fishing on the 5.5 mile stretch of the Sacramento River from the Highway 44 Bridge where it crosses the Sacramento River upstream to Keswick Dam, according to Harry Morse of the CDFW. The area is currently closed to salmon fishing but was open to catch and release trout fishing. DFW officials claimed the closure "will protect critical spawning habitat and eliminate any incidental stress or hooking mortality of winter-run salmon by anglers." Charles Bucaria of the Northern California Council of Fly Fishers said he supported the closure in light of the precarious situation the winter Chinook are in. "There are no alternatives - the closure needs to take place," he stated. Other anglers told the Commission that they opposed the closure because it unfairly targets anglers, even though they rarely hook winter Chinook when targeting trout while fly fishing on the river. Many anglers have pointed out that massive winter Chinook mortalitytook place in 2013 and 2014, due to the virtual emptying of Shasta and other northern California reservoirs to ship water to corporate agribusiness interests, Southern California water agencies and oil companies during a record drought. Mike Quinn of Angler West Radio told the Commissioners, "What you are proposing today will no effect on the salmon in the Sacramento River. It's a matter of not having enough salmon carcasses in the river to provide food for the winter Chinook fry." The Commission also adopted ocean sport fishing regulations that will mirror federal regulations approved earlier this week. CDFW, in consultation with representatives of California?s sport and commercial salmon fishing industries, recommended additional "strategic protective measures" for winter-run Chinook salmon to the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC). The PFMC recommended federal regulations that provide for sport and commercial seasons off California designed to target more abundant stocks, including Sacramento River fall-run Chinook salmon, while minimizing contact with winter-run Chinook. Recreational fisheries in California and southern Oregon are primarily focused on Chinook salmon and run from May 1 through September 7 in the Brookings/ Eureka/Crescent City area, according to the PFMC. Fisheries further south all opened on April 4 and will continue through November 8 in the Fort Bragg area, through October 31 in the San Francisco area, through September 7 from Pigeon Point to Point Sur, and through July 19 south of Point Sur. ?The CDFW proposal to reduce the allowable ocean harvest rate on winter-run salmon and change the timing and location of ocean fisheries south of San Francisco was accepted by the PFMC after in- depth analysis, review and discussion,? said Marci Yaremko, CDFW?s representative to the PFMC. ?The Commission concurred with these recommendations, realizing their conservation benefit to all winter- run.? Yaremko said it is "highly unusual" for a state to propose even stricter guidelines on a listed species than required by the federal Endangered Species Act. However, CDFW scientists believe the additional protection provided in the emergency river closure and additional ocean fishing restrictions will help a significant segment of the winter-run population to avoid losses. ?Given the gravity of the current situation, the Commission recognizes the need for highly protective measures,? said Commission President Jack Baylis. ?It is imperative that our fisheries are given the best protections.? Recreational anglers "went the extra mile" to ensure that more adult fish are returned to the river this year, and put forth restrictions beyond what even the CDFW expected, according to the Coastside Fishing Club. "Throughout this process we have been concerned about the impacts of the drought, and in particular the effects the drought is having on our salmon stocks," said Dan Wolford, President of the Coastside Fishing Club. "With the loss of the 2014 winter-run brood year it was apparent that we had to take extraordinary measures to help recover these fish.? "But curtailing fishing opportunities this year to provide for the return of more adult spawners, will be a meaningless gesture unless the federal and state water managers take immediate and dramatic action to provide suitable spawning habitat when they return, and to enable the resulting brood year to successfully out-migrate to the ocean. We want our actions to be noted and acted on," Wolford emphasized. Fishermen, Tribal leaders and environmentalists note that the drought itself is not the reason for the collapse of winter Chinook salmon, the near extinction of Delta smelt and the collapse of American River steelhead, as agency officials often claim. They point to poor management of our reservoirs and rivers by the Bureau of Reclamation and the California Department of Water Resources during a record drought as the culprit behind record low populations of fish species that once numbered in the millions. The Delta smelt, an indicator species that demonstrates the health of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, reached a new record low population level in 2014, according to the CDFW's fall midwater trawl survey released in January. Department staff found a total of only eight smelt at a total of 100 sites sampled each month from September through December. (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/01/09/18766643.php ) The surveys were initiated in 1967, the same year the State Water Project began exporting water from the Delta. The surveys show that population indices of Delta smelt, striped bass, longfin smelt, threadfin shad, American shad and Sacramento splittail have declined 97.80%, 99.70%, 99.98%, 97.80%, 91.90%, and 98.50%, respectively, between 1967 and 2014, according to Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Allliance. The Delta smelt surveys continue to yield dismal results in 2015. The CDFW has found only 21 fish in January, 72 in February, 6 in March and only one - yes, one - lonely Delta smelt in April. Anglers point out that imposing more restrictions on angling and conducting captive breeding programs of winter run Chinook salmon and Delta smelt don't address the real reasons for the declines of endangered fish species - massive water exports out of the Delta, poor management of upstream reservoirs and increases in pollutants in Central Valley rivers over the past two decades. Meanwhile, Governor Jerry Brown continues to fast track his plan to build the twin tunnels under the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. On April 13, the Center for Biological Diversity and Restore the Delta (RTD) responded to the governor?s abandonment of the pretense of ?conservation? and ?restoration? and move to permit a ?tunnels only? Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP). (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/04/15/18771135.php ) The construction of the tunnels would hasten the extinction of winter Chinook, Central Valley steelhead, Delta and longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other species, as well as imperil the salmon and steelhead populations on the Trinity and Klamath rivers. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Winter Chinook.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 43373 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Apr 21 13:05:47 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 20:05:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Chronicle: Activists decry plan to cut habitat aid from delta tunnel project Message-ID: <1063219559.1506013.1429646747829.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> ?http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Activists-decry-plan-to-cut-habitat-aid-from-6212404.php ? Activists decry plan to cut habitat aid from delta tunnel project By?Peter Fimrite? Updated 7:09?pm, Monday, April 20, 2015 - ? - 5 - ? - ? - ? - ? - ? - Environmental groups Monday blasted a proposal by the state to jettison the habitat restoration portion of the massive delta water tunnel project as an ill-conceived ?bait and switch? that will only make California?s water woes worse.?The $25 billion twin-tunnel project was supposed to include $7.8 billion to restore 100,000 acres of habitat for fish, birds and other species in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. The environmental portion of the plan was designed to minimize the impact of siphoning out water and moving it south, but long-term water guarantees could not be justified, forcing state officials to consider alternatives.The new plan, according to water resources officials, is to use $17 billion from state water contractors just to build and operate the tunnels. That would allow habitat restoration work on the delta and surrounding waterways to begin immediately regardless of what happens with the tunnel project, said?Richard Stapler, the spokesman for the?Bay Delta Conservation Plan, which has been championed by Gov.?Jerry Brown.??The status quo in the delta is unsustainable,? Stapler said. ?By decoupling habitat from the tunnel portion, we can get started immediately with the habitat restoration.??Stapler said contractors would no longer be liable for the vast majority of the environmental work. Details about who ? and how ? that work would be funded will be released within the next two weeks, he said.Longtime opponents of the tunnel plan were skeptical.??They are saying that they will, on a parallel track, pursue restoration,? but ?no details have been provided,? said?Jonas Minton, a water policy adviser for the?Planning and Conservation League. ?Where (the governor) thinks those dollars will come from is a mystery. So this is bait and switch, without the bait.?Conservationists are battling the giant water project, which is designed to bypass the delta pumps used by both the state and federal water projects. They have come up with a laundry list of possible alternatives, including water recycling, groundwater storage and even cloud seeding.Rates likely to go upCentral Valley farming contractors, Southern California water agencies and some Bay Area water suppliers, meanwhile, complain that federal protections for fish have forced reductions in the amount of water they get from the delta.The tunnels would be paid for with bonds sold by water districts, which would likely increase water rates to pay off the debt.The idea of separating habitat restoration and tunnel construction came about because one of the primary tenets of the plan over the past eight years ? 50-year water guarantees to the contractors paying for the project ? appears to be falling apart.?We cannot from a scientific standpoint accurately predict what the conditions will be like in the delta 50 years from now,? Stapler said, blaming climate change and the unpredictability of drought.?The new environmental plan will include shorter 10-year permits that would still require contractors to pay for 9,000 acres of habitat restoration, Stapler said.?He acknowledged that the money could conceivably come from Proposition 1, the $7.5 billion water bond that California passed last year.Not enough moneyProp. 1 promised new storage facilities, conservation, recycled water, desalination and general drought preparedness, but prohibited spending any funds on ?delta conveyance facilities.??Separating the two projects might allow that money to be used on the delta, but Minton said there is not enough money in that pot to complete the job.Meanwhile, large water contractors footing the bill have said they aren?t willing to pay for the plan if they don?t have long-term water guarantees.?Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, the executive director of Restore the Delta, said the twin-tunnels plan is palatable to some environmentalists because it includes habitat restoration and to farming contractors because the long-term contracts would protect supplies against endangered species lawsuits.Besides, she said, the new plan bolsters the perception that this is all a water grab by Southern California.?We oppose the delta tunnels because it makes it easier to deliver water to water wasters,? she said, calling it ?a naked tunnels-only water grab for the unsustainable mega-farms.?Peter Fimrite is a?San Francisco Chronicle?staff writer. E-mail:?pfimrite at sfchronicle.com. Twitter: @pfimrite -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Apr 22 08:10:16 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 15:10:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Chronicle Editorial: The end of the delta tunnels plan? We should hope so Message-ID: <959572189.2072746.1429715416680.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/The-end-of-the-delta-tunnels-plan-We-should-hope-6214990.php ? The end of the delta tunnels plan? We should hope so San Francisco ChronicleApril 21, 2015?Updated: April 21, 2015 10:02pmA grand bargain to guarantee delta water deliveries to urban and agricultural users for 50 years ? as long as they cover the cost of both environmental restoration and the mammoth twin-tunnels water project ? appears to have fallen apart.?Gov. Jerry Brown?s administration has simply concluded it cannot assure the water would be available. This development could affect both the scale of restoration work in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta ? and the governor?s plan for the twin tunnels.So far, the State Water Contractors Association says it is waiting for more details from the governor. Those are expected next week. What we want to hear is how the state is prioritizing water for the environment and the San Francisco Bay-Delta estuary, not building tunnels to divert more of it to the south.The governor?s decision to decouple the habitat restoration work from the tunnels construction should guarantee that some work gets done in the delta and Sierra watersheds during the remainder of the governor?s term, according to?Chuck Bonham, who heads the state Department of Fish and Wildlife. The administration has the wetlands projects outlined in the?California Water Action Plan?and funds budgeted to accomplish them.?The governor originally sold the idea of the $25 billion tunnels project, known as the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, as a way to increase the water supply for some 23 million Californians and 3 million acres of Central Valley farmlands and restore 100,000 acres of badly degraded delta habitat. The tunnels would take good-quality water from the north delta, move it along the eastern edge of the delta thus avoiding introducing salty water, and then dump it into the state aqueduct in the south. This plan, it was hoped, would allow the state to meet the legally required coequal goals of providing ?a more reliable water supply and protecting, restoring and enhancing the delta ecosystem.??The tunnels plan rested on the premise that restored wetlands would help rebuild declining salmon populations by providing better habitat for baby fish to fatten before their long swim to the sea. Linking the construction project with the environmental work provided an incentive for the state water contractors to pay the full cost of the tunnels and about half of the $8 billion in environmental restoration costs, because it offered some protection from lawsuits over endangered species laws and from federal rules that require reduced pumping to protect the fish. Environmental advocates were split: some praised the wetlands restoration but others worried the tunnel diversions would draw more saltwater into the delta, despoiling farmlands. Delta farmers also worried restoration efforts would take farmlands out of production and, eventually, them out of business.The tunnels plan hit a dead end however when fish scientists could show correlation, but not causation, between wetlands restoration and improved fish health. Climate change also has cast doubt on water planning scenarios considered reliable only a few years ago. Federal fish agencies now see a 50-year permit as impossibly long. The state contractors are still in the game, but without a 50-year guarantee of water deliveries, they are weighing whether the plan still pencils out for them, said Jim Beck, general manager of the Kern County Water Agency.?California can no longer afford to dodge the expensive and politically difficult choices about how we use water. We can?t look to magic bullets like tunnels to solve problems. Cities will have to commit to reducing water use, as Mayor Eric Garcetti did earlier this month when he released his plan to reduce Los Angeles? reliance on imported water by half over the next 20 years. The landscape will change as fields are fallowed.The governor has it half-right with his decision to invest in environmental restoration. Now he just needs to deep-six those tunnels. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ebpeterson at usbr.gov Tue Apr 21 17:31:00 2015 From: ebpeterson at usbr.gov (Peterson, Eric) Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 17:31:00 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: New News Release:Reclamation Announces Final Schedule for Release into Trinity River as Part of Restoration Program In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Hello, The attached and embedded news release is being distributed today, Tuesday, April 21, 2015 *Mid-Pacific Region* *Sacramento**, Calif.* MP-15-054 Media Contact: Erin Curtis, 916-978-5100, eccurtis at usbr.gov For Release On: April 21, 2015 Reclamation Announces Final Schedule for Release into Trinity River as Part of Restoration Program *REDDING, Calif.* ? The Bureau of Reclamation announced today that releases from Lewiston Dam into the Trinity River for the ?dry? water year with a total volume of 453,000 acre-feet will reach a peak flow of 8,500 cubic feet per second over the two-day period of May 5 and 6, 2015 for coarse sediment management purposes as part of the Trinity River Restoration Program. Releases will begin increasing gradually on April 22, with more rapid increases from April 30-May 4, and remain at the peak of 8,500 cfs for a period of 2 days. Release rates will then be reduced to 2,000 cfs over a period of 11 days. As the flows recede, several days of flows at 2,000, 1,200, and 700 cfs follow for monitoring purposes. The summer base-flow rate of 450 cfs will begin on June 30. The public should take appropriate safety precautions whenever near or on the river. Landowners are advised to clear personal items and debris from the floodplain prior to the releases. The December 2000, Trinity River Mainstem Fishery Restoration Record of Decision created a plan for the restoration of the Trinity River and its fish and wildlife populations. The Program?s restoration strategy includes four different restoration elements, two of which include increased releases to the river and sediment management. Flow regimes link two essential purposes deemed necessary to restore and maintain the Trinity River?s fishery resources: 1) flows to provide physical fish habitat (i.e., appropriate depths and velocities, and suitable temperature regimes for anadromous salmonids), and 2) flows to restore the riverine processes that create and maintain the structural integrity and spatial complexity of the fish habitats. More information on the Trinity River ROD can be found at *www.trrp.net/background/rod/ *. A daily schedule of flow releases is available at *www.trrp.net/restore/flows/current/ *, and the public may subscribe to automated notifications (via phone or email) of Trinity River release changes. The flow release schedule is posted at the Trinity River Restoration Program office, located at 1313 South Main Street, Weaverville, CA. For additional information, please call 530-623-1800 or email *info at trrp.net *. # # # 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 and follow us on Twitter at Reclamation at USBR. Thank you, Wilbert Louis Moore Deputy Public Affairs Officer Bureau of Reclamation 2800 Cottage Way Sacramento, CA 95825 Desk - 916-978-5102 Cell - 916-335-9755 Fax - 916-978-5114 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: MP-15-054 Reclamation Announces Final Schedule for Release into Trinity River as Part of Restoration Program.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 35024 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Apr 22 08:46:33 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 15:46:33 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Trinity_Journal=3A_Worries_over_water_sto?= =?utf-8?b?cmFnZSBpbiDigJhkcnnigJkgeWVhcg==?= Message-ID: <1187152241.2089108.1429717593129.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_667b4c70-e88d-11e4-a351-e36bd8b1c56c.html Worries over water storage in ?dry? year By AMY GITTELSOHN The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 6:15 am River flow chart Trinity River Restoration Program staff shared their recommendations for river flows in the 2015 water year to a skeptical group who argued those plans don?t reserve enough water to contend with the drought.The state Department of Water Resources is forecasting that 934,000 acre-feet of water will enter Trinity Lake for the 2015 water year running from Oct. 1, 2014, through Sept. 30, 2015. Although that amount is still on the low side bringing a ?dry year? forecast for the basin, it?s far more water than last year.?We are all hopeful of a normal year,? said Robin Schrock, executive director for the restoration program, at the presentation held Thursday at the Trinity Public Utilities District office.While this seems at odds with reports on the meager snowpack, overall precipitation in the Trinity River Basin is not as grim.From the restoration program, hydraulic engineer Robert Stewart noted that about 800,000 acre-foot of water had flowed into the lake from Oct. 1 to April 1, a higher than average amount for the time period.?It?s all coming in the form of rain instead of snow,? he said, adding that most of the projected inflow is already in the reservoir.Although the reservoir is ahead in terms of the 2015 water year, because of low carryover storage it is only at 61 percent of average for this time of year, holding 1.2 million acre-feet.In addition to the amount that has already flowed into the lake, the DWR forecast includes some projected inflow from the small amount of snow in the mountains and anticipated rainfall for the remainder of the water year.Under the Trinity River Record of Decision that includes five water-year types ranging from extremely wet to wet, normal, dry and critically dry, the forecast of 934,000 acre-feet pegs this as a dry year with 453,000 acre-feet to be released to the Trinity River.Unlike the river release, there is no set amount of water from the reservoir diverted through tunnels for Central Valley Project purposes.Stewart noted that in the past the drier the water year the higher proportion of the inflow the CVP typically diverts. For example, in the critically dry year of 2014, 396,000 acre-feet of water flowed into the Trinity reservoir. The lake was drawn down as 435,300 acre-feet was released to the river and 618,000 acre-feet was diverted through the Carr tunnels for the CVP.?It?s not just water going down the river that causes the reservoir to go dry,? Stewart noted.At the recommendation of river restoration program staff, the Trinity Management Council recommended a flow schedule that was approved by Interior Department officials on Tuesday. The release to the river was to begin ramping up for a high spring flow today, April 22, and reach a high of 8,500 cubic feet per second released from Lewiston Dam on May 5 and 6. The spring spike meant to meet habitat and temperature objectives for fish is higher than that called for in the Record of Decision, which states that based on monitoring and studies the schedule for daily releases may be adjusted but the annual flow volumes could not be. The recommended spring peak takes water from the other parts of the schedule to use the same total volume of water.Several fishing guides and residents who live along the Trinity River were in attendance to voice concerns about the amount of water soon to be released.Jim Smith asked if it would be possible to take into account the effect of back-to-back dry years rather than basing releases on only the projection for the current year.He also noted that not sending water ?over the hill? costs Trinity County in terms of lost power generation.?People aren?t considered at all in this equation,? Smith said.?We have no ability to make changes to that framework we got from the Record of Decision. None of the people here do,? said Ernie Clarke, science program coordinator for the restoration program.He noted that people and economics were considered in the National Environmental Policy Act document prepared in advance of the Record of Decision.Allen Houston of Weaverville asked how the program can justify sending more water down the river than is currently coming into the lake, adding he believes it?s for political reasons. Current inflow to the lake is approximately 1,000 cubic feet per second.It was noted that other alternatives were examined prior to the Record of Decision, including a release based on percent of inflow, but that led to temperature problems for fish.Program staff also noted that prior to the dam being put in the fish could go farther upstream in search of cool water.Stewart pointed out that the DWR?s projection of inflow is at the high end for a dry year ? closer to reaching a normal year than dropping into a critically dry year.Fishing guide Travis Michel asked what the situation will be given the flows recommended by program staff if Reclamation again decides to do another high release in the fall and this year is followed by another drought.?That will depend on how they operate the dams,? Stewart said, and Michel added, ?We don?t know what the Central Valley is going to want on top of that.?There was also a discussion of the program?s plans to add 1,700 yards of gravel to the upper river during the high spring release. The gravel is added to compensate for gravel that would otherwise come from above the dams, however, fishing guides have argued that it has filled pools in the river ? deep spots used by fish to keep cool.While acknowledging that this has inadvertently occurred in the past, David Gaeuman, a physical scientist with the program, said changes have been made to ?not repeat those errors? and ?we?re going to keep looking at this stuff. It?s ongoing.?However, he also shared results of sonar studies indicating that almost all of the pools studied are deeper or have stayed the same.Smith responded that the data may show one thing, but ?we?ll all line up and say you?re absolutely wrong.?Schrock said changes have been made due to Gaeuman?s research.Regarding the volume of the release to the Trinity River called for in the Record of Decision, she said Congress would have to take action to change that and ?these three dry years may be the impetus for others who do have power to make changes.?Regarding the gravel recommendation, which is dependent on the spring high flow, she said ?This is the best available science and in our jobs we?re obligated to use it.?Schrock added that as a fisheries biologist, she hoped the recommended high flow would be approved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From twashburn at usbr.gov Wed Apr 22 10:09:37 2015 From: twashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy) Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 10:09:37 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Trinity River Message-ID: Please make the following release change to the Trinity River. * Date* *Time* *From (cfs)* *To (cfs)* 4/22/2015 1200 300 400 4/22/2015 1200 400 500 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Trinity Pulse Flow -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From twashburn at usbr.gov Wed Apr 22 10:14:17 2015 From: twashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy) Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 10:14:17 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Trinity River - Revise in RED Message-ID: Please make the following release change to the Trinity River. * Date* *Time* *From (cfs)* *To (cfs)* 4/22/2015 1200 300 400 4/22/2015 1300 400 500 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Trinity Pulse Flow -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Wed Apr 22 22:59:24 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 22:59:24 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Is Jerry Brown Breaking His Prop. 1 Campaign Promise? (Revised) In-Reply-To: <42D596F2-6288-489A-9955-59ECB4AD4923@fishsniffer.com> References: <60519974-0D58-4359-8C6E-C50785ECEF56@fishsniffer.com> <42D596F2-6288-489A-9955-59ECB4AD4923@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <9A8ABDBE-30F0-4689-850E-AC19E972E1CB@fishsniffer.com> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/22/1379382/-Is-Jerry-Brown-Breaking-His-Prop-1-Promise Is Jerry Brown Breaking His Prop. 1 Campaign Promise? by Dan Bacher During the fall election, Governor Jerry Brown and advocates of Proposition 1, the state water bond, constantly claimed that the measure was "tunnels neutral." In photo opportunity after photo opportunity, Brown and Prop. 1 backers, including corporate environmental" NGOs, promised the people of California that water bond funds would not be used for the BDCP, but for dealing with the drought. Now, Restore the Delta (RTD) is charging that Brown is breaking his promise after Richard Stapler, the spokesman for the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, admitted to Peter Fimrite of the San Francisco Chronicle that they could use money from Proposition 1 to pay for "habitat mitigation" for construction and operation of the tunnels. RTD Executive Director Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla said, "It is outrageous that the governor would break the promise he made to the people of California that their taxes would not be used to mitigate damage from the tunnels. Now he is signaling that bond monies will support mega-growers like Stewart Resnick, who plans to expand almond production by 50% over the next five years." ?It's time for Governor Brown to drop the 19th century tunnels plan, and embrace water technologies that will serve the world we live in now, and our children will live in in the future," she said. According to the Chronicle, Stapler "acknowledged that the money could conceivably come from Proposition 1, the $7.5 billion water bond that California passed last year.? Here is a link to the San Francisco Chronicle story including this startling admission: http://bit.ly/1QgcJc3 ?The science has demonstrated that habitat without water for fisheries fails in the Delta. The tunnels project cannot restore the Delta because it takes the necessary water out of the Delta,? said Barrigan- Parrilla. ?California experiences dry or drought conditions 40% of the time historically, even before climate change. That means that in at least four out of ten years exporters will have astronomical fixed costs to pay for no water," Barrigan-Parrilla concluded. On Monday, a coalition of environmentalists blasted Beverly Hills billionaire Stewart Resnick and other corporate agribusiness interests for continuing to plant thousands of acres of new almond trees during the drought while Governor Jerry Brown is mandating that urban families slash water usage by 25 percent. Barrigan-Parrilla said Stewart Resnick, the owner of Paramount Farms in Kern County, uses as much water for his almonds as the amount of water 38 million Californians are now required to conserve. ?While farmers make their own decisions on what to plant, the public is paying the price for poor decisions made by greedy mega-growers, who plant permanent crops where there is no water,? Barrigan-Parrilla told reporters in a news conference about the ?tunnels only? version of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) that Governor Jerry Brown is now pushing. ?That is not sustainable and the tunnels would subsidize unsustainable agriculture.? For the complete details on the news conference, go to: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/21/1379102/-Resnick-increases-almond-acreage-as-city-dwellers-forced-to-slash-water-use Proposition 1, California Governor Jerry Brown?s $7.5 billion water bond, sailed to easy victory on November 4, 2014. The election results show how the power of millions of dollars of corporate money in the corrupt oligarchy of California were able to defeat a a grassroots movement of fishermen, environmentalists, Indian Tribes and family farmers opposed to Prop. 1. The Hoopa Valley, Yurok, Winnemem Wintu and Concow Maidu Tribes, the defenders of California?s rivers and oceans for thousands of years, strongly opposed Prop. 1. because of the threat the bond poses to water, salmon and their culture. Caleen Sisk, chief and spiritual leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, said the water bond, peripheral tunnels, Shasta Dam raise and other water projects now being planned by the state and federal governments are in reality ?one Big Project? that will destroy salmon, rivers and groundwater supplies. ?It does not make sense that people are separating the water puzzle into individual pieces, such as: the raising of Shasta Dam, Proposition 1, the Delta tunnels, BDCP, Sites Reservoir, Temperance Flat, CALFED, Delta Vision, BDCP, OCAP, the Bay Delta, Trinity/Klamath Rivers, the Sacramento River, the San Joaquin River, and water rights,? said Chief Sisk. ?It is all one BIG Project.? She emphasized, ?You have to look at the whole picture and everything in between from Shasta Dam to the Delta estuary. We need to ask what is affected by our actions and who is benefitting from them? These are not separate projects; they are all the same thing that the State is asking us to fund ? California water being manipulated for the enrichment of some and the devastation of cultures, environments, and species all in the name of higher profits.? Prop. 1 proponents, including a rogue?s gallery of oil companies, corporate agribusiness tycoons, Big Tobacco, health insurance companies and billionaires, dumped over $16.4 million into the campaign, while Prop. 1 opponents raised around $100,000 for the effort. Resnick, the Beverly Hills billionaire ?farmer? who has made millions off of reselling environmental water to the public, donated $150,000 to the Yes on Prop 1 campaign. (http://nativenewsonline.net/currents/californias-prop-1-passes-power-big-money-overcomes-power-people/ ) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Apr 23 07:59:46 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 14:59:46 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard: County, tribe seek promised dam water for Trinity Message-ID: <1875345990.2916634.1429801186956.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.times-standard.com/general-news/20150422/county-tribe-seek-promised-dam-water-for-trinity ? County, tribe seek promised dam water for Trinity By?Will Houston, Eureka Times-StandardPOSTED:?04/22/15, 10:55 PM PDT?|0 COMMENTSWhile the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation began releasing Lewiston Dam water into the Trinity River on Wednesday as part of an ongoing restoration project, Humboldt County and the Hoopa Valley Tribe are seeking for the agency to make another release later this year to prevent fish-kill conditions.The option for the county to have the federal agency release the dam water was a contested issue for several years even though a 1955 Congressional act and subsequent contract between the county and the agency in 1959 promised the county 50,000 acre-feet of water annually in addition to fish protecting flows. After the U.S. Interior Department issued an opinion in December formally recognizing this right, 3rd District Humboldt County Supervisor Mark Lovelace said that the county has been working on how to make such a request and ensure that the promised water will actually be available in these times of drought.?We want to begin a dialogue on establishing a clear protocol for how the call for water would be made in the future,? he said. ?Possibly also talk about having the bureau save multiple years? worth of water for the ongoing drought situation. Maybe to have three years? worth of the county?s water so that if you have a low rainfall year, they can?t say there is no water available.?The county and tribe don?t expect the fighting to be over as Central Valley Project water suppliers have consistently raised legal objections to the releases and the 1955 law?s applicability.While the Hoopa Valley Tribe has requested in the past for the bureau to make preventative dam releases from Lewiston Dam to prevent fish kills caused by low flows and warm waters, the requests often involved lengthy legal battles. Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries Department Director Mike Orcutt met with Lovelace and 5th District Supervisor Ryan Sundberg last week on how to avoid legal entanglements as the flows were often delayed, thus increasing the chances of a fish kill.??We need to start talking about that stuff sooner rather than later,? Orcutt said.In anticipation of the legal battle to come, both Lovelace and Sundberg are currently drafting a letter to the Bureau of Reclamation calling for the water release even though the release may not occur until August.??We don?t want to be in a position in that we need the water and then get caught up in six weeks of legal delays,? Lovelace said. ?That could be devastating to the fish.?Last summer, the Hoopa Valley Tribe and several other tribal and local entities were able to convince the Bureau of Reclamation to release preventive flows to protect against a fish kill like that of 2002 in which an estimated 34,000 fish ???Other people are concerned this year that we have a fairly abundant Chinook population estimated to return and there is some uncertainty with the hydrology,? Orcutt said. ?We might be need to release some flows. We should get ready for planning early. Last year, the Interior ran it right into August.? Unlike last year, the Bureau of Reclamation does not consider any fish protecting water releases into the Trinity River ? the first provision of the 1955 Congressional act ? to count toward the promised annual 50,000 acre-feet ? the second provision of the act.Will Houston can be reached at 707-441-0504. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From twashburn at usbr.gov Thu Apr 23 08:24:13 2015 From: twashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy) Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 08:24:13 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Trinity River Message-ID: Please make the following release change to the Trinity River. *Date* *Time* *From (cfs)* *To (cfs)* *4/28/15* *0600* *500* *600* *4/29/15* *0600* *600* *650* 4/29/15 1000 650 700 4/29/15 1400 700 750 4/29/15 1800 750 800 4/29/15 2200 800 850 *4/30/15* *0200* *850* *900* 4/30/15 0600 900 1,000 4/30/15 1000 1,000 1,100 4/30/15 1400 1,100 1,200 4/30/15 1800 1,200 1,300 4/30/15 2200 1,300 1,400 *5/1/15* *0200* *1,400* *1,500* 5/1/15 0600 1,500 1,600 5/1/15 1000 1,600 1,800 5/1/15 1400 1,800 2,000 5/1/15 1800 2,000 2,200 5/1/15 2200 2,200 2,400 *5/2/15* *0200* *2,400* *2,500* 5/2/15 0600 2,500 2,600 5/2/15 1000 2,600 2,800 5/2/15 1400 2,800 3,000 5/2/15 1800 3,000 3,200 5/2/15 2200 3,200 3,400 *5/3/15* *0200* *3,400* *3,500* 5/3/15 0600 3,500 3,600 5/3/15 1000 3,600 3,900 5/3/15 1400 3,900 4,000 5/3/15 1800 4,000 4,100 5/3/15 2200 4,100 4,400 *5/4/15* *0200* *4,400* *4,500* 5/4/15 0600 4,500 5,000 5/4/15 1000 5,000 6,000 5/4/15 1400 6,000 7,500 5/4/15 1800 7,500 7,500 5/4/15 2200 7,500 8,500 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Trinity Pulse Flow -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Apr 26 08:39:04 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2015 15:39:04 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] UT San Diego: CA still tied to Gold Rush-era water rights system Message-ID: <1728113136.4595140.1430062744448.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2015/apr/25/sacramento-drought-california-water-right-system/ ??CA still tied to Gold Rush-era water rights system Critics say it sets arbitrary winners, has little accountability By?Chris Nichols5 p.m.April 25, 2015In this photo taken Friday March 27, 2015, farmer Rudy Mussi poses at one of his pumps that draws water from a slough to irrigate his farm land in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta near Stockton, Calif. As California enters the fourth year of drought, huge amounts of water are mysteriously vanishing from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, and farmers whose families for generations have tilled fertile soil there are the prime suspects. Delta farmers deny they are stealing water, still, they have been asked to report how much water they?re pumping and to prove their legal right. Mussi says he has senior water rights in a system more than a century old that puts him in line ahead of those with lower ranking, or junior, water rights.(AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli)?The Associated PressSACRAMENTO?? Ravaged by California?s four-year drought, an increasing number of farms and towns are struggling to find reliable water supplies.That?s not the case for the state?s so-called senior water rights holders who, due to what critics call an antiquated and byzantine water rights system, enjoy few limits on their water and nearly zero cost or accountability for its use, even during severe droughts.California?s water rights structure dates to the Gold Rush era, when miners and later farmers made claims by posting notices to trees along waterways. Additional rights have been established by cities and irrigation districts in modern times, though rights created before 1914 are off-limits to many state regulations.Many of these original claims remain active today, giving their holders, some who started as pioneering farm families but have morphed into large corporations, top priority when water gets scarce. It can essentially guarantee water for these senior rights holders, particularly those with land along a river, while others with lesser rights are forced to find or pay higher prices for alternate supplies.Critics say this system has created an arbitrary set of winners and losers among farms, cities and the environment, compromising the state?s ability to deliver water in a fair and effective manner during painful dry spells.Farm and water industry leaders defend the priority rights system, saying it justly rewards those who took the initial risk and made early investments in the state?s water network. They add that the structure necessarily scales back water rights and usage during dry years, preventing supplies from being wiped out.Gov. Jerry Brown told reporters earlier this month that changes to the water rights system could be coming, though he cautioned they won?t be drastic.That hasn?t stopped critics who say it needs a flood of reforms.?In an era of relatively few people and limited statewide water demand, California?s water rights system worked reasonably well. Now, 100 years later, with the same legal rules intact, California?s population growing steadily, and state water supplies shrinking due to the effects of climate change, that system has become antiquated, dysfunctional and unresponsive to 21st century conditions,? Richard Frank, director of the California Environmental Law & Policy Center at the UC Davis School of Law, wrote in a recent?newspaper opinion piece.Frank added in a telephone interview: ?If this drought persists, I think we?re going to be forced into the fundamental re-examination of this system. We?ve got a 19th century system and we?re confronted with a 21st century, unprecedented drought.?Protected right to waterThe?key water rights?in California are senior and junior entitlements. Senior rights are?held by a mix of entities?from private utilities like Pacific Gas & Electric Company, municipalities such as the cities of Los Angeles and San Francisco and the private media company Hearst Corporation, started by newspaper magnate William Randolph Hearst. Senior rights holders include some current celebrities, too, including Star Trek icon William Shatner, who owns rights along the south fork the Kaweah River for a ranch he owns in eastern Tulare County, according to a?Sacramento Bee report?on Friday.Senior rights were generally established before 1914 and allow owners to divert surface water for what state law describes as ?a reasonable and beneficial use.? They are the last rights cut off during a drought, while junior rights holders ? those who obtained water entitlements after 1914 and face greater state regulation ? are among the first to have their rights, and the water that goes with it, scaled back.The state lists the acceptable beneficial uses by senior rights holders as: municipal and industrial uses, irrigation, hydroelectric generation and livestock watering. More recently, the concept has been broadened to include recreational use and fish and wildlife protection.The state relies on senior rights holders to self-report their water use and maintains a?patchwork of documentation?of the rights. Many of those documents originated as ?a piece of paper folded in a farmer?s back pocket? generations ago, said Chris Scheuring, an attorney with the California Farm Bureau.Defending the systemCriticism of the state water rights system was spurred last year with the release of a?UC Davis study?that found the state?s water rights collectively amount to five times as much water as runs off the state in an average year, leading many to conclude the state has overpromised the increasingly limited resource.Scheuring, whose family farms walnut and almond trees west of Sacramento but does not have senior water rights, said the criticism comes from a lack of understanding of the system and its benefits.?The perception that we?ve overpromised water rights (and) that our water rights system is crazy? rests upon a fundamental misunderstanding, I think, of the priority system and how it?s flexible. It?s an accordion, basically. It matches up the appropriate number of rights in any given year with the available water. It?s a flexible system.?Expanded cutbacks ahead?Senior water rights have not been cut back since the drought of the late 1970s. That could change this year, however, as the State Water Resource Control Board?warned rights holders?this month that all junior rights and many senior rights will be curtailed if dry conditions continue. The notion that the state has the authority to curtail senior rights is ?a bone of contention? among senior rights holders, with many asserting that only state courts have that power, not state regulators, Scheuring added.Frank, the UC Davis law professor, said the freedoms enjoyed by senior rights holders create a mess for state water managers who seek to spread scarce supplies fairly among users. It also ?discourages free water markets and common sense transfers from lower to higher priority water uses; and water rights for environmental purposes aren?t directly obtainable or recognized by the system,? he said.One type of senior water right, known as appropriative rights, can be sold or mortgaged like other property. The water attached to the rights can also be temporarily transferred to a willing buyer, a practice that?s become more common during the drought and allows farmers to make sizable profits on their excess supply. These senior, appropriative rights must be used, otherwise they can be lost.Riparian water rights are a type of senior water entitlement. They give property owners along a river or stream a share of the water that flows down that waterway. The right stays with the property when it?s sold and can?t be used on property outside the watershed where it originated. The use of riparian water rights do not require government approval.Local perspectiveMany of the state?s senior water rights are concentrated along the water-rich Sacramento River Valley, and in Imperial Valley, which has claims to the Colorado River.There are few, if any, senior water rights held in San Diego County, though the region, perhaps ironically, depends on the generations-old rights system because of its landmark water deal with farmers in Imperial Valley. A decade ago, the San Diego County Water Authority agreed to purchase huge amounts of water for 45 years from the Imperial Irrigation District, which owns some of the largest and most senior water rights in California to Colorado River water. It was considered the largest agricultural-to-urban water transfer in U.S. history, and a key piece of San Diego?s push to diversify its water supply.Dennis Cushman, assistant general manager for the San Diego authority, said it has no complaints about what others have called a broken water rights system.That system, in fact, ?is foundational? to San Diego?s water supply, he said.chris.nichols at utsandiego.com | (916) 445-2934 | Twitter at ChrisTheJourno? Copyright 2015 The San Diego Union-Tribune, LLC. An MLIM LLC Company. All rights reserved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Apr 26 14:00:37 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2015 21:00:37 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Beard talk at UCB April 29: "Busting Deadbeat Dams and Other Solutions to the Megadrought" Message-ID: <301796553.4721367.1430082037836.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Please share the following talk announcement: UC Berkeley campus, Wurster Hall, Room 315-A Wednesday 29 April, 1-2pm Speaker:?Dan BeardTitle:? "Busting Deadbeat Dams and Other Solutions to the Megadrought""Deadbeat Dams" is an insider?s story of western water. America is facing a water crisis, and nowhere is this more evident than in the West where significant problems abound. How are we responding to this rapidly growing crisis? We?re not. "Deadbeat Dams" reveals the need to change western water policies and exposes the public to the lack of common sense, corruption, and utter waste of taxpayers? money that the author witnessed over a long government career spanning three decades. The faults of the present system of federally assisted water management efforts are amply detailed, and an agenda for reform is provided that can be used as ammunition by a new generation of water reformersBio: Dan Beard has been an advocate for water policy reform for nearly four decades, and is former Commissioner of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. Thanks, Zan Rubin zanrubin at berkeley.edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Mon Apr 27 11:28:02 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:28:02 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] FW: WATER RIGHT CURTAILMENTS - San Joaquin River and Scott River watersheds Message-ID: <00bb01d08117$e5fc1c00$b1f45400$@sisqtel.net> State Water Resources Control Board This is a message from the State Water Resources Control Board. NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY OF WATER AND NEED FOR IMMEDIATE CURTAILMENT FOR THOSE DIVERTING WATER UNDER A POST-1914 WATER RIGHT IN THE SAN JOAQUIN RIVER WATERSHED AND THOSE WITH A JUNIOR PRIORITY CLASS RIGHT IN THE SCOTT RIVER WATERSHED SUBJECT TO DECREE NO. 30662 On April 23, 2015, the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) issued curtailment notices to all post-1914 water right holders within the San Joaquin River watershed and those with junior priority class right holders in the Scott River watershed until further notice. The State Water Board has been monitoring the flow conditions in the San Joaquin and Scott River watersheds and due to limited precipitation and snowpack, the current flows are insufficient to satisfy diversion demands under more senior rights. San Joaquin River Watershed: The post-1914 water rights curtailed include permits, licenses, registrations and certificates issued by the State Water Board after 1914 within the San Joaquin River watershed. Scott River Watershed: The junior priority class rights are identified as either: (1) a Priority 2 Class Right in Schedule D-4 of the Decree, (2) a Post-1914 Appropriative Right in Schedule E of the Decree, or (3) a "Surplus Class" right in the Decree. The notices can be viewed at: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/wate r_availability.shtml Required Compliance Certification Required: Curtailed water rights and junior priority class diverters are required to document receipt of the notice by completing an online Curtailment Certification Form (Form) within seven days. The Form confirms cessation of your diversion under the specific junior priority class water right identified in the notice, and, if applicable, identifies the alternate water supply to be used in lieu of the curtailed water right. You are required to complete the Form for each of your junior priority class water rights identified through this curtailment at: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/ewrims/curta ilment/2015curt_form.php The State Water Board will continue to monitor weather forecasts and stream gages to determine if a temporary diversion opportunity should arise during the diversion season. Please monitor your email and State Water Board Drought Year Water Actions website for further updates on when diversions are authorized, and when curtailments are in place. If an email list notice is issued on the weekend, the website will not be updated until the following Monday due to service limitations. ________________________________________________ You are currently subscribed to drought_updates as: sari at sisqtel.net. To unsubscribe click here: leave-4136979-968263.2a4de63637aceb6933f7283515759e1a at swrcb18.waterboards.ca .gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Tue Apr 28 08:17:24 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 08:17:24 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Article submission: Why Brown broke his "promise" - Big Money interests dumped $21.8 million into Yes on Prop. 1 campaign In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <68532219-4229-410A-A4DE-6A1713660623@fishsniffer.com> Photo of Governor Jerry Brown at the inauguration on January 5, 2015, by Dan Bacher. jerry_brown_1_5_15_.jpg http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/04/27/1380693/-Big-Money-interests-dumped-21-8-million-into-Prop-1-campaign Big Money interests dumped $21.8 million into Yes on Prop. 1 campaign by Dan Bacher The recent admission by the Brown administration that it could use money from Proposition 1, the water bond, to pay for "habitat mitigation" linked to the construction and operation of the massive Delta tunnels is no surprise, especially when you consider the Big Money interests that dumped $21,820,691 into the campaign. The contributors are a who?s who of Big Money interests in California, including corporate agribusiness groups, billionaires, timber barons, Big Oil, the tobacco industry and the California Chamber of Commerce. There is no doubt that these wealthy corporate interests are expecting a big return for their "investment" in the corrupt "play to pay" politics that rules California today, including the construction of the twin tunnels and new dams. Richard Stapler, spokesman for the California Department of Natural Resources, "acknowledged that the money [for delta habitat restoration] could conceivably come from Proposition 1, the $7.5 billion water bond that California passed last year,? according to Peter Fimrite in the San Francisco Chronicle.(http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Activists-decry-plan-to-cut-habitat-aid-from-6212404.php ) Delta advocates slammed Governor Brown for breaking his campaign promise that bond money wouldn't be used to mitigate the environmental damage caused by the tunnels, a $67 billion project designed to export Sacramento River water to agribusiness interests, Southern California water agencies and oil companies conducting fracking and steam injection operations. "It is outrageous that the governor would break the promise he made to the people of California that their taxes would not be used to mitigate damage from the tunnels,? said Restore the Delta Executive Director Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla. "Now he is signaling that bond monies will support mega-growers like Stewart Resnick, who plans to expand almond production by 50 percent over the next five years." (http://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/archives/2015/04/23/is-jerry-brown-breaking-his-prop-1-campaign-promise ) And guess who was one of the contributors to the Prop. 1 campaign? Yes, Stewart Resnick, the Beverly Hills agribusiness tycoon, owner of Paramount Farms and largest orchard fruit grower in the world, contributed $150,000. Resnick and his wife, Lynda, have been instrumental in promoting campaigns to eviscerate Endangered Species Act protections for Central Valley Chinook salmon and Delta smelt populations and to build the fish-killing peripheral tunnels - and have made millions off reselling environmental water to the public. Corporate agribusiness interests, the largest users of federal and state water project water exported through the Delta pumping facilities, contributed $850,000 to the campaign, including the $150,000 donated by Resnick. The California Farm Bureau Federation contributed $250,000, the Western Growers Service Association donated $250,000 and California Cotton Alliance contributed $200,000. The largest individual donor in the Yes on Prop. 1 campaign was Sean Parker, who contributed $1 million to the campaign. Parker is an entrepreneur and venture capitalist who cofounded the file-sharing computer service Napster and served as the first president of the social networking website Facebook. He also cofounded Plaxo, Causes, and Airtime. Four members of the Fisher family, who own the controversial Gap stores, collectively donated $1.5 million to the Yes. on Prop. 1 and Prop. 2 campaign. They also own the Mendocino Redwood Company and Humboldt Redwood Company, formerly the Pacific Lumber Company (PALCO), more than half a million acres of redwood forest lands in total. Doris F. Fisher contributed $499,000, John J. Fisher $351,000, Robert J. Fisher $400,000 and William S. Fisher $250,000. The Gap become notorious among labor and human rights advocates for employing sweatshop labor in the Third World to produce its clothes. Aera Energy LLC, a company jointly owned by affiliates of Shell and ExxonMobil, contributed $250,000 to the Yes on Proposition 1 and 2 campaign, according to the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). Aera Energy LLC is one of California's largest oil and gas producers, accounting for nearly 25 percent of the state's production, according to the company?s website. (http://www.aeraenergy.com/who-we-are.asp) Tobacco giant Philip Morris also donated $100,000 to Governor Brown?s ballot measure committee established to support Propositions 1 and 2. On October 20, the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network (ACS CAN) called on the governor to return that money. A total of eleven ballot measure campaign committees registered in support Proposition 1 and 2, according to Ballotpedia (http://ballotpedia.org/California_Proposition_1,_Water_Bond_(2014) ) The committees and money raised are below: ? California Business Political Action Committee, Sponsored by the California Chamber of Commerce: $1,169,500 ? Wetlands Conservation Committee, Sponsored by Ducks Unlimited, Audubon California and The Nature Conservancy, Yes on Prop. 1: $265,000 ? Conservation Action Fund - Yes on Proposition 1 and 2 - Sponsored by Conservation Organizations: $1,042,526 ? Sac. Valley Water & Rice for Prop 1: $72,356 ? Brown; Yes on Props 1 and 2 A Bipartisan Coalition of Business, Labor, Republicans, Democrats and Governor: $17,690,658 ? Think Long Committee, Inc., Sponsored by Nicolas Berggruen Institute Trust, Supporting Propositions 1 & 2 (Non-Profit 501(C)(4)): $250,000 ? Western Plant Health Association, Supporting Propositions 1 and 2 (Non-Profit 501 (C) (6)): $100,000 ? NRDC Action Fund California Ballot Measures Committee - Yes on Prop. 1: $12,653 ? Southern California District Council of Laborers Issues PAC: $203,662 ? Laborers Pacific Southwest Regional Organizing Coaltion Issues PAC - Yes on Props 1 and 2: $842,896 ? The California Conservation Campaign: $171,440 These committees raised a total of $21,820,691 and spent a total of $19,538,153. In contrast, Proposition 1 opponents raised only $101,149 and spent $86,347 during the campaign. To put that in perspective, note that just one big grower, Stewart Resnick, contributed $150,000 to the Prop. 1 campaign, more than all of the opponents combined. And Resnick wasn?t even one of the top 23 donors, with Sean Parker being the largest individual donor at $1,000,000! Top 23 Contributors to Prop. 1 and 2 Campaign Brown for Governor 2014 $5,196,529 Sean Parker $1,000,000 L. John Doerr $875,000 California Alliance for Jobs - Rebuild California Committee $533,750 The Nature Conservancy $518,624 California Hospitals Committee $500,000 Doris F. Fisher $499,000 Health Net $445,600 Robert Fisher $400,000 351,000 $351,000 Area Energy LLC $250,000 California American Council of Engineering Companies $250,000 California Farm Bureau Federation $250,000 California Association of Hospitals and Health Systems $250,000 Dignity Health $250,000 Kaiser Permamente $250,000 Northern California Carpenters Regional Council Issues PAC $250,000 Reed Hastings $250,000 SW Regional Council Of Carpenters $250,000 Think Long Committee, Inc. $250,000 Western Growers Service Corporation $250,000 William Fisher $250,000 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: jerry_brown_1_5_15_.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 18209 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Thu Apr 30 15:03:42 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 22:03:42 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Flow Release Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C522353@057-SN2MPN1-042.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hi All, This is to inform you that flows in the Trinity River will increase rapidly over this weekend to reach 8500 cfs on Tuesday and Wednesday May 5-6. For perspective, flows were 600 cfs on May 28, so the river will rise substantially. Please see the flow schedule in the table below for details and please use extreme caution and expect the river to rise quickly particularly this Sunday to Tuesday (May 3-5). You may also visit the Trinity River Restoration Program website for more information: http://www.trrp.net/ [http://www.trrp.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/WY2015HydrographScheduleTable.png] Thanks, Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 350452 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Thu Apr 30 16:27:31 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 16:27:31 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] FW: CURTAILMENT OF WATER RIGHTS WITH TERM 91 AS A CONDITION OF THEIR PERMIT OR LICENSE In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <002601d0839d$3ba29800$b2e7c800$@sisqtel.net> From: lyris at swrcb18.waterboards.ca.gov [mailto:lyris at swrcb18.waterboards.ca.gov] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 3:52 PM To: Sari Sommarstrom Subject: CURTAILMENT OF WATER RIGHTS WITH TERM 91 AS A CONDITION OF THEIR PERMIT OR LICENSE State Water Resources Control Board This is a message from the State Water Resources Control Board. NOTICE OF IMMEDIATE CURTAILMENT FOR WATER RIGHT HOLDERS IN THE SACRAMENTO - SAN JOAQUIN WATERSHED AND DELTA WITH TERM 91 AS A CONDITION OF THEIR PERMIT OR LICENSE Today, April 30, 2015, the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) issued curtailment notices to holders of 88 permits and licenses in the Sacramento-San Joaquin watershed and Delta with Term 91 as a condition. The State Water Board has been monitoring flow conditions in the Sacramento-San Joaquin watershed and Delta and determined the following two conditions which trigger curtailment under Term 91 have occurred: (1) Supplemental Project Water is being released in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Watershed and (2) the Delta is in Balanced Condition. The curtailment notice can be viewed at: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/wate r_availability.shtml A graph showing additional information on the Term 91 curtailment can be viewed here: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/anal ysis/docs/term91graph.pdf Required Compliance Certification Required: Curtailed Term 91 diverters are required to document receipt of the notice of curtailment by completing a Term 91 Curtailment Certification Form (Form). The completed Form should be returned to the Division of Water Rights within seven (7) days of receipt of the curtailment notice. The Form confirms cessation of diversion under the specific water right that includes Term 91, and, if applicable, either (i) identifies the alternative water supply to be used in lieu of the curtailed water right, or (ii) claims there is no hydraulic continuity between the surface water at the authorized point of diversion and the surface water in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. This condition of curtailment will continue until water conditions improve. Please monitor your email and State Water Board Drought Year Water Actions website for further updates on when diversions are authorized, and when curtailments are in place. If an email list notice is issued on the weekend, the website will not be updated until the following Monday due to service limitations. ________________________________________________ You are currently subscribed to drought_updates as: sari at sisqtel.net. To unsubscribe click here: leave-4154925-968263.2a4de63637aceb6933f7283515759e1a at swrcb18.waterboards.ca .gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri May 1 08:08:22 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 1 May 2015 15:08:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Stories on reformulation of BDCP Message-ID: <682793920.346336.1430492902415.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> The Bay-Delta Conservation Plan reminds me of the "Six Phases of a Project and I wonder which phase they are in? ?Maybe No. 3? Six Phases of a Project: 1. ?Enthusiasm2. ?Disillusionment3. ?Panic4. ?Search for the guilty5. ?Punishment of the innocent6. ?Praise and honors for the non-participants Here is the Mercury story plus more links:Jerry Brown?s revised water tunnels plan adds political problems?-- For years, Gov. Jerry Brown used the promise of habitat restoration to broaden the appeal of his plan to build two tunnels to divert water around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to the south.?David Siders?and?Phillip Reese?in the?Sacramento Bee$??Bettina Boxall?in the?Los Angeles Times$?Paul Rogers?in the?San Jose Mercury$?Scott Smith?Associated Press?-- 5/1/15 New $17 billion Delta tunnels plan with less environmental restoration unveiled by Brown By Paul Rogersprogers at mercurynews.comPOSTED: ? 04/30/2015 02:53:23 PM PDT8 COMMENTS|?UPDATED: ? ABOUT 12 HOURS AGOLATEST DROUGHT STORIES ...? - New $17 billion Delta tunnels plan with less environmental restoration unveiled by Brown - San Jose: Water conservation difficult to measure in multi-family housing with shared meters - EBMUD adopts penalty fees for excess users ...?MORE AT CADROUGHT.COM - Your guide to living with California's drought - water conservation tips, drought monitor maps and more OAKLAND -- Gov. Jerry Brown on Thursday unveiled a new version of his besieged plan to build massive tunnels under the Delta, this time significantly reducing the project's environmental restoration work.The latest version -- the third in three years -- brought down the cost from $25 billion to $17 billion. But it made the project even more risky politically.Environmental groups immediately blasted the plan, arguing that without extensive work to restore fish and wildlife in the Delta, the proposal is little more than a water grab by Southern California and Central Valley agribusiness. And it drew tepid responses from the big water providers that must pay for the tunnels.But Brown dug in.Recalling the efforts of his father, Gov. Edmund "Pat" Brown, and President Franklin Roosevelt, the governor said that since the 1920s modern California has been built with dams, canals and other water projects -- which have often been controversial when first proposed. They are costly but essential in a state as arid and crowded as California, Brown said."Civilization isn't free, and it's not cheap," he said at a news conference. "Yes, this costs money. But compared to what? Compared to a stadium? This is the basis of human existence."The central purpose of the tunnels, which would take 10 years to build, is to make it easier to move water from Northern California south to cities and farms, through the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, a vast system of sloughs and wetlands south of Sacramento that is the hub of much of California's water supply.AdvertisementPreviously, Brown had proposed building two huge tunnels, each about 35 miles long and 40 feet wide. They would take water from the Sacramento River north of Sacramento and move it under the Delta to state and federal pumps in Tracy.That project would have cost an estimated $25 billion, with $8 billion paying for a 50-year environmental plan that was expected to restore 153,000 acres of land, including roughly 100,000 acres of wetlands, to help bring back crashing populations of salmon, smelt and other fish and wildlife.But Thursday's plan does away with the 50-year environmental component, largely because the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and other agencies would not give it permits. They said the state couldn't prove it would benefit the species.Instead, Brown and his deputies promised Thursday to restore 30,000 acres of habitat, which they said would cost only $300 million.The governor said the smaller environmental restoration can be funded, while the old project, whose written plan cost $240 million and was 30,000 pages long, was less certain."This is a step forward because it's a concrete action," Brown said. "It's real. It's happening in the real world. The other was more a desire."The Delta Cross Channel between the Sacramento River and Snodgrass Slough near Walnut Grove, Calif. (Rich Pedroncelli / AP)But the new plan's future, like one of Brown's other big projects, the $68 billion high-speed rail system, remains in question.Environmentalists said Thursday that without a guaranteed major environmental restoration component, it is very similar to Brown's efforts when he was governor decades ago to build the so-called Peripheral Canal, a huge canal around the eastern edge of the Delta. Those efforts were soundly defeated by voters in a statewide ballot measure in 1982."The common definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results," said Robert Wright, an attorney with Friends of the River.Wright said that the likelihood is "100 percent" that opponents will file a lawsuit next spring when the final environmental study on the revised plan is completed.?Environmentalists also noted that nearly all the 30,000 acres the new plan promises to restore already were required under an agreement with the federal government dating back to 2010 as part of a plan to restore endangered fish -- and that state studies this year estimated its costs at $20,000 per acre -- twice what Brown's staff said it would cost Thursday.Brown is counting on major water agencies to pay the $17 billion to build and operate the tunnels. They have said they will raise that money through higher water rates on the public and possibly by raising property taxes.On Thursday, with few details of Brown's revised plans made public, large water agencies were guarded."We will thoroughly review with our board this new proposal," said Jeff Kightlinger, CEO of the Metropolitan Water District, which provides water to 19 million people in Southern California.Reducing the scale of the environmental restoration could make it more difficult for the big water agencies, which include the Santa Clara Valley Water District and Westlands Water District in Fresno, to invest billions to build the tunnels.That's because the 50-year "habitat conservation plan" was supposed to guarantee them insurance against endangered species lawsuits and decisions by the federal government that have limited Delta pumping in recent years to protect endangered fish.Brown and his lieutenants said the tunnels will not provide more water than California now takes from the Delta, but they will provide more reliability, even without the 50-year habitat conservation plan. They said that's because moving the intake structures north will reduce reliance on the huge pumps near Tracy, which kill fish and make parts of the Delta run backward."I believe water users, both urban and agricultural, will invest the money, because they have no choice," Brown said. "They are facing reduced water. I mean, the people in Livermore, and the Santa Clara Valley Water District, and growers. If they don't do this, they are absolutely certain to suffer serious losses of water in the future." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Fri May 1 09:55:51 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Fri, 1 May 2015 09:55:51 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Article Submission: Tunnel opponents blast Governor's revised Bay Delta Conservation Plan In-Reply-To: <682793920.346336.1430492902415.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <682793920.346336.1430492902415.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5F63FEC8-7708-4A9F-9359-CF1FAE519313@fishsniffer.com> Bill Jennings, CSPA Executive Director, speaks at the Restore the Delta statewide general membership meeting in Stockton on April 30. Photo by Dan Bacher. 800_bill_jennings.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Tunnel opponents blast Governor's revised Bay Delta Conservation Plan by Dan Bacher On April 30 at a press conference in Oakland, Governor Jerry Brown and federal officials unveiled controversial plans that they claim "accelerate restoration of the Delta's ecosystem" and "fix the state's aging water infrastructure" by building two massive underground tunnels. Environmental groups and Delta advocates responded that the updated Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) is nothing more than a "slightly revised" water grab for corporate agribusiness interests - and is "more unfair than ever" for the majority of Californians during the record drought. One of the key differences between the previous version of the BDCP and the latest incarnation is that it now calls for only "restoring" 30,000 acres for wetland and wildlife habitat - down from the 100,000 acres originally proposed. The other major difference is that the BDCP has been split into two components - The "California Water Fix" component for the tunnels and the "California Eco Restore" component for the habitat "restoration" component. ?We can't just cross our fingers, hoping for the best in the Delta,? said Governor Brown in touting the revised plan. ?Fish populations are at an all-time low. Bold action is imperative." "We've listened to the public and carefully studied the science," echoing his comments that he made regarding the tunnels plan at a press conference in Sacramento in July 2012. "This revised plan is the absolute best path forward," stated Brown, without offering evidence how this plan compared to other more comprehensive solutions to California's water supply and ecosystem restoration problems, most notably the Environmental Water Caucus Responsible Exports Plan that sets a cap of 3 million acre feet per year on water exports from the Delta. Deputy Secretary of the Interior Michael L. Connor claimed, ?The State, through Governor Brown?s leadership, has been a strong partner working with us to improve California?s water infrastructure while restoring the Delta. The plan announced today, which has been greatly improved in response to public input, will secure California?s water future and a healthier, sustainable Bay-Delta ecosystem." The Governor claimed the revised plan "substantially improves the health of California?s fisheries, increases water reliability and addresses the uncertainty of climate change." "Specifically, the plan will accelerate long-stalled Delta environmental projects, including critical habitat, wetlands and floodplain restoration, while fixing California?s aging and environmentally damaging water infrastructure system," the Governor said. "The effectiveness of the restoration work depends on building a reliable conveyance system." The Governor's Office released a brightly colored 8-page "fact sheet" that summarizes the changes in the Bay Delta Conservation Plan: http://gov.ca.gov/docs/Delta_Fact_Sheets_4.30.15.pdf Revised plan is "Ecocide" for the Delta Critics of the tunnels slammed the revised tunnel plan for a number of severe flaws after reviewing the released documents. Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA) and Board Member of the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) and Executive Commitee Member of Restore the Delta, summed up the reactions of many to the revised plan when he said, "The Water Fix and Eco Restore? are Ecocide for the Delta." Adam Scow, the California Director of Food and Water Watch, said the revised tunnels plan remains a scheme to provide subsidized water for "Big Agriculture" that has expanded its water-intensive almond acreage during the drought while urban water users are asked to cut their water usage by 25 percent and more. "Governor Brown?s plan to build massive tunnels to divert the Sacramento River away from the San Francisco Bay Delta ? estimated to cost as much as $67 billion ? has always primarily been a scheme to send massive amounts of water to corporate agribusinesses on the west side of the Central Valley," said Scow. "These powerful agribusinesses, including Stewart Resnick?s Paramount Farms and growers in the Westlands Water District, have planted excessive amounts of water-thirsty almonds and pistachios, most of which are exported overseas and need massive amounts of water to succeed in the hot and dry climate of the west side." ?The Governor has slightly repackaged his euphemistically named Bay Delta Conservation Plan, because the tunnels plan will likely not meet federal water quality standards in the Bay Delta, but the fundamental problem with the project remains: it is grossly unfair for the Governor to make California taxpayers and water ratepayers subsidize a massive project that only benefits a handful of California?s most powerful agribusinesses," he stated. "Forcing taxpayers to subsidize agribusiness is especially wrong now that the Governor has demanded all Californians reduce their own water use or face substantial fines. In addition, removing fresh water from the Bay Delta via tunnels will only worsen conditions for California?s threatened wild salmon," said Scow. Limits on west side agribusiness water usage urged Scow urged the Governor to impose limits on the amount of water that is used by agribusiness interests on the San Joaquin Valley's west side. ?Instead of pushing this outdated tunnels project, the Governor should limit agricultural irrigation on the west side and stop sending enormous amounts of public water to agriculture tycoons at the expense of California taxpayers and the fragile ecosystem and fish populations supported by the San Francisco Bay Delta," concluded Scow. Restore the Delta (RTD) responded to Gov. Brown?s "abandonment of habitat restoration" in his Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) tunnels scheme by saying the new plan violates the statutory co-equal goals and "end-runs" the EPA and federal scientists who refused to issue permits for the project. Governor Brown has called the massive change ?technical,? but RTD and other opponents said it results from "fatal flaws" in the BDCP and the lack of funding for the restoration formerly proposed under the BDCP. The group pointed out that the "new maneuver" ignores the judgment of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), Delta Independent Science Board (DISB), and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) after scientific reviews that the tunnels project didn?t meet minimum Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Clean Water Act (CWA) standard. The agencies found in particular that the project would "jeopardize," rather than help recover key species, and violate anti-degradation laws to protect the Delta waterways as fishable, swimmable and drinkable, according to RTD. RTD said the change also results from the failure of the BDCP to identify the required funding to meet the financial assurances provisions of the ESA, RTD noted. The BDCP relied heavily on future unidentified state bonds and state and federal budget allocations. New document reveals Prop. 1 funds will pay for tunnels mitigation Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, RTD Executive Director, pointed out, "Though a key promise made to pass the 2014 Water Bond was that it would not fund the BDCP, the administration has now indicated it does intend to take Prop. 1 funds for restoration to attempt to address the damage from over pumping the Delta, which the tunnels would compound." The 12-page fact sheet confirms the contention of Barrigan-Parrilla and other tunnel opponents that the water bond will fund "restoration" to mitigate the environmental damage caused by the tunnels. Page 1 of the document reveals that 1,000+acres out of the more than 30,000 acres of "Delta Habitat Restoration and Protection" will be funded by Prop. 1 and Pro. 1E The fact sheet states, "Various aquatic, riparian, and upland restoration and multi-benefit flood management projects will be supported by Proposition 1 and 1E." The document also claims: "Proposition 1 funds and other state public dollars will be directed exclusively for public benefits unassociated with any regulatory compliance responsibilities." New plan even worse than previous one Bob Wright, senior counsel for Friends of the River, slammed the revised Bay Delta Conservation Plan also, saying that the new plan is "even worse" for people and the environment than previous one was. ?After 9 years and $250 million dollars, creating a stack of planning documents over 27 feet tall, the governor has admitted that the BDCP could not protect Delta species and therefore could not meet HCP and NCCP standards,? said Wright. ?The BDCP, a plan that conserved little and would cost ratepayers and taxpayers over 25 Billion dollars to subsidize giant unsustainable agribusiness, is now even worse for the people, the environment, and sustainable water policies.? Wright noted that the BDCP was previously designed as an HCP/NCCP to purportedly ??restore and protect ecosystem health, water supply, and water quality within a stable regulatory framework.? As an HCP/ NCCP, the BDCP was required to protect endangered species and prevent their decline. ?The plan has now shifted from a proposal to protect 56 Species, and over 100,000 acres of habitat, to a straight water grab that would take up to half of the freshwater from the north end of the Delta,? added Barrigan-Parrilla. ?The governor plans to do an end-run around the public, the federal agencies that flunked the project, and the Legislature, with a fast-tracked section 7 process for permitting the tunnels. Under section 7, the project only needs to mitigate for direct project impacts, and does not have to meet a recovery standard.? ?The tunnels would create permanent drought conditions in the Delta by diverting up to half of the freshwater flows, which will increase salinity intrusion into the Delta and help push several species to extinction,? Barrigan-Parrilla said. For more information, go to: http://restorethedelta.org/blog/ Tunnel fiasco part of a larger pattern The recent abandonment of the pretense of "restoration" and "conservation" under the BCCP is part of a larger pattern by the Brown administration, a regime that has pushed some of the most anti-fish and anti-environmental policies of any administration in California history. This is a huge story that the mainstream media and much of the alternative media have failed to cover. (http://www.truth-out.org/speakout/item/30452-the-extinction-governor-rips-the-green-mask-off-his-tunnels-plan ) The Brown administration, in collaboration with the Obama administration, has presided over record water exports out of the Delta and record deaths of Sacramento splittail and other species in 2011; the collapse of Delta smelt and other fish species to record low levels in 2014 and 2015; the death of 95 percent of endangered winter run Chinook salmon in low, warm water conditions in 2014; the creation of questionable "marine protected areas" created under the helm of a Big Oil lobbyist; and the clearcutting of forests in the Sierra Nevada. Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, said the water bond, peripheral tunnels, Shasta Dam raise and other water projects now being planned by the state and federal governments are in in reality "one Big Project" that will destroy salmon, rivers and groundwater supplies. (http://www.truth-out.org/speakout/item/27216-chief-caleen-sisk-it-s-all-one-big-project ) ?It does not make sense that people are separating the water puzzle into individual pieces, such as: the raising of Shasta Dam, Proposition 1, the Delta tunnels, BDCP, Sites Reservoir, Temperance Flat, CALFED, Delta Vision, BDCP, OCAP, the Bay Delta, Trinity/Klamath Rivers, the Sacramento River, the San Joaquin River, and water rights," said Chief Sisk. "It is all one BIG Project." Meanwhile, the mainstream media continues to portray Brown as a "climate leader" and "green energy" guru when in fact he is a strong proponent of neoliberal carbon trading policies and the expansion of the environmentally devastating practice of fracking in California. (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/30/us/california-governor-orders-new-target-for-emissions-cuts.html?_r=0 ) http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/05/01/18771746.php -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_bill_jennings.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 297161 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bgutermuth at usbr.gov Fri May 1 13:58:44 2015 From: bgutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F.) Date: Fri, 1 May 2015 13:58:44 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Flow and Gravel augmentation schedule Message-ID: Dear Trinity River Enthusiasts - Please be careful on the river this weekend as flows are increasing to 4,500 cubic feet per second (cfs) by Sunday night. Flows will continue to rise Monday and will peak at 8,500 cfs on May 5th and 6th. The Dry year hydrograph is shown below and is attached. A total of 1,700 yards of clean gravel (1/4 inch to 5 inch diameter rocks) will be added during Monday on the ascending limb of the hydrograph and at peak flows on Tuesday. One thousand yards will be added at the Diversion pool (aka the weir hole) and 700 yards will be added at the Lowden Ranch site in Lewiston. [image: Inline image 1] [image: Inline image 2] Have a great weekend - Brandt Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Scientist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S. Main ST. Weaverville CA 96093 530.623.1806 Voice http://www.trrp.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image.png Type: image/png Size: 131835 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image.png Type: image/png Size: 157609 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WY2015_DRY_hydrograph_schedule1.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 175712 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat May 2 09:52:50 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 2 May 2015 16:52:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] LaMalfa amendment on Trinity River flows Message-ID: <1306987217.255390.1430585570063.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> LaMalfa Helps Shape Water Appropriations | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | LaMalfa Helps Shape Water AppropriationsWashington, DC ? Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA) applauds the passage of the Energy and Water Appropriations bill.? When the bill passed today, it included two amend... | | | | View on lamalfa.house.gov | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | ? LaMalfa Helps Shape Water Appropriations May 1, 2015??Press Release?House Adopts LaMalfa Regulation Reform & Drought Language, Includes Reservoir Study, Levee Upgrade in Bill?Washington, DC?? Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA) applauds the passage of the Energy and Water Appropriations bill.? When the bill passed today, it included two amendments sponsored by Rep. LaMalfa intended to roll back excessive regulations and protect California?s access to water supplies during the drought.? Additionally, LaMalfa was successful in securing funds for a levee project in the North State and accelerate the completion of the Sites feasibility study. LaMalfa?s first amendment prevents the Army Corps of Engineers from ignoring regulatory exemptions for farming activities?The amendment I sponsored prohibits the Army Corps of Engineers from using creative interpretations of the law to penalize farmers for changing crops or fallowing fields. Congress never intended for the Corps to interpret the law in this way, and the House has once again expressed its opposition to this overreach.?LaMalfa?s second proposal will prevent the Bureau of Reclamation from diverting water from cities and farms beyond what is required by the Trinity Record of Decision (ROD). In 2013 and 2014, the Bureau ignored the ROD to divert even more water toward environmental purposes.?I?m also pleased that the House supported my language preventing the Bureau of Reclamation from abandoning the Trinity Record of Decision and diverting more water away from the Central Valley Project,??continued LaMalfa.??Despite the state?s historic drought, the Bureau has diverted far more water for environmental purposes that the Record of Decision allows, depriving the state of water that could supply hundreds of thousands of Californians. We need every drop we can spare during this crisis, and this amendment will put an end to this misuse.??LaMalfa also was successful in working with Rep. David Valadao from the Central Valley in securing language in the final funding bill aimed at increasing water infrastructure in the North State, and across California. The measure instructs the Bureau of Reclamation to finish and submit feasibility studies for three dam expansion and two dam creation proposals, including language setting a 2016 deadline on the study of Sites Reservoir. California's voters approved $2.7 billion in construction funds for projects like Sites, and the state will begin selecting projects to fund at the end of 2016."California's voters have spoken strongly in support of funding projects like Sites Reservoir, and completing the study brings us one step closer to construction. It's time to end the decades of studies and start working to ensure that California's farms, cities and environment have water in generations to come."LaMalfa also announced that the measure provided $15 million toward the Hamilton City levee construction project, which will protect 1,800 residents from flooding.???We?ve again been successful in providing funding to rebuild Hamilton City?s levees, protecting families and farms from winter floods. The community?s contributions to this project are paying dividends today, and we hope to secure final funding for this project in the coming year.???To view Rep. LaMalfa's comments on the House floor, please click here:?https://youtu.be/JRB3CJGLPAE?Tom Stokely Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact California Water Impact Network V/FAX 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net http://www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at att.net Sat May 2 10:23:51 2015 From: kierassociates at att.net (Kier Associates) Date: Sat, 2 May 2015 10:23:51 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] LaMalfa amendment on Trinity River flows In-Reply-To: <1306987217.255390.1430585570063.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1306987217.255390.1430585570063.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002c01d084fc$c351b000$49f51000$@att.net> How, do you suppose, enabling greater delivery of Trinity River water to Westlands Water District, strikes Mr. LaMalfa as benefitting his district/interests? From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Saturday, May 02, 2015 9:53 AM To: Env-trinity Subject: [env-trinity] LaMalfa amendment on Trinity River flows LaMalfa Helps Shape Water Appropriations Description: Image removed by sender. image LaMalfa Helps Shape Water Appropriations Washington, DC ? Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA) applauds the passage of the Energy and Water Appropriations bill. When the bill passed today, it included two amend... View on lamalfa.house.gov Preview by Yahoo LaMalfa Helps Shape Water Appropriations May 1, 2015 Press Release House Adopts LaMalfa Regulation Reform & Drought Language, Includes Reservoir Study, Levee Upgrade in Bill Washington, DC ? Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA) applauds the passage of the Energy and Water Appropriations bill. When the bill passed today, it included two amendments sponsored by Rep. LaMalfa intended to roll back excessive regulations and protect California?s access to water supplies during the drought. Additionally, LaMalfa was successful in securing funds for a levee project in the North State and accelerate the completion of the Sites feasibility study. LaMalfa?s first amendment prevents the Army Corps of Engineers from ignoring regulatory exemptions for farming activities ?The amendment I sponsored prohibits the Army Corps of Engineers from using creative interpretations of the law to penalize farmers for changing crops or fallowing fields. Congress never intended for the Corps to interpret the law in this way, and the House has once again expressed its opposition to this overreach.? LaMalfa?s second proposal will prevent the Bureau of Reclamation from diverting water from cities and farms beyond what is required by the Trinity Record of Decision (ROD). In 2013 and 2014, the Bureau ignored the ROD to divert even more water toward environmental purposes. ?I?m also pleased that the House supported my language preventing the Bureau of Reclamation from abandoning the Trinity Record of Decision and diverting more water away from the Central Valley Project,? continued LaMalfa. ?Despite the state?s historic drought, the Bureau has diverted far more water for environmental purposes that the Record of Decision allows, depriving the state of water that could supply hundreds of thousands of Californians. We need every drop we can spare during this crisis, and this amendment will put an end to this misuse.? LaMalfa also was successful in working with Rep. David Valadao from the Central Valley in securing language in the final funding bill aimed at increasing water infrastructure in the North State, and across California. The measure instructs the Bureau of Reclamation to finish and submit feasibility studies for three dam expansion and two dam creation proposals, including language setting a 2016 deadline on the study of Sites Reservoir. California's voters approved $2.7 billion in construction funds for projects like Sites, and the state will begin selecting projects to fund at the end of 2016. "California's voters have spoken strongly in support of funding projects like Sites Reservoir, and completing the study brings us one step closer to construction. It's time to end the decades of studies and start working to ensure that California's farms, cities and environment have water in generations to come." LaMalfa also announced that the measure provided $15 million toward the Hamilton City levee construction project, which will protect 1,800 residents from flooding. ?We?ve again been successful in providing funding to rebuild Hamilton City?s levees, protecting families and farms from winter floods. The community?s contributions to this project are paying dividends today, and we hope to secure final funding for this project in the coming year.? To view Rep. LaMalfa's comments on the House floor, please click here: https://youtu.be/JRB3CJGLPAE 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: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 662 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Mon May 4 09:22:28 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Mon, 4 May 2015 09:22:28 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] FW: 2015 Sacramento River Watershed Post-1914 Curtailment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <002201d08686$8404ef80$8c0ece80$@sisqtel.net> Curtailments of ag keeps coming. From: lyris at swrcb18.waterboards.ca.gov [mailto:lyris at swrcb18.waterboards.ca.gov] Sent: Friday, May 01, 2015 1:21 PM To: Sari Sommarstrom Subject: 2015 Sacramento River Watershed Post-1914 Curtailment State Water Resources Control Board This is a message from the State Water Resources Control Board. May 1, 2015 NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY OF WATER AND IMMEDIATE CURTAILMENT FOR THOSE DIVERTING WATER UNDER A POST-1914 WATER RIGHT IN THE SACRAMENTO RIVER WATERSHED AND DELTA The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) is issuing curtailment notices to all post-1914 water rights within the Sacramento River watershed and Delta until further notice. The State Water Board has been monitoring diversion records and the flow conditions in the Sacramento River watershed and Delta. Due to limited precipitation and snowpack, the current flows are insufficient to satisfy diversion demands under senior rights. The post-1914 water rights curtailed include all those permits, licenses, registrations and certificates issued after 1914 within the larger Sacramento River watershed and Delta. The notice can be viewed at: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/wate r_availability.shtml If you are subject to another curtailment, (Term 91 Notice, Deer or Antelope Creek Orders), the most restrictive curtailment applies. Should a curtailment be lifted in the future under a notice or order, the other curtailment condition remains in effect until notified otherwise. If you have any questions, please contact our Curtailment Hotline at (916) 341-5342. Compliance Certification Required: Curtailed water rights are required to document receipt of this notice by completing an online Curtailment Certification Form (Form) within seven days. The Form confirms cessation of your diversion under the specific water right identified and, if applicable, identifies the alternate water supply to be used in lieu of the curtailed water right. You are required to complete the Form for each of your water rights identified through this curtailment at: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/ewrims/curta ilment/2015curt_form.php The State Water Board will continue to monitor diversion demands, weather forecasts and stream gages. Please monitor your email and State Water Board Drought Year Water Actions website for further updates on when diversions may be authorized. If an email list notice is issued on the weekend, the website will not be updated until the following Monday due to service limitations. ________________________________________________ You are currently subscribed to drought_updates as: sari at sisqtel.net. To unsubscribe click here: leave-4156832-968263.2a4de63637aceb6933f7283515759e1a at swrcb18.waterboards.ca .gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From twashburn at usbr.gov Mon May 4 10:27:52 2015 From: twashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy) Date: Mon, 4 May 2015 10:27:52 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Trinity River Message-ID: Please make the following release change to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 5/7/2015 200 8,500 8,000 5/7/2015 600 8,000 7,500 5/7/2015 1000 7,500 7,000 5/7/2015 1400 7,000 6,500 5/7/2015 1800 6,500 6,000 5/7/2015 2200 6,000 5,600 5/8/2015 200 5,600 5,200 5/8/2015 600 5,200 4,800 5/8/2015 1000 4,800 4,400 5/8/2015 1400 4,400 4,000 5/8/2015 1800 4,000 3,800 5/8/2015 2200 3,800 3,600 5/9/2015 200 3,600 3,400 5/9/2015 600 3,400 3,200 5/9/2015 1000 3,200 3,000 5/9/2015 1400 3,000 2,900 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Trinity Pulse Flow -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue May 5 08:15:31 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 15:15:31 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Oakland_Tribune_Editorial=3A_Brown?= =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=99s_plan_just_a_huge_water_grab?= Message-ID: <325074100.379122.1430838931929.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://oaklandtribune.ca.newsmemory.com/publink.php?shareid=103b4b3de ?Oakland Tribune?|?Page A09Tuesday, 5 May 2015Brown?s plan just a huge water grab?Gov. Jerry Brown has abandoned any pretense that his massive Delta twin-tunnel project could benefit the environment, leaving it simply as one of the biggest water grabs instate history.Having failed to convincefederal agencies thathis plan would improve the Delta?s health, Brown dropped the $8 billion, 50-year environmental component of the tunnel project. Salvaging the ecology of the largest estuary west of the Mississippi is officially off the table.Making matters worse, what?s now touted as a $17 billion project could move forward without the approval of the Legislature or California voters by simply increasing property taxes and water rates by fiat. It?sjust wrong.?The Zone 7 and Alameda County water districts in the East Bay and the Santa Clara Valley Water District have all helped finance the studies and could help fund the project itself. They should ask voters before considering putting ratepayers and property owners on the hook for part of the cost.These districts shouldn?t be parties to the Delta?s destruction. Brown dropped the environmental component of the project because the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and other agencies told him they wouldn?t grant California the 50-year permits for Delta restoration work.The state couldn?t prove that the plan would benefit endangered fish andwildlife.?We?re not surprised.The only way to improvethe health of the Delta is by pouring more ? not less ? water through. The feds essentially repeated what Brown had already heard in 2011 from a comprehensive report by the National Academy of Sciences.To understand what the Delta plan is really about, keep your eye on Stewart Resnick, the billionaire ag king who runs one of the largest farming operations in the nation. While Brown is forcing Californians to reduce water use by 25 percent during the drought, Resnick recently announced plans for a huge expansion of his almond and pistachio acreage, among the most profitable but also thirstiestcrops.Ten percent of thestate?s available water already goes to almond orchards, roughly half the amount used by California?s entire urban population. It takes a gallon of water to grow every almond harvested in California?s Central Valley. The twin-tunnel project would enable Resnick and other almond and pistachio mega-growers to further profit at the expense of urban ratepayers.Brown should instead focus on increasing recycling and reuse, and helping districts that are eager to purify wastewater for drinking. He should help farmers install more efficient irrigation and work to restore groundwater supplies to stop the land from subsiding. These strategies aim for sustaining a society, economy and environment without sacrificing one for the other. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Tue May 5 08:27:07 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 08:27:07 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Billionaire Stewart Resnick Is Advisor to UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi In-Reply-To: References: <047d7bd6c492cf74a7051554985e@google.com> Message-ID: <515CDADC-F8BB-4744-836B-9BCDE1DD9CB9@fishsniffer.com> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/05/05/1382549/-Stewart-Resnick-is-on-UC-Davis-Chancellor-s-Board-of-Advisors Billionaire Stewart Resnick Is Advisor to UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi by Dan Bacher A lot of things about Beverly Hills billionaire Stewart Resnick, owner of Paramount Farms, and his wife, Lynda, are well-known. Environmentalists have castigated the Resnicks, the largest orchard fruit growers in the world, and other corporate agribusiness interests for planting thousands of acres of new almond trees during the drought while Governor Jerry Brown is mandating that urban families slash water usage by 25 percent. (http://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/archives/2015/04/22/well-connected-billionaire-expands-almond-acreage-as-cities-forced-to-slash-water-use ) The media, particularly alternative outlets, have also widely publicized the instrumental role that Resnicks played in promoting campaigns to eviscerate Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections for Central Valley Chinook salmon and Delta smelt populations and to build the fish-killing peripheral tunnels. The Resnicks have become infamous as the "Koch Brothers of California Water" for the many thousands of dollars they contribute to candidates and propositions in California every year. (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/10/09/1335459/-Corporate-Agribusiness-dumps-850-000-into-Proposition-1 ) It is also well-documented how Resnick, while serving on the board of Conservation International, bought subsidized Delta water and then sold it back to the public for a big profit as Delta fish and Central Valley salmon populations crashed. (https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2014/09/28/18762178.php ) The Resnicks' contributions to the arts and charities, as well as the millions donated to the Resnick Program for Food Law and Policy at UCLA, are also well publicized. (https://www.law.ucla.edu/centers/social-policy/resnick-program-for-food-law-and-policy/about/ ) However, I bet you didn't know that Stewart Resnick also serves on the Board of Advisors of UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi, made famous for serving as Chancellor when UC Davis Police Lt. John Pike pepper sprayed students during the Occupy protests in the fall of 2011. (http://chancellor.ucdavis.edu/initiatives/board_of_advisors/resnick_bio.html ) But that's not the only position in the educational system than Resnick holds. According to the UC Davis website, Resnick is a member of the Executive Board of the UCLA Medical Sciences; member of the Board of Trustees of Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, NY; member of the Board of Trustees of the J. Paul Getty Trust; and trustee of the California Institute of Technology. He is also a member of the Advisory Board of the Anderson School Management, University of California, Los Angeles. Resnick and his wife have managed to use their wealth not only to exert enormous influence over water politics in California, but over the educational sphere as well. This is yet one more example of the growing collaboration between corporations, billionaires and government in California and across the nation. Here is the list of the Chancellor's Board of Advisors, where Resnick serves with other corporate leaders such as Riley P. Bechtel and Vivek Ranadiv?: Riley P. Bechtel Bryan Cameron Tani Cantil-Sakauye Nancy Cantor Richard H. Carmona John A. De Luca James J. Duderstadt M.R.C. Greenwood Alan Leshner Vivek Ranadiv? Stewart A. Resnick Patrick Soon-Shiong Kathie Sowa William P. Sullivan John S. Watson Sanford I. Weill Resnick's biography on the UC Davis website is listed below. Stewart A. Resnick, president & CEO, Roll Global LLC: Stewart A. Resnick is chairman and owner of Roll Global, a Los Angeles- based holding company that includes both global agricultural operations and well-known consumer-facing brands. Among Mr. Resnick's companies are a number of Central California-based farming companies, including Paramount Citrus, Paramount Farming and Paramount Farms, the world?s largest growers, processors and marketers of citrus, almonds and pistachios. His holdings also include POM Wonderful, grower of pomegranates and maker of the all-natural POM Wonderful pomegranate juice; Teleflora, the largest floral wire service in the world; FIJI Water, the largest imported bottle water in the United States; Suterra, the largest biorational pest control company in the United States; and more recently, JUSTIN Vineyards and Winery, an award-winning winery based in Paso Robles focusing on Bordeaux-style blends and single varietals. Mr. Resnick is a member of the Executive Board of the UCLA Medical Sciences; member of the Board of Trustees of Bard College, Annandale- on-Hudson, NY; member of the Board of Trustees of the J. Paul Getty Trust; member of the Board of Conservation International; and trustee of the California Institute of Technology. He is also a member of the Advisory Board of the Anderson School Management, University of California, Los Angeles. Mr. Resnick holds a Bachelor of Science degree in business administration from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) and Juris Doctorate from UCLA Law School. Last update: October 16, 2012 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed May 6 20:35:22 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 03:35:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Bloomberg: Greedy Environment Steals California's Water Message-ID: <1984894765.1681858.1430969722164.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-05-05/greedy-environment-keeps-stealing-california-s-water ?Greedy Environment Steals California's Water26?MAY 5, 2015 5:19 PM EDTBy?Justin FoxThere?s this thing called ?the environment,? and it?s using up as much as half of California?s scarce water. Pretty greedy, huh?This is one way to interpret the California Department of Water Resources? data?on how water is used in the state. Here?s the breakdown on average water use from 2001 through 2010:Add together the four environmental categories and you get 47 percent -- more in some years. People in California agricultural circles like these?numbers a lot better than the 80 percent agriculture, 20 percent urban water-use breakdown usually cited in the media. ?But what exactly does it mean that ?the environment? uses 50 percent of California?s water?Writing in the National Review?a couple of weeks ago, Devin Nunes, a U.S. representative from the Central Valley farm town of Tulare, put it like this: Farmers do not use 80 percent of California?s water. In reality, 50 percent of the water that is captured by the state?s dams, reservoirs, aqueducts, and other infrastructure is diverted for environmental causes. Farmers, in fact, use 40 percent of the water supply. That second sentence is incorrect, unless you count free-flowing rivers as part of that state ?infrastructure.? The denominator here is all the water used by California?s residents, businesses and farms (of which agriculture takes?about 80 percent and municipal and industrial users about 20 percent), plus all other water flows upon which the state has identified some sort of legal claim, mostly for purposes of environmental protection. It?s not that the water is ?diverted for environmental causes.? It?s that it is?not diverted?to farms and cities, largely for environmental reasons.?Still, water is water, and it is indisputable that if hadn't been for the rise of environmental movement in the 1970s, more of it probably would be flowing to the state?s farms and cities instead of out to sea. From the 1850s through the 1970s, California drained its swamps, dammed its rivers and built long aqueducts and pipelines to move water from where it was abundant ?to where it was not. Since the controversial completion of the New Melones Dam on the Stanislaus River in 1978, though, this great California water development machine has mostly ground to a halt, and in some cases even gone into reverse. As a result there are those, such as Republican presidential candidate Carly Fiorina, who?blame the state?s water shortages?on ?overzealous liberal environmentalists who continue to devalue the lives and livelihoods of California residents in pursuit of their own agenda.?In the face of such rhetoric, it?s worth taking inventory of where all the environmental water really is going, and what would be involved in wresting it away for the benefit of Central Valley farmers and Orange County lawn-waterers. As you can see from the above chart, by far the biggest environmental use of water is for Wild & Scenic Rivers -- rivers, streams or segments thereof that have been designated by the state, the federal government or both as too nice to dam. Dig a little deeper into the?2013 California Water Plan Update, and you find that 93 percent of this water use transpires along California?s very wet northern coast, which is separated from the Central Valley and its water infrastructure by mountain ranges that get higher and more rugged as you head north.The three biggest rivers that flow into the Pacific along the northern coast are the Klamath, the Eel and the Smith. In the 1950s and 1960s there were tentative plans to dam all three and send the water south. A major Klamath tributary, the Trinity River, was in fact dammed in 1962 and much of its water diverted into the federal Central Valley Project.The Eel River also came close to being dammed after a devastating flood in 1964. But Ronald Reagan, who became governor in 1967, refused to give the go-ahead. The location envisioned for the dam, while pretty good for water-supply purposes, would have been little help against floods, and it was hard to square the costs of the projects with the likely benefits. What?s more, the dam would have flooded an Indian reservation. ?We?ve broken enough treaties with the Indians already,? Reagan reportedly said at the time.?In 1973, after California passed its Wild & Scenic Rivers law, Reagan added the Eel to the list.Reagan?s successor as governor, Jerry Brown, made increasing commitments to protect northern California rivers in his attempt to muster support for the Peripheral Canal (more on that in a moment). As part of this campaign, he asked Interior Secretary Cecil Andrus to designate the Eel, the Klamath and the Smith as federal Wild & Scenic Rivers -- meaning it would take an act of Congress to dam them. Andrus complied just before leaving office in 1981.So ? three substantial California rivers have been declared effectively off limits for reasons both economic and environmental. I don?t think anybody, including Nunes or Fiorina, is seriously campaigning to dam them. I didn?t hear a single Central Valley farmer bring this up during my visit last week.That leaves another 16.9 percent of the state?s water to look at. Managed wetlands are just 1.4 percent, most of it along the formerly very swampy Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers and their tributaries in the Central Valley, and they don?t seem to be wildly controversial -- some are actually managed by farmers. As for the more substantial instream-flow requirements (5.8 percent) for energy production, drinking water quality and fish protection, almost half of those are in north coast rivers and thus?aren't?accessible to Central Valley and Southern California water users. The?requirements?are also contingent on how much water there is, and tend to drop sharply in drought years. This is definitely something that Central Valley farmers complain about, but I have not seen evidence that it's been a huge drain on water resources during the drought.It is the??required delta outflow,? which accounted for 9.7 percent of the state?s water from 2001 through 2010, that is the great source of controversy. The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta is where the Central Valley?s two big rivers meet before flowing into the San Francisco Bay; ?water from northern California reservoirs also has to pass through it to get to farmers and cities to the south. Here?s the state Water Resources Control Board?s?tally of the uses?for the 6 million acre-feet of water that flowed out of the delta in the 2014 water year:The ?hydraulic barrier? is fresh water flows devoted to keeping salt water from the San Francisco Bay out of the delta. Before the federal Central Valley Project started storing water behind Shasta Dam in 1944 for release during the summer, salt water intruded deep into the delta once every few summers. Using water stored in federal reservoirs to prevent that from happening was a major selling point of Central Valley Project for delta farmers. It is also essential to keeping salt water from infiltrating the pumps that send water south from the delta. So it?s a little hard to see that as water being ?diverted for environmental causes.?It?s a different story with the ?additional theoretical exports,? 747,000 acre-feet of water in 2014 that could have been pumped from the delta without risking salt-water incursion but wasn?t pumped mainly because of federal biologists? concerns about what this?would do to fish, endangered delta smelt in particular. The big lost opportunities come when a rainstorm floods the delta with fresh water -- and even in a drought, this still happens a few of times every winter. You can get a better picture of it from this chart:CALIFORNIA WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARDFarmers south of the delta find this enormously frustrating. The water?s there in the delta, but it can?t be pumped south?because of concerns about an endangered fish that?may well be doomed?for reasons having little to do with the pumps. The Peripheral Canal was meant in part as a way around this. It was to skirt the delta on the east, delivering?water from the Sacramento River?north of the delta to?the pumps at the south end of the delta, making it much less?likely that those pumps would suck in either smelts or salt water. People in the delta and the bay area were concerned that bypassing the delta would reduce the state?s interest in keeping it healthy and increase the capacity for shipping water south, so in the late 1970s and early 1980s Brown added lots of environmental commitments to the project. These turned out not to be enough to convince northern California voters, but too much for some big farmers in the southern part of the Central Valley who ended up opposing the project as well.Now Brown is?pushing for two giant tunnels?to do the same job as the Peripheral Canal. State water officials have also been?contemplating an off-stream reservoir?northwest of Sacramento that would take in Sacramento River water when it?s abundant and pump it back out when it?s not. These projects could conceivably ease current water shortages. As best I can tell, what we?re talking about is a difference of?maybe a million acre-feet of water in a drought year. That is nothing to sneeze at -- a?million acre-feet of water would be enough to quench almost 350,000 of California?s 9 million acres of irrigated farmland. About 428,000 acres were taken out of production last year because of the drought.?On the other hand, adding water supplies often just creates new demand -- and increased scrutiny of?water projects in California?over the past few decades has actually led to big improvements in both agricultural and urban water-use efficiency.?Yes, "the environment" is taking more?of California's water than it used to, and that's worth discussing. But it isn't exactly the water hog it is sometimes made out to be. ? - This is from the?California Water Today?chapter of the 2013 California Water Plan Update, which I don't link to in the text because it's a 56 megabyte pdf. Also, I prepared a similar but slightly different chart for an?earlier column?that showed applied water use instead of depleted water use.?? - This account is from Marc Reisner's epic Western water history,?? ?Cadillac Desert.??? - This account is from Norris Hundley Jr.?s even longer?California water history, ?The Great Thirst.?? - California?s rainy season runs from late fall through early spring, so water totals are usually measured from the beginning of October to the end of September. The 2014 water year, then, ran from Oct. 1, 2013, to Sept. 30, 2014.? To contact the author on this story: Justin Fox?at?justinfox at bloomberg.netTo contact the editor on this story: James Greiff?at?jgreiff at bloomberg.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu May 7 08:17:30 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 15:17:30 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Fishery and wildlife groups critical of LaMalfa Message-ID: <259482911.2021509.1431011850696.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Fishery and wildlife groups critical of LaMalfa | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | Fishery and wildlife groups critical of LaMalfaFisheries and environmental groups say the bill's amendments could cause a fish die-off in the Klamath River. | | | | View on www.redding.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | ? Fishery and wildlife groups critical of LaMalfa ADDRESS: Damon Arthur? 6:36 PM, May 6, 20157:03 PM, May 6, 2015local news?|?homepage showcase?|?tablet showcase?|?happening now??Copyright Associated PressFILE PHOTOSHOW CAPTIONREDDING, California - An amendment to a House appropriations bill to limit the amount of water sent down the Trinity River has come under fire from fish and wildlife groups that say the move could lead to a massive fish die-off downstream in the Klamath River.The amendment, by U.S. Rep. Doug LaMalfa, R-Richvale, would prohibit releasing more water from Lewiston Dam into the Trinity River in late summer to keep salmon from becoming sickened by fish diseases.LaMalfa said the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which controls the dam, should not be allowed to send more water downstream than allowed under 15-year-old agreement called the ?Record of Decision.??Despite the state?s historic drought, the bureau has diverted far more water for environmental purposes than the Record of Decision allows, depriving the state of water that could supply hundreds of thousands of Californians,? LaMalfa said in a recent news release.?We need every drop we can spare during this crisis, and this amendment will put an end to this misuse,? LaMalfa said.The amendment was added to the Energy and Water Appropriations bill, which the House approved last week.During the past three years the bureau has sent higher levels of colder water down the river to flush fish diseases out of the Klamath River.In the fall, thousands of salmon annually swim up the Klamath River, crowding into pools, where fish diseases can spread in the warmer water conditions. The past three years, the bureau has used water from the Trinity, which flows into the Klamath, to flush disease-causing pathogens out the river, ease fish crowding and lower the water temperature.The fisheries and environmental groups say the extra water is needed to prevent a fish die-off like the one that killed more than 35,000 fish in 2002.?Really, Mr. LaMalfa, by looking out for very well-off corporate farmers in the San Joaquin Valley, is doing a disservice to farmers in his own district,? said Felice Pace, a spokesman for the Klamath Forest Alliance.The past two years, the Westlands Water District and other San Joaquin Valley agriculture interests, unsuccessfully sued the bureau to stop the higher fall flows.If there is another fish die-off, the courts would likely order more water for Klamath salmon, hurting farmers who also rely on the water for irrigation, Pace said.?Whose interest does it serve to have a lot of dead fish?? Pace said.Glen Spain, Northwest regional director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen?s Associations, said a fish kill would also hurt the West Coast commercial and recreational fishing industry.?Again, it?s going to affect the economy of the whole Northern California if we have another fish kill,? Spain said.But Kevin Eastman, a spokesman for LaMalfa, said the Trinity water being sent downstream is needed to offset the effects of the drought statewide and in the city of Redding.?On a basic level, it is irresponsible for the bureau to arbitrarily ignore the ROD (Record of Decision) and divert additional water to environmental purposes when Californians across the state are facing mandatory rationing,? Eastman said.Higher flows down the Trinity River mean less water is piped over the mountains from Lewiston Lake to the Carr Powerhouse at Whiskeytown Lake and the Spring Creek Powerhouse at Keswick Lake.When those two powerhouses generate less electricity, Redding Electric Utility has to purchase more expensive power from other sources, Eastman said.?On a basic level, it is irresponsible for the bureau to arbitrarily ignore the ROD (Record of Decision) and divert additional water to environmental purposes when Californians across the state are facing mandatory rationing,? Eastman said.?Requiring the Bureau to maintain Trinity flows under the Record of Decision keeps more water available to all Central Valley Project water recipients, including Redding and agriculture in the North State,? he said.REU pays about $6.5 million a year for electricity from the Western Area Power Administration, which distributes the power, said Barry Tippin, Redding?s assistant city manager. The city pays hundreds of thousands of dollars more for power if it has to get electricity from other sources when hydropower generation runs low, he said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu May 7 12:05:51 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 19:05:51 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Bacher: Governor Jerry Brown tells tunnels critics to "Shut Up" Message-ID: <1470839444.2208142.1431025551718.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/05/06/18771989.php ?Governor Jerry Brown tells tunnels critics to "Shut Up"by Dan Bacher? Wednesday May 6th, 2015 5:46 PM? "Until you've put a million hours into it, SHUT UP!" said Brown, referring to critics of his tunnels and Delta policies.?? Photo of Governor Jerry Brown after receiving a new bowl for his dog, Sutter, from leaders of the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) at their conference in Sacramento today. Photo by Dan Bacher. 800_jerry_with_dog_bowl__... original image ( 960x640) Governor Jerry Brown tells tunnels critics to "Shut Up"?? by Dan Bacher?? In a moment of candor during a speech he gave at the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) conference in Sacramento today, Governor Jerry Brown told critics of his plan to build the twin tunnels to "shut up" unless they have spent a million hours working on the project like the state has.?? Brown told the crowd, ?I asked my water man how many man hours have gone into the Delta Project? One million."?? "Until you've put a million hours into it, SHUT UP!" said Brown, referring to critics of his tunnels and Delta policies.?? He added that even that if the staff had "wasted" 25 percent of their time, 250,000 hours, working on the project, that would still be 750,000 hours they spent on the projecet.?? "Let?s assume they wasted one quarter of the time,? Brown noted. ?It?s still 750,000 man hours. That?s a lot of stuff. So it is complicated. On this subject we want to be thoughtful. We don?t have to do it (just) to have something to do."? "We?re happy doing this Delta project because for 50 years people have tried to figure out how to deal with the fish, conveyance of water and the most efficient way to do it that protects all the different interests," he stated.? And those weren't the only bizarre things that Brown said in his rambling speech. Reverting from "Big Ag Brown" to "Governor Moonbeam" briefly, Brown talked about us being on "Spaceship Earth," how the astronauts recycled their urine and how "everything goes somewhere."?? And he had the gall to spout this eco-babble while his administration has pursued some of the worst policies for fish, water and the environment in California history! (http://www.truth-out.org/speakout/item/30452-the-extinction-governor-rips-the-green-mask-off-his-tunnels-plan)?? To watch the video of the speech by Gene Beley of the Central Valley Business Times, go to:?http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=28289?or?https://player.vimeo.com/video/127131251? Tom Stokely, Water Policy Analyst for the California Water Policy Network (C-WIN), responded to the Governor's "Shut Up" comment: "Money and time spent on a deeply flawed project is still a useless exercise and a waste of ratepayer and taxpayer money."?? "They've spent $240 million and have nothing to show for it other than a pile of documents 27 feet high," he stated. "The revised Bay-Delta Conservation Plan is an act of desperation to try and save a doomed project."? Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta (RTD), vowed, "We will not go away, and we will not shut up.??? She said that the Governor "has his fingers in his ears" and won't listen to criticism.?? Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, said, "A million hours is not enough obviously to know what's good for the Delta because those million hours must not have included the path to extinction of the Delta smelt and salmon. These fish are so necesssary to the Delta - there won't be a Delta without the smelt and salmon. The smelt and salmon have been here for over six thousand years.?? "If people want to survive, they can't trust the Governor and staff, who have only spent a million hours on this project," Chief Sisk said. "The Delta has been dying since they've been doing what they've been doing - and they don't even know that it's dying."?? During his speech, Brown quoted Edward O. Wilson, a preeminent biologist and naturalist, as he did before during his inaugural address this January:?? "Surely one moral precept we can agree on is to stop destroying our birthplace, the only home humanity will ever have. The evidence for climate warming, with industrial pollution as the principal cause, is now overwhelming. Also evident upon even casual inspection is the rapid disappearance of tropical forests and grasslands and other habitats where most of the diversity of life exists. We are needlessly turning the gold we inherited from our forebears into straw, and for that we will be despised by our descendants."? Osha Meserve, an attorney for Delta agricultural and environmental interests, pointed out the irony of Brown proclaiming "small is beautiful" and quoting from a notable biologist about the need to preserve California and the planet for future generations while promoting an environmentally destructive project like the Delta tunnels.? "Rerouting the Sacramento River into massive tunnels is an outdated nineteenth century approach to water supply that will destroy the largest estuary on the west coast," said Meserve. "We have an obligation to future generations to come up with more effective, long-term solutions using state of the art science to meet our State?s water needs."? Governor Brown continues to fast track his multi-billion dollar project to build the twin tunnels under the Sacramento San Joaquin River Delta to export massive amounts of water to Stewart Resnick, owner of Paramount Farms, and other corporate agribusiness interests, Southern California water agencies and oil companies conducting fracking and steam injection operations.?? On April 30 at a press conference in Oakland, Governor Brown and federal officials unveiled their revised plans for Delta conveyance and ecosystem "restoration."?? One major difference between the previous version of the BDCP and the latest incarnation is that it now calls for only "restoring" 30,000 acres for wetland and wildlife habitat - down from the 100,000 acres originally proposed.?? The other key difference is that the BDCP has been split into two components - The "California Water Fix" component for the tunnels and the "California Eco Restore" component for the habitat "restoration" component.?? "We've listened to the public and carefully studied the science," Brown claimed at the press conference, echoing his comments that he made regarding the tunnels plan at a news conference in Sacramento in July 2012.?? However, as the Governor's call for tunnels critics to "Shut Up" demonstrated, Brown neither listened to the public nor carefully studied the science. Every group of scientists that has reviewed the plan, ranging from the Delta Independent Science Board to the federal Environmental Protection Agency, has slammed the terminally flawed "science" behind the tunnels.?? There is no doubt that the tunnels will hasten the extinction of Sacramento River Chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, Delta and longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other species, as well as threatening the salmon and steelhead populations on the Trinity and Klamath rivers.?? While the Brown administration has mandated that urban families slash their water usage by 25 percent, California almond growers have expanded their almond acreage from 870,000 acres to 1,020,000 acres during the current drought. That's a 150,000 acre increase in acreage for almonds, a water-intensive crop, since the drought began. (http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/California/Publications/Fruits_and_Nuts/201504almac.pdf)? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From twashburn at usbr.gov Thu May 7 12:04:27 2015 From: twashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy) Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 12:04:27 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Trinity River Message-ID: Please make the following release change to the Trinity River. *Date* *Time* *From (cfs)* *To (cfs)* 5/12/2015 1400 2,900 2,700 5/12/2015 1800 2,700 2,500 5/12/2015 2200 2,500 2,300 5/13/2015 200 2,300 2,100 5/13/2015 600 2,100 2,000 5/24/2015 600 2,000 1,900 5/26/2015 200 1,900 1,800 5/30/2015 200 1,800 1,700 5/30/2015 1000 1,700 1,600 5/30/2015 1800 1,600 1,500 5/30/2015 2200 1,500 1,400 5/31/2015 200 1,400 1,300 5/31/2015 600 1,300 1,200 6/5/2015 600 1,200 1,100 6/7/2015 2200 1,100 1,000 6/8/2015 2200 1,000 900 6/10/2015 2200 900 800 6/11/2015 2200 800 700 6/18/2015 2200 700 650 6/20/2015 2200 650 600 6/24/2015 2200 600 550 6/27/2015 2200 550 500 6/30/2015 2200 500 450 10/15/2015 200 450 400 10/16/2015 200 400 350 10/17/2015 200 350 300 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Trinity Pulse Flow -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at att.net Thu May 7 12:39:01 2015 From: kierassociates at att.net (Kier Associates) Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 12:39:01 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Bacher: Governor Jerry Brown tells tunnels critics to "Shut Up" In-Reply-To: <1470839444.2208142.1431025551718.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1470839444.2208142.1431025551718.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001101d088fd$78c98300$6a5c8900$@att.net> Well, at least he didn?t call us punks ?. From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 12:06 PM To: Env-trinity Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Bacher: Governor Jerry Brown tells tunnels critics to "Shut Up" https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/05/06/18771989.php Governor Jerry Brown tells tunnels critics to "Shut Up" by Dan Bacher Wednesday May 6th, 2015 5:46 PM "Until you've put a million hours into it, SHUT UP!" said Brown, referring to critics of his tunnels and Delta policies. Photo of Governor Jerry Brown after receiving a new bowl for his dog, Sutter, from leaders of the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) at their conference in Sacramento today. Photo by Dan Bacher. Description: Image removed by sender. 800_jerry_with_dog_bowl__1_1.jpg original image ( 960x640) 800_jerry_with_dog_bowl__... original image ( 960x640) Governor Jerry Brown tells tunnels critics to "Shut Up" by Dan Bacher In a moment of candor during a speech he gave at the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) conference in Sacramento today, Governor Jerry Brown told critics of his plan to build the twin tunnels to "shut up" unless they have spent a million hours working on the project like the state has. Brown told the crowd, ?I asked my water man how many man hours have gone into the Delta Project? One million." "Until you've put a million hours into it, SHUT UP!" said Brown, referring to critics of his tunnels and Delta policies. He added that even that if the staff had "wasted" 25 percent of their time, 250,000 hours, working on the project, that would still be 750,000 hours they spent on the projecet. "Let?s assume they wasted one quarter of the time,? Brown noted. ?It?s still 750,000 man hours. That?s a lot of stuff. So it is complicated. On this subject we want to be thoughtful. We don?t have to do it (just) to have something to do." "We?re happy doing this Delta project because for 50 years people have tried to figure out how to deal with the fish, conveyance of water and the most efficient way to do it that protects all the different interests," he stated. And those weren't the only bizarre things that Brown said in his rambling speech. Reverting from "Big Ag Brown" to "Governor Moonbeam" briefly, Brown talked about us being on "Spaceship Earth," how the astronauts recycled their urine and how "everything goes somewhere." And he had the gall to spout this eco-babble while his administration has pursued some of the worst policies for fish, water and the environment in California history! ( http://www.truth-out.org/speakout/item/30452-the-extinction-governor-rips-the-green-mask-off-his-tunnels-plan) To watch the video of the speech by Gene Beley of the Central Valley Business Times, go to: http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=28289 or https://player.vimeo.com/video/127131251 Tom Stokely, Water Policy Analyst for the California Water Policy Network (C-WIN), responded to the Governor's "Shut Up" comment: "Money and time spent on a deeply flawed project is still a useless exercise and a waste of ratepayer and taxpayer money." "They've spent $240 million and have nothing to show for it other than a pile of documents 27 feet high," he stated. "The revised Bay-Delta Conservation Plan is an act of desperation to try and save a doomed project." Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta (RTD), vowed, "We will not go away, and we will not shut up.? She said that the Governor "has his fingers in his ears" and won't listen to criticism. Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, said, "A million hours is not enough obviously to know what's good for the Delta because those million hours must not have included the path to extinction of the Delta smelt and salmon. These fish are so necesssary to the Delta - there won't be a Delta without the smelt and salmon. The smelt and salmon have been here for over six thousand years. "If people want to survive, they can't trust the Governor and staff, who have only spent a million hours on this project," Chief Sisk said. "The Delta has been dying since they've been doing what they've been doing - and they don't even know that it's dying." During his speech, Brown quoted Edward O. Wilson, a preeminent biologist and naturalist, as he did before during his inaugural address this January: "Surely one moral precept we can agree on is to stop destroying our birthplace, the only home humanity will ever have. The evidence for climate warming, with industrial pollution as the principal cause, is now overwhelming. Also evident upon even casual inspection is the rapid disappearance of tropical forests and grasslands and other habitats where most of the diversity of life exists. We are needlessly turning the gold we inherited from our forebears into straw, and for that we will be despised by our descendants." Osha Meserve, an attorney for Delta agricultural and environmental interests, pointed out the irony of Brown proclaiming "small is beautiful" and quoting from a notable biologist about the need to preserve California and the planet for future generations while promoting an environmentally destructive project like the Delta tunnels. "Rerouting the Sacramento River into massive tunnels is an outdated nineteenth century approach to water supply that will destroy the largest estuary on the west coast," said Meserve. "We have an obligation to future generations to come up with more effective, long-term solutions using state of the art science to meet our State?s water needs." Governor Brown continues to fast track his multi-billion dollar project to build the twin tunnels under the Sacramento San Joaquin River Delta to export massive amounts of water to Stewart Resnick, owner of Paramount Farms, and other corporate agribusiness interests, Southern California water agencies and oil companies conducting fracking and steam injection operations. On April 30 at a press conference in Oakland, Governor Brown and federal officials unveiled their revised plans for Delta conveyance and ecosystem "restoration." One major difference between the previous version of the BDCP and the latest incarnation is that it now calls for only "restoring" 30,000 acres for wetland and wildlife habitat - down from the 100,000 acres originally proposed. The other key difference is that the BDCP has been split into two components - The "California Water Fix" component for the tunnels and the "California Eco Restore" component for the habitat "restoration" component. "We've listened to the public and carefully studied the science," Brown claimed at the press conference, echoing his comments that he made regarding the tunnels plan at a news conference in Sacramento in July 2012. However, as the Governor's call for tunnels critics to "Shut Up" demonstrated, Brown neither listened to the public nor carefully studied the science. Every group of scientists that has reviewed the plan, ranging from the Delta Independent Science Board to the federal Environmental Protection Agency, has slammed the terminally flawed "science" behind the tunnels. There is no doubt that the tunnels will hasten the extinction of Sacramento River Chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, Delta and longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other species, as well as threatening the salmon and steelhead populations on the Trinity and Klamath rivers. While the Brown administration has mandated that urban families slash their water usage by 25 percent, California almond growers have expanded their almond acreage from 870,000 acres to 1,020,000 acres during the current drought. That's a 150,000 acre increase in acreage for almonds, a water-intensive crop, since the drought began. ( http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/California/Publications/Fruits_and_Nuts/201504almac.pdf) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 5357 bytes Desc: not available URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Thu May 7 12:45:55 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 12:45:55 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Bacher: Governor Jerry Brown tells tunnels critics to "Shut Up" In-Reply-To: <001101d088fd$78c98300$6a5c8900$@att.net> References: <1470839444.2208142.1431025551718.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <001101d088fd$78c98300$6a5c8900$@att.net> Message-ID: <8E0BB060-F0F2-4C25-AB6A-4D12B02538D7@fishsniffer.com> That comes later... On May 7, 2015, at 12:39 PM, Kier Associates wrote: > Well, at least he didn?t call us punks ?. > From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > ] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely > Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 12:06 PM > To: Env-trinity > Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Bacher: Governor Jerry Brown tells > tunnels critics to "Shut Up" > > https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/05/06/18771989.php > > Governor Jerry Brown tells tunnels critics to "Shut Up" > by Dan Bacher > Wednesday May 6th, 2015 5:46 PM > "Until you've put a million hours into it, SHUT UP!" said Brown, > referring to critics of his tunnels and Delta policies. > > Photo of Governor Jerry Brown after receiving a new bowl for his > dog, Sutter, from leaders of the Association of California Water > Agencies (ACWA) at their conference in Sacramento today. Photo by > Dan Bacher. > > 800_jerry_with_dog_bowl__... > original image ( 960x640) > > Governor Jerry Brown tells tunnels critics to "Shut Up" > > by Dan Bacher > > In a moment of candor during a speech he gave at the Association of > California Water Agencies (ACWA) conference in Sacramento today, > Governor Jerry Brown told critics of his plan to build the twin > tunnels to "shut up" unless they have spent a million hours working > on the project like the state has. > > Brown told the crowd, ?I asked my water man how many man hours have > gone into the Delta Project? One million." > > "Until you've put a million hours into it, SHUT UP!" said Brown, > referring to critics of his tunnels and Delta policies. > > He added that even that if the staff had "wasted" 25 percent of > their time, 250,000 hours, working on the project, that would still > be 750,000 hours they spent on the projecet. > > "Let?s assume they wasted one quarter of the time,? Brown noted. > ?It?s still 750,000 man hours. That?s a lot of stuff. So it is > complicated. On this subject we want to be thoughtful. We don?t have > to do it (just) to have something to do." > > "We?re happy doing this Delta project because for 50 years people > have tried to figure out how to deal with the fish, conveyance of > water and the most efficient way to do it that protects all the > different interests," he stated. > > And those weren't the only bizarre things that Brown said in his > rambling speech. Reverting from "Big Ag Brown" to "Governor > Moonbeam" briefly, Brown talked about us being on "Spaceship Earth," > how the astronauts recycled their urine and how "everything goes > somewhere." > > And he had the gall to spout this eco-babble while his > administration has pursued some of the worst policies for fish, > water and the environment in California history! (http://www.truth-out.org/speakout/item/30452-the-extinction-governor-rips-the-green-mask-off-his-tunnels-plan > ) > > To watch the video of the speech by Gene Beley of the Central Valley > Business Times, go to: http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=28289 > or https://player.vimeo.com/video/127131251 > > Tom Stokely, Water Policy Analyst for the California Water Policy > Network (C-WIN), responded to the Governor's "Shut Up" comment: > "Money and time spent on a deeply flawed project is still a useless > exercise and a waste of ratepayer and taxpayer money." > > "They've spent $240 million and have nothing to show for it other > than a pile of documents 27 feet high," he stated. "The revised Bay- > Delta Conservation Plan is an act of desperation to try and save a > doomed project." > > Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta > (RTD), vowed, "We will not go away, and we will not shut up.? > > She said that the Governor "has his fingers in his ears" and won't > listen to criticism. > > Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, > said, "A million hours is not enough obviously to know what's good > for the Delta because those million hours must not have included the > path to extinction of the Delta smelt and salmon. These fish are so > necesssary to the Delta - there won't be a Delta without the smelt > and salmon. The smelt and salmon have been here for over six > thousand years. > > "If people want to survive, they can't trust the Governor and staff, > who have only spent a million hours on this project," Chief Sisk > said. "The Delta has been dying since they've been doing what > they've been doing - and they don't even know that it's dying." > > During his speech, Brown quoted Edward O. Wilson, a preeminent > biologist and naturalist, as he did before during his inaugural > address this January: > > "Surely one moral precept we can agree on is to stop destroying our > birthplace, the only home humanity will ever have. The evidence for > climate warming, with industrial pollution as the principal cause, > is now overwhelming. Also evident upon even casual inspection is the > rapid disappearance of tropical forests and grasslands and other > habitats where most of the diversity of life exists. We are > needlessly turning the gold we inherited from our forebears into > straw, and for that we will be despised by our descendants." > > Osha Meserve, an attorney for Delta agricultural and environmental > interests, pointed out the irony of Brown proclaiming "small is > beautiful" and quoting from a notable biologist about the need to > preserve California and the planet for future generations while > promoting an environmentally destructive project like the Delta > tunnels. > > "Rerouting the Sacramento River into massive tunnels is an outdated > nineteenth century approach to water supply that will destroy the > largest estuary on the west coast," said Meserve. "We have an > obligation to future generations to come up with more effective, > long-term solutions using state of the art science to meet our > State?s water needs." > > Governor Brown continues to fast track his multi-billion dollar > project to build the twin tunnels under the Sacramento San Joaquin > River Delta to export massive amounts of water to Stewart Resnick, > owner of Paramount Farms, and other corporate agribusiness > interests, Southern California water agencies and oil companies > conducting fracking and steam injection operations. > > On April 30 at a press conference in Oakland, Governor Brown and > federal officials unveiled their revised plans for Delta conveyance > and ecosystem "restoration." > > One major difference between the previous version of the BDCP and > the latest incarnation is that it now calls for only "restoring" > 30,000 acres for wetland and wildlife habitat - down from the > 100,000 acres originally proposed. > > The other key difference is that the BDCP has been split into two > components - The "California Water Fix" component for the tunnels > and the "California Eco Restore" component for the habitat > "restoration" component. > > "We've listened to the public and carefully studied the science," > Brown claimed at the press conference, echoing his comments that he > made regarding the tunnels plan at a news conference in Sacramento > in July 2012. > > However, as the Governor's call for tunnels critics to "Shut Up" > demonstrated, Brown neither listened to the public nor carefully > studied the science. Every group of scientists that has reviewed the > plan, ranging from the Delta Independent Science Board to the > federal Environmental Protection Agency, has slammed the terminally > flawed "science" behind the tunnels. > > There is no doubt that the tunnels will hasten the extinction of > Sacramento River Chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, Delta and > longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other species, as well as > threatening the salmon and steelhead populations on the Trinity and > Klamath rivers. > > While the Brown administration has mandated that urban families > slash their water usage by 25 percent, California almond growers > have expanded their almond acreage from 870,000 acres to 1,020,000 > acres during the current drought. That's a 150,000 acre increase in > acreage for almonds, a water-intensive crop, since the drought > began. (http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/California/Publications/Fruits_and_Nuts/201504almac.pdf > ) > > _______________________________________________ > 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 rukim1259 at sbcglobal.net Thu May 7 12:49:34 2015 From: rukim1259 at sbcglobal.net (Rukim1259@sbcglobal.net) Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 12:49:34 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Bacher: Governor Jerry Brown tells tunnels critics to "Shut Up" In-Reply-To: <001101d088fd$78c98300$6a5c8900$@att.net> References: <1470839444.2208142.1431025551718.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <001101d088fd$78c98300$6a5c8900$@att.net> Message-ID: <50466CC4-5623-4630-A637-A4672522F5E7@sbcglobal.net> The Governors comments presupposes government doesn't make mistakes which is nonsense. Exhibit 1 is the corroding Bay Bridge that he and Willie Brown orchestrated. Sent from my I-phone > On May 7, 2015, at 12:39 PM, Kier Associates wrote: > > Well, at least he didn?t call us punks ?. > From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely > Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2015 12:06 PM > To: Env-trinity > Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Bacher: Governor Jerry Brown tells tunnels critics to "Shut Up" > > https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/05/06/18771989.php > > Governor Jerry Brown tells tunnels critics to "Shut Up" > by Dan Bacher > Wednesday May 6th, 2015 5:46 PM > "Until you've put a million hours into it, SHUT UP!" said Brown, referring to critics of his tunnels and Delta policies. > > Photo of Governor Jerry Brown after receiving a new bowl for his dog, Sutter, from leaders of the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) at their conference in Sacramento today. Photo by Dan Bacher. > > 800_jerry_with_dog_bowl__... > original image ( 960x640) > > Governor Jerry Brown tells tunnels critics to "Shut Up" > > by Dan Bacher > > In a moment of candor during a speech he gave at the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) conference in Sacramento today, Governor Jerry Brown told critics of his plan to build the twin tunnels to "shut up" unless they have spent a million hours working on the project like the state has. > > Brown told the crowd, ?I asked my water man how many man hours have gone into the Delta Project? One million." > > "Until you've put a million hours into it, SHUT UP!" said Brown, referring to critics of his tunnels and Delta policies. > > He added that even that if the staff had "wasted" 25 percent of their time, 250,000 hours, working on the project, that would still be 750,000 hours they spent on the projecet. > > "Let?s assume they wasted one quarter of the time,? Brown noted. ?It?s still 750,000 man hours. That?s a lot of stuff. So it is complicated. On this subject we want to be thoughtful. We don?t have to do it (just) to have something to do." > > "We?re happy doing this Delta project because for 50 years people have tried to figure out how to deal with the fish, conveyance of water and the most efficient way to do it that protects all the different interests," he stated. > > And those weren't the only bizarre things that Brown said in his rambling speech. Reverting from "Big Ag Brown" to "Governor Moonbeam" briefly, Brown talked about us being on "Spaceship Earth," how the astronauts recycled their urine and how "everything goes somewhere." > > And he had the gall to spout this eco-babble while his administration has pursued some of the worst policies for fish, water and the environment in California history! (http://www.truth-out.org/speakout/item/30452-the-extinction-governor-rips-the-green-mask-off-his-tunnels-plan) > > To watch the video of the speech by Gene Beley of the Central Valley Business Times, go to: http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=28289 or https://player.vimeo.com/video/127131251 > > Tom Stokely, Water Policy Analyst for the California Water Policy Network (C-WIN), responded to the Governor's "Shut Up" comment: "Money and time spent on a deeply flawed project is still a useless exercise and a waste of ratepayer and taxpayer money." > > "They've spent $240 million and have nothing to show for it other than a pile of documents 27 feet high," he stated. "The revised Bay-Delta Conservation Plan is an act of desperation to try and save a doomed project." > > Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta (RTD), vowed, "We will not go away, and we will not shut up.? > > She said that the Governor "has his fingers in his ears" and won't listen to criticism. > > Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, said, "A million hours is not enough obviously to know what's good for the Delta because those million hours must not have included the path to extinction of the Delta smelt and salmon. These fish are so necesssary to the Delta - there won't be a Delta without the smelt and salmon. The smelt and salmon have been here for over six thousand years. > > "If people want to survive, they can't trust the Governor and staff, who have only spent a million hours on this project," Chief Sisk said. "The Delta has been dying since they've been doing what they've been doing - and they don't even know that it's dying." > > During his speech, Brown quoted Edward O. Wilson, a preeminent biologist and naturalist, as he did before during his inaugural address this January: > > "Surely one moral precept we can agree on is to stop destroying our birthplace, the only home humanity will ever have. The evidence for climate warming, with industrial pollution as the principal cause, is now overwhelming. Also evident upon even casual inspection is the rapid disappearance of tropical forests and grasslands and other habitats where most of the diversity of life exists. We are needlessly turning the gold we inherited from our forebears into straw, and for that we will be despised by our descendants." > > Osha Meserve, an attorney for Delta agricultural and environmental interests, pointed out the irony of Brown proclaiming "small is beautiful" and quoting from a notable biologist about the need to preserve California and the planet for future generations while promoting an environmentally destructive project like the Delta tunnels. > > "Rerouting the Sacramento River into massive tunnels is an outdated nineteenth century approach to water supply that will destroy the largest estuary on the west coast," said Meserve. "We have an obligation to future generations to come up with more effective, long-term solutions using state of the art science to meet our State?s water needs." > > Governor Brown continues to fast track his multi-billion dollar project to build the twin tunnels under the Sacramento San Joaquin River Delta to export massive amounts of water to Stewart Resnick, owner of Paramount Farms, and other corporate agribusiness interests, Southern California water agencies and oil companies conducting fracking and steam injection operations. > > On April 30 at a press conference in Oakland, Governor Brown and federal officials unveiled their revised plans for Delta conveyance and ecosystem "restoration." > > One major difference between the previous version of the BDCP and the latest incarnation is that it now calls for only "restoring" 30,000 acres for wetland and wildlife habitat - down from the 100,000 acres originally proposed. > > The other key difference is that the BDCP has been split into two components - The "California Water Fix" component for the tunnels and the "California Eco Restore" component for the habitat "restoration" component. > > "We've listened to the public and carefully studied the science," Brown claimed at the press conference, echoing his comments that he made regarding the tunnels plan at a news conference in Sacramento in July 2012. > > However, as the Governor's call for tunnels critics to "Shut Up" demonstrated, Brown neither listened to the public nor carefully studied the science. Every group of scientists that has reviewed the plan, ranging from the Delta Independent Science Board to the federal Environmental Protection Agency, has slammed the terminally flawed "science" behind the tunnels. > > There is no doubt that the tunnels will hasten the extinction of Sacramento River Chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, Delta and longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other species, as well as threatening the salmon and steelhead populations on the Trinity and Klamath rivers. > > While the Brown administration has mandated that urban families slash their water usage by 25 percent, California almond growers have expanded their almond acreage from 870,000 acres to 1,020,000 acres during the current drought. That's a 150,000 acre increase in acreage for almonds, a water-intensive crop, since the drought began. (http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/California/Publications/Fruits_and_Nuts/201504almac.pdf) > > _______________________________________________ > 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: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 5357 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri May 8 08:04:58 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 8 May 2015 15:04:58 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com Editorial: What's the responsible path here? Message-ID: <352809665.2720205.1431097498404.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-whats-the-responsible-path-here_39939754 ? Editorial: What's the responsible path here? 6:00 PM, May 7, 20156:17 PM, May 7, 2015editorials?On the face of it, Congressman Doug LaMalfa?s recent amendment to a House appropriations bill limiting the amount of water sent down the Trinity River sounds almost humanitarian.LaMalfa, R-Richvale, says he hopes to accomplish two very important things by forcing the transfer of water released from Lewiston Lake east toward the Sacramento River instead.Sending water our way puts it into a place where it could supply hundreds of thousands of Californians suffering from the four-year drought. And on its way that water will do double duty as it passes through the Carr Powerhouse at Whiskeytown Lake and the Spring Creek Powerhouse at Keswick Lake.Those powerhouses generate electricity for the Redding Electric Utility. The more hydropower they generate, the less REU has to buy power from elsewhere, where it?s more expensive.?We need every drop we can spare during this crisis and this amendment will put an end to this misuse,? LaMalfa said in a statement.LaMalfa, a rice farmer, understand farmers? needs. Although his farms draw on Feather River water, he knows the importance of every drop to the powerful Westlands Water District and farming interests in the San Joaquin Valley.LaMalfa accuses the Bureau of Reclamation of violating the Trinity Record of Decision, an agreement signed in 2000 by the Hoopa Valley Tribe and the Department of the Interior after 20 years of environmental studies. It?s a compromise agreement seeking to repair endangered salmon habitat almost destroyed by damming the Trinity River.It sets suggested appropriate water flows for dry years and wet years and those in between ? flows LaMalfa says are ?required,? but abandoned by the bureau. But that?s not really the case. The agreement recommends a peak flow of 4,500 cubic feet a second in dry years. That is not a requirement. It?s a recommendation.And, as we learned to our dismay in another drought year ? 2002 ? two years after the agreement was signed, there are times when those recommendations just aren?t sufficient. In that year more than 35,000 chinook salmon and other fish died after the Bush Administration ordered diversion of Klamath River water to farmers in Oregon and far Northern California. Scientists concluded the water levels fell too low for that fall?s salmon run, and the water got too warm. The fish sickened and died. Thousands of them, scarred and covered with ulcers, littered the shores. So now, especially in drought years, the bureau exceeds the recommended releases in an effort to flush disease-causing pathogens out of the river and ease fish crowding. This years?s release peaked this week when it hit 8,500 cfs on Tuesday and Wednesday. By next Tuesday the flow will be back down to 2,900 cfs ? well below the peak recommended level.True, that?s a lot of water released over a few days, but we?re talking here about saving a species. We?re also talking about a huge North State tourist attraction drawing anglers from all over the globe. We?re talking about tribes with rights to some of those fish.Farm interests from the Central Valley and Westlands have joined together in lawsuits aimed at tapping the bulk of that water meant to save the salmon. In 2013 a federal judge in Fresno actually reversed his initial ruling in their favor after hearing more evidence, and approved sending additional water down the Trinity to help those spawning Chinook. He found that failing to provide more water to help the fish would cause more environmental harm than it would prevent.As for Redding?s need for more water to support its ?sustainable energy? hydropower, what?s sustainable about killing off a species?LaMalfa thinks the bureau?s releases are irresponsible. They are precisely the opposite.Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Sun May 10 11:10:32 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Sun, 10 May 2015 11:10:32 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Sacramento Bee Editorial- "Prepare for a deluge as Delta begins boiling over"/ In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Good Morning In case you've missed it, here's Dan Morain's editorial on the twin tunnels. Thanks Dan http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/dan-morain/article20605575.html Prepare for a deluge as Delta begins boiling over Dan Morain Editorial page editor, political affairs columnist and editorial writer Gov. Jerry Brown, speaking at the Association of California Water Agencies conference last week, made clear that in his fourth and final term, he intends to build twin tunnels through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. | Rich Pedroncelli The Associated Press By Dan Moraindmorain at sacbee.com JOIN THE CONVERSATION: Why should the plan to build twin tunnels to transfer water from the Sacramento River to south of the Delta be put to a popular vote? Submit a letter or comment on our Facebook page. Jerry Brown was sounding a little like an eccentric uncle-governor the other day as he muttered about Spaceship Earth, how he got the Moonbeam moniker, and, yes, the need to recycle human waste into water. Wearing a sweater and no tie, the governor was at ease among the 1,000 or so Association of California Water Agencies conventioneers at the Sheraton last week as he gave one of his most direct pitches yet for his Delta plan. That?s the one that includes two 40-foot-wide, 35-mile- long tunnels, which will cost $17 billion, give or take. Citing the research and engineering that has gone into the plan, the governor, his unscripted tongue in his cheek, sort of, said: ?Until you put a million hours into it, shut up.? The comment elicited laughs and huzzahs from the audience, though his critics used the opportunity to issue huffy statements expressing their dismay. Coming in a week when his appointees on the State Water Resources Control Board ordered deep cuts in residential water usage, Brown made clear that in his fourth and final term, he intends to get stuff done, specifically, the tunnel project. He believes it?s the only reliable way of moving water around the Delta to the farms and cities to the south. ?You have to build some things. We have got to get water to people,? Brown said. It was no coincidence that a well-financed political group calledCalifornians for Water Security unveiled a slick ad and lobbying campaign last week. Californians for Water Security includes organized labor, the building trades, business groups including the California Chamber of Commerce, and the state?s largest farming interests. ?We must act urgently to protect the water supply for California?s homes, farms and businesses, while restoring the environment of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta,? the group said in a letter signed by representatives of nearly 50 unions, business groups and water agencies. Its spokespeople won?t say how much is being spent in the first ad buy. ?We?re certainly not done yet,? Democratic consultant Robin Swanson said. Assume the well is deep. They?ll need it. Wealthy Stockton-area farmer Dean Cortopassi, who like Brown is a septuagenarian, and his wife, Joan, have spent $2 million to qualify an initiative for the 2016 ballot that would require a statewide vote on any state projects costing $2 billion or more that rely on revenue bonds. Read: Delta tunnels and high-speed rail. ?This measure puts the brakes on our state?s public debt crisis by giving the voters a say in all major state bond debt proposals that must be repaid through specific revenue streams or charges imposed directly on Californians like taxes, fees, rates, tolls or rents,? says the initiative, which was written by attorneys at the political law firm Nielsen Merksamer. To run the campaign, Cortopassi has retained Democratic consultant Andrew Acosta and Meridian Pacific, a Republican consulting firm whose founder, Matt Rexroad, is a Yolo County supervisor. ?It doesn?t stop the tunnels,? said Meridian Pacific partner Tom Ross. ?It would require a vote on projects of $2 billion or more. It requires a public discussion on the tunnels. We would have a discussion on high-speed rail.? Although Cortopassi will have allies, the vast majority of the power and money will be on the other side. The anti-tunnel group, Restore the Delta, released emails showing that Paramount Farms, one of the largest land holders and growers in the state, is a driving force behind Californians for Water Security. As he often does, Brown in his speech to the water association looked to history. Gov. Goodwin Knight was working on a trans-Delta conveyance back in the 1950s. Brown?s father did the same in 1960s. Brown tried too when he was governor 40 years ago. ?If these problems aren?t handled, they get worse and don?t go away,? Brown said last week. Brown has surrounded himself with lifelong environmentalists. Like Brown, the governor?s aides would never think to drive the Delta to ruin or cause the extinction of species so cattle ranchers, almond growers and land speculators could make more money. But there?s also an incongruity between Brown?s advocacy of the tunnels and his governing philosophy. He talks about subsidiarity, the notion that issues and problems ought to be handled locally if at all possible. If he were to apply that to water, local water districts would focus more on recycling, conservation and underground storage. He advocates alternatives to a centralized system of energy delivery and wants to wean commuters off gasoline-powered cars. The state uses huge amounts of energy to move water over the Tehachapi Mountains. He?s certain that climate change is disrupting weather patterns. Why, then, depend on massive new tunnels to move what could be an uncertain supply of water? He talks about frugality and the need to pay off California?s accumulated debt, but remains intent on building the $17 billion tunnels to move water around the Delta. Perhaps the tunnels are the best solution for the Delta and California?s 39 million residents. I haven?t spent a million hours studying the situation. But in the coming months, as our lawns turn brown, our showers get shorter and our water bills rise, we all will become steeped in the Delta, and likely be called upon to vote on its future. Follow Dan Morain on Twitter @danielmorain. 2. Report on North Coast film night 800_image2.jpg original image ( 2448x3264) Photo of people listening to Chief Caleen Sisk's presentation in Arcata on May 8 by Allie Hostler. Tribal water activists organize to stop the California Water Heist North Coast event highlights drought related threats to rivers by Dan Bacher Tribal water activists presented short films about threats to Northern California?s rivers from Governor Jerry Brown?s drought plans at Arcata?s D Street Community Center on the evening of Friday, May 8. The films included the Yurok Youth Fish Kill video, Sovereigns Water and the Shasta Dam raise video, according to event organizer Regina Chichizola. The speakers explained to a crowd of 40 people that Northwestern California water from the Trinity River and Shasta reservoirs are shipped hundreds of miles to benefit California?s agriculture industry, which continues to use 80 percent of California?s water on water intensive crops during the record drought. ?Even though average Californians are being asked to cut their water use, corporate agriculture interests are expanding their acreage in the driest areas of California,? said Chichizola, "and they are planning to destroy Northern California?s rivers and flood sacred sites to keep up their unsustainable water.? Chichizola noted that almond acreage alone has gone up over 150,000 acres since the drought began, yet Governor Jerry Brown on May 6 told environmentalists to "Shut Up" in response to criticism over his twin tunnel plans. (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/05/06/18771989.php) The film night focused on impacts to Northern California?s rivers from water diversions and how politicians and corporate agribusiness interests are using the drought to push through new harmful water policy and projects, such as the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP), the Shasta dam raise, and drought legislation, while allowing the state?s aquifers to be drained. Native American speakers highlighted how the proposed Shasta dam raise, which threatens over 40 actively used sacred sites of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, and how the continued water exports to the Central Valley threaten the Trinity and Klamath River salmon and Tribes. They also shared efforts by Tribal activists and other river and salmon activists to stop what they called the "biggest planned water heist in decades." The speakers included Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe; Jene McCovey, Yurok Tribe Member; Allie Hostler, Hoopa Valley Tribe Member; Dania Rose Colegrove, Hoopa Valley Tribe Member; and Will Doolittle, Filmmaker. Chief Caleen Sisk said the water bond, peripheral tunnels, Shasta Dam raise and other water projects now being planned by the state and federal governments are in in reality "one Big Project" that will destroy salmon, rivers and groundwater supplies. ?It does not make sense that people are separating the water puzzle into individual pieces, such as: the raising of Shasta Dam, Proposition 1, the Delta tunnels, BDCP, Sites Reservoir, Temperance Flat, CALFED, Delta Vision, BDCP, OCAP, the Bay Delta, Trinity/Klamath Rivers, the Sacramento River, the San Joaquin River, and water rights," said Chief Sisk. "It is all one BIG Project." She emphasized, "These are not separate projects; they are all the same thing that the State is asking us to fund - California water being manipulated for the enrichment of some and the devastation of cultures, environments, and species all in the name of higher profits.? On May 6, Governor Brown told the crowd at the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) Conference, ?I asked my water man sitting over there how many man and woman hours have gone into the Delta Project? Would you tell them? One million!" "Until you've put a million hours into it, Shut Up!" said Brown, referring to critics of his tunnels and Delta policies. In response, Chief Sisk said, "A million hours is not enough obviously to know what's good for the Delta because those million hours must not have included the path to extinction of the Delta smelt and salmon. These fish are so necesssary to the Delta - there won't be a Delta without the smelt and salmon. The smelt and salmon have been here for over six thousand years. "If people want to survive, they can't trust the Governor and staff, who have only spent a million hours on this project," Chief Sisk said. "The Delta has been dying since they've been doing what they've been doing - and they don't even know that it's dying." For more information about this and future events, call Regina Chichizola: (541) 951-0126 http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/05/09/18772117.php http://www.calitics.com/diary/15730/tribal-water-activists-organize-to-stop-the-california-water-heist http://www.fishsniffer.com/blogs/details/north-coast-organizes-to-fight-drought-related-threats-to-rivers/ Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/dan-morain/article20605575.html#storylink =cpy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: dan_morain.png Type: image/png Size: 27447 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: California Drought (3).jpeg Type: image/jpeg Size: 58123 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_image2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 309886 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed May 13 09:05:51 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 16:05:51 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] East Bay Express Editorial: No, Governor Brown, You Shut Up Message-ID: <1817267523.1396716.1431533151758.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/no-governor-brown-you-shut-up/Content?oid=4278727 ?? No, Governor Brown, You Shut Up? Just kidding. Umm, not really. By?Robert Gammon?@RobertGammonEmailPrintclick to enlarge - - Governor Brown. Last week, Governor Jerry Brown told critics to "shut up" about his $15 billion plan to build two giant water tunnels underneath the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. Critics of his plan include numerous environmental groups and the editorial boards of several major newspapers, including the?San Francisco Chronicle, the?San Jose Mercury News, and the?Sacramento Bee, which have all called on Brown to torpedo his tunnels proposal. A spokesperson later said that the governor was only "kidding," when he told his critics to clam up. But numerous journalists, including?Los Angeles Times?columnist George Skelton, have noted that Brown sure didn't look like he was kidding when he made the remark to the leaders of several water agencies.Regardless, it's clear that Brown was not joking about the substance of what he was saying: that those who oppose the tunnels plan are wrong. The governor argued that state water officials know best because, he said, they have spent "one million hours" studying the tunnels proposal. In short, Brown was essentially saying, "Trust us. We know better."Sorry, Governor Brown, but that's not good enough, especially considering the poor track record your administration has on major projects and environmental issues, and the bogus assurances from state officials to "ignore critics, and trust us, because we know better." Here are just a few examples:? State transportation officials repeatedly tried to reassure the public over the past several years that engineering experts were wrong about the shoddy workmanship on the new Bay Bridge and that the $6.4 billion eastern span is perfectly safe. Turns out, the experts were right all along.The new bridge, as we now know, thanks mostly to the experts and to?Chronicle?investigative reporter Jaxon Van Derbeken, is riddled with problems ? including corrosion issues, broken steel rods, and bad welds. Concerns are legitimate that the new bridge, which was built at great expense to replace the old seismically unsafe one, may be vulnerable to catastrophic failure during a major quake. Even Steve Heminger, executive director of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, is now calling the bridge the "project from hell."? Brown administration officials also told us for years that fracking for oil in California was safe and that calls for a moratorium on the fossil-fuel extraction method were reckless. Of course, we now know definitively that officials within the Brown administration's Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources have been allowing oil companies to inject toxic fracking wastewater into underground aquifers that could be needed for drinking water ? particularly during the drought.And if that were not bad enough, there's this: Scientists with the US Geological Survey have concluded that injecting fracking wastewater into the ground triggers earthquakes. In other words, fracking is anything but safe, and in a seismically active state like California, it's reckless.? State regulators also told us repeatedly for years that PG&E's underground natural gas pipelines were safe ? another blatant falsehood, it turns out. Governor Brown himself also told us that we should "trust" Michael Peevey, the then-chair of the California Public Utilities Commission. Later, we found out the truth: Peevey, who was supposed to oversee the regulation of PG&E, was instead secretly colluding with the utility to help it escape accountability and punishment for its pipeline-safety negligence.In short, Governor Brown, trusting the assurances that state officials "know better" because "they've studied the issues longer" is ignoring reality. Californians have every right to be skeptical about practically anything state officials say, especially when it comes to large, expensive public works projects and the state's ability to pull them off.Which brings us back to the water tunnels. It's a devilishly difficult project, involving the construction of two massive, 35-mile-long tunnels underneath the fragile delta. And while state officials may have spent "one million hours" studying this complex plan, there are good reasons to believe it won't work, and could end up ruining the largest estuary on the West Coast.The whole idea behind the tunnels is to take freshwater from the Sacramento River?before?it reaches the delta, and then ship it south to agribusinesses in the San Joaquin Valley and to Southern California residents. That way, the state would be able to avoid the current problem of fish being shredded in massive pumps that suck freshwater out of the delta.But, as many biologists and environmental groups have noted, taking freshwater before it reaches the delta could make the delta too salty for fish and too salty for residents and farms that depend on the water. In fact, right now, saltwater intrusion is a huge problem because the drought is depriving the delta of freshwater ? so huge, the state is building a temporary barrier this month in the delta to prevent it from being destroyed by saltwater from San Francisco Bay.In other words, the tunnels, if operational right now, could not be used, because they would starve the delta of too much freshwater during the drought.So, Governor Brown, I'm sure you'll understand if we and many others intend to ignore your "shut up" comment ? and hollow assurances that state officials know better.Contact?the author of this piece,?send?a letter to the editor,?like?us on Facebook, or?follow?us on Twitter. Tags:?Seven Days,?Jerry Brown,?California drought,?politics? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at att.net Wed May 13 09:57:23 2015 From: kierassociates at att.net (Kier Associates) Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 09:57:23 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] East Bay Express Editorial: No, Governor Brown, You Shut Up In-Reply-To: <1817267523.1396716.1431533151758.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1817267523.1396716.1431533151758.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <004801d08d9d$e3141370$a93c3a50$@att.net> Mr Gammon gets an A+ in my book for his ?The whole idea behind the tunnels is to take freshwater from the Sacramento River before it reaches the delta, and then ship it south to agribusinesses in the San Joaquin Valley and to Southern California residents? 1- He gets it that the most aggressive proponents of the Chunnels are agribusinesses in the San Joaquin Valley; and 2- He gets that when you pump water south from the Delta you are pumping water into the San Joaquin Valley, not the ?Central Valley? I?m bone weary of geography-challenged journalists referring to pumping water from the Delta south into the ?Central Valley?. That?s such a disservice to the Sacramento Valley agricultural community which has historically pushed back from/ been adversely impacted by the westside San Joaquin Valley agribusiness communities aggressive Sacramento and Trinity rivers water-grabbing ? see http://www.c-win.org/webfm_send/175 Bill Kier From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 9:06 AM To: Env-trinity Subject: [env-trinity] East Bay Express Editorial: No, Governor Brown, You Shut Up http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/no-governor-brown-you-shut-up/Content?oid=4278727 No, Governor Brown, You Shut Up Just kidding. Umm, not really. By Robert Gammon @RobertGammon Email Print click to enlarge Governor Brown. * * Governor Brown. Last week, Governor Jerry Brown told critics to "shut up" about his $15 billion plan to build two giant water tunnels underneath the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. Critics of his plan include numerous environmental groups and the editorial boards of several major newspapers, including the San Francisco Chronicle, the San Jose Mercury News, and the Sacramento Bee, which have all called on Brown to torpedo his tunnels proposal. A spokesperson later said that the governor was only "kidding," when he told his critics to clam up. But numerous journalists, including Los Angeles Times columnist George Skelton, have noted that Brown sure didn't look like he was kidding when he made the remark to the leaders of several water agencies. Regardless, it's clear that Brown was not joking about the substance of what he was saying: that those who oppose the tunnels plan are wrong. The governor argued that state water officials know best because, he said, they have spent "one million hours" studying the tunnels proposal. In short, Brown was essentially saying, "Trust us. We know better." Sorry, Governor Brown, but that's not good enough, especially considering the poor track record your administration has on major projects and environmental issues, and the bogus assurances from state officials to "ignore critics, and trust us, because we know better." Here are just a few examples: ? State transportation officials repeatedly tried to reassure the public over the past several years that engineering experts were wrong about the shoddy workmanship on the new Bay Bridge and that the $6.4 billion eastern span is perfectly safe. Turns out, the experts were right all along. The new bridge, as we now know, thanks mostly to the experts and to Chronicle investigative reporter Jaxon Van Derbeken, is riddled with problems ? including corrosion issues, broken steel rods, and bad welds. Concerns are legitimate that the new bridge, which was built at great expense to replace the old seismically unsafe one, may be vulnerable to catastrophic failure during a major quake. Even Steve Heminger, executive director of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, is now calling the bridge the "project from hell." ? Brown administration officials also told us for years that fracking for oil in California was safe and that calls for a moratorium on the fossil-fuel extraction method were reckless. Of course, we now know definitively that officials within the Brown administration's Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources have been allowing oil companies to inject toxic fracking wastewater into underground aquifers that could be needed for drinking water ? particularly during the drought. And if that were not bad enough, there's this: Scientists with the US Geological Survey have concluded that injecting fracking wastewater into the ground triggers earthquakes. In other words, fracking is anything but safe, and in a seismically active state like California, it's reckless. ? State regulators also told us repeatedly for years that PG&E's underground natural gas pipelines were safe ? another blatant falsehood, it turns out. Governor Brown himself also told us that we should "trust" Michael Peevey, the then-chair of the California Public Utilities Commission. Later, we found out the truth: Peevey, who was supposed to oversee the regulation of PG&E, was instead secretly colluding with the utility to help it escape accountability and punishment for its pipeline-safety negligence. In short, Governor Brown, trusting the assurances that state officials "know better" because "they've studied the issues longer" is ignoring reality. Californians have every right to be skeptical about practically anything state officials say, especially when it comes to large, expensive public works projects and the state's ability to pull them off. Which brings us back to the water tunnels. It's a devilishly difficult project, involving the construction of two massive, 35-mile-long tunnels underneath the fragile delta. And while state officials may have spent "one million hours" studying this complex plan, there are good reasons to believe it won't work, and could end up ruining the largest estuary on the West Coast. The whole idea behind the tunnels is to take freshwater from the Sacramento River before it reaches the delta, and then ship it south to agribusinesses in the San Joaquin Valley and to Southern California residents. That way, the state would be able to avoid the current problem of fish being shredded in massive pumps that suck freshwater out of the delta. But, as many biologists and environmental groups have noted, taking freshwater before it reaches the delta could make the delta too salty for fish and too salty for residents and farms that depend on the water. In fact, right now, saltwater intrusion is a huge problem because the drought is depriving the delta of freshwater ? so huge, the state is building a temporary barrier this month in the delta to prevent it from being destroyed by saltwater from San Francisco Bay. In other words, the tunnels, if operational right now, could not be used, because they would starve the delta of too much freshwater during the drought. So, Governor Brown, I'm sure you'll understand if we and many others intend to ignore your "shut up" comment ? and hollow assurances that state officials know better. _____ Contact the author of this piece, send a letter to the editor, like us on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter. Tags: Seven Days, Jerry Brown, California drought, politics -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Wed May 13 09:12:47 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 09:12:47 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Winnemem Wintu speaker responds to Brown's "Shut Up" comment In-Reply-To: <1817267523.1396716.1431533151758.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1817267523.1396716.1431533151758.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <38B7B7C0-CD9C-4F13-891D-560B1EC522FD@fishsniffer.com> Hey Tom I'm having problems with my email today. Could you tell me if you receive this, please? I'm probably going to set up a new email today - I've had nothing but problems lately. Thanks Daj http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/05/13/1384375/-Winnemem-Wintu-speaker-responds-to-Brown-s-Shut-Up-comment Winnemem Wintu speaker responds to Brown's "Shut Up" comment Environmental groups and Tribes rally for rivers at Capitol by Dan Bacher On May 11, Gary Mulcahy of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe responded to Jerry Brown's comment during a speech in Sacramento that opponents of the twin tunnels should "Shut Up" unless they had spent a "million hours" on the project like the administration's staff had. "The Winnemem Wintu and California Indians have been on these rivers for over 6,000 years, praying for the water and praying for the salmon streams and fisheries all this time," said Mulcahy at a noon program at California Rivers Day at the State Capitol in Sacramento on Monday. "We know our rivers and salmon and what they need. So Tunnel Vision Brown, until you have been on the rivers for over 6,000 years, Shut Up." The Tribe has been fighting for years to stop a federal plan to raise Shasta Dam, a project that would inundate many of the Winnemen Wintu's remaining sacred sites, and to restore the original run of winter run Chinook salmon, now thriving in New Zealand, to the McCloud River above Lake Shasta. California Rivers Day 2015 brought together 23 river groups from throughout the state and two Indian Tribes to speak up for rivers and call on state leaders to support "sustainable drought solutions" at noon at the West Steps of the State Capitol in Sacramento. The noon program that Mulcahy spoke at was preceded by a "Paddle to the Capitol" that arrived at the Tower Bridge public boat dock at 10:30 am. "The drought is taking a major toll on our rivers?California?s lifeblood," according to Eric Wesselman, Executive Director of Friends of the River. "In addition to the noon program event at the Capitol, this day included a morning paddle down the Sacramento River to the Capitol, informational booths on the West Steps of the building, and meetings with legislators to promote sustainable drought solutions that protect our rivers." Katherine Evatt of the Foothill Conservancy, who also spoke at the noon rally, said, "California rivers matter. It is important that California rivers have a voice in the Legislature. We gathered here today to give California rivers a voice and to tell the Legislature that California rivers matter - and to make sure that they do not lose sight of that in the drought." The groups and Tribes released a letter to Governor Jerry Brown, Senator Pro Tem Kevin de Leon and Speaker Toni Atkins urging them to take a number of actions: ? Oppose any potential legislative efforts to weaken environmental protections for rivers such as removing Wild & Scenic River protections for the McCloud River, reducing minimum flow standards, or shortcutting the environmental review process for surface storage projects by undercutting the California Environmental Quality Act. ? Oppose AB 1242 (Gray) as it would undermine the Water Board?s authority to require adequate instream flows to protect water quality, fish and wildlife, and aquatic habitat. ? Support SB 226 (Pavley), and expedite implementation of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act of 2014, especially for critical overdraft basins, to ensure that the limits on surface water sources do not lead to over-pumping of groundwater and the collapse of our aquifers?California?s largest, cheapest, and most environmentally sound reservoirs. ? Support SB 637 (Allen) to provide for the regulation of motorized suction dredge gold mining. ?Support AB 142 (Bigelow) to require the Resources Secretary to study and make a recommendation to the Legislature as to whether 37 miles of the Mokelumne River should be protected in the California Wild & Scenic Rivers System. ? Support SB 555 (Wolk) to take a needed step toward reducing system losses by requiring annual water loss audits and reporting. ? Support AB1, now in the Senate, (Brown) to prohibit a city or county from imposing a fine for a brown lawn or failure to water a lawn during a period for which the Governor has issued a state of emergency due to drought conditions. The letter also noted that "building massive surface storage projects" will not address the water crisis: "The Public Policy Institute of California recently reported that the five major surface water storage projects currently under study (including the three most controversial projects ? the Shasta Dam raise, Temperance Flat Dam, and Sites Reservoir) will cost roughly $9 billion but increase annual average supplies by just 1 percent. What these projects will do is put the state deeper in debt, delay our pursuit of real solutions, and destroy rivers along with Native American culture, family ranches, and thousands of acres of habitat for wildlife." Organizations that participated in the event included the following: Friends of the River Foothill Conservancy California Hydropower Reform Coalition South Yuba River Citizens League Sacramento River Preservation Trust All Outdoors California Sport Fishing Protection Alliance Restore the Delta Tuleyome Adventure Connection American Whitewater American Rivers New Voices Are Rising Winnemem Wintu Tribe American River Conservancy Delta Kayaking Adventures Tuolumne River Trust Mother Lode Adventures Paddle with Purpose Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians Protect American River Canyons Effie Yeah Nature Center American River Natural History Association San Joaquin River Parkway & Conservation Trust Save the American River Association To learn more about California Rivers Day, go to: http://www.friendsoftheriver.org/site/PageServer?pagename=riversday -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Thu May 14 11:32:02 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 11:32:02 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] E & E News: Enviro pressure forces resignation of Calif. water commissioner Message-ID: <005d01d08e74$45fcf2a0$d1f6d7e0$@sisqtel.net> https://mercuryllc.app.box.com/s/48ys2k2aap3h1nlf2obxerppz80mmqiq E & E News: Enviro pressure forces resignation of Calif. water commissioner Debra Kahn, E&E reporter Published: Wednesday, May 13, 2015 A member of an influential California commission overseeing $2.7 billion in water spending stepped down this week after pressure from environmentalists over his position on building a dam. Anthony Saracino, a longtime California water resources consultant, resigned from the California Water Commission on Monday after environmental groups raised a furor over his advocacy for considering the expansion of Shasta Dam, one of several major water storage proposals in the running to receive funds from the 2014 ballot-passed water bond. State officials have identified expanding water storage as one of the long-term methods of improving the state's ability to weather droughts by increasing the ability to capture floodwaters and other excess runoff. Saracino, 56, sent his resignation letter to Gov. Jerry Brown (D) on Friday, citing pressure from "special interests," as well as potential future conflicts of interest stemming from his work as an industry consultant. He had been nominated for a second term in 2014 and was scheduled to have a confirmation hearing in the state Senate today. "It was clear to me, talking to folks, that it was going to become a circus and a distraction from important commission activity, so I decided to step down now rather than waiting till January to avoid the circus," Saracino said in an interview. "It's unfortunate that irrational special interests can influence water policy by essentially stifling public discourse and rational discussion." Former California Water Commission member Anthony Saracino. Photo courtesy of Anthony Saracino. Environmental groups sent a letter May 1 to the state Senate Rules Committee protesting his appointment after he made remarks defending Shasta at an April 15 meeting in Fresno. Shasta is the largest dam on the federally run Central Valley Project and has long been studied by the Bureau of Reclamation as a candidate for expansion. But California officials have been hesitant since an upstream tributary, the McCloud River, was protected under the state Wild and Scenic Rivers Act in 1989. Raising the 602-foot-high dam would increase the pool of water stored behind it, inundating several thousand feet of the McCloud, as well. At the April 15 meeting, Saracino pressed the water commission to consider the prospect of raising Shasta, despite the state protections. "It's unfortunate, because from a technical standpoint, in terms of adding flexibility and public benefits and water supply to the state of California, Shasta raise is probably one of the more viable projects," he said. "That's why I'm just curious in exploring the options of not eliminating it at this point in the game." Environmental groups, some of whom are working on alternate proposals for the money that could include things like groundwater cleanup or storage, reacted strongly to his remarks. "That meeting went way over the line for us," said Eric Wesselman, executive director of Friends of the River, who co-authored the letter to Rules Committee Chairman and Senate President Pro Tem Kevin De Leon (D). "It wasn't just an offhand remark; it wasn't an oral brainstorming session. It was a persistent thread. It's just a huge problem, especially for someone coming from a group like the Nature Conservancy, with an expressed willingness to repeal protections for rivers in order to allow new dams to destroy them. It was clear then that we didn't have a voice for rivers or the environment on that commission." Saracino worked for the Nature Conservancy as director of its California water program from 2005-11 and also has consulted for a wide swath of water industry participants, including the California Department of Water Resources, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. He had been scheduled for confirmation by the Senate Rules Committee on May 6, along with several other commissioners but was pulled from the consent agenda due to opposition and had been rescheduled for a hearing today. He said he had already been planning not to seek reappointment in January, when his term was set to expire, because he might want to work as a consultant again on water issues. The commission is due to pass rules by the end of 2016 governing how the storage money will be spent. It also has a role overseeing implementation of the state's new Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, which requires local agencies to self-regulate groundwater pumping. Saracino said both subject areas are within his expertise. If he continued as a commissioner, "I would be precluded from doing most of what I know how to do," he said. As a former commissioner, Saracino will be barred from appearing before the commission for one year. A geologist by training, Saracino was one of two members on the commission appointed for their knowledge of the environment, alongside Armando Quintero, executive director of the University of California's Sierra Nevada Research Institute and a former National Park Service ranger. The other seven slots are reserved for experts in the "control, storage and beneficial use of water." Saracino was originally named to the CWC as chairman in 2010 by former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R), who revived the 1950s-era commission in anticipation of a water bond that never came to the ballot. The eventual $7.5 billion bond that passed in 2014, Brown's Proposition 1, contains $2.7 billion for storage, as well as $1.5 billion for watershed protection and restoration and lesser amounts for flood protection, water treatment, desalination and other uses. Brown reappointed Saracino in 2014 but staggered each of the members' terms so that they would expire gradually rather than all at once. As a result, Saracino's term was set to expire at the end of 2015. Wesselman said he was hoping Brown would appoint a more vocal environmental advocate to replace Saracino. Kim Delfino, California program director for Defenders of Wildlife, was not reappointed when her term expired earlier this year (Greenwire, March 12). "There are some members of the commission that are extremely vocal advocates for surface storage and dams that have really limited public benefits or environmental benefits, let alone water supply benefits," Wesselman said. "There's no one on the commission who is a counterpoint from that." Saracino said he had provided a pragmatic viewpoint. "There are certain factions of the environmental community that don't believe that I'm as green as they are, certainly, and they're probably correct," he said. "In my view, certain factions of the environmental community use misinformation and risk-avoidance techniques to prevent progress that could actually benefit the environment," he added, citing as an example the current political logjam over Brown's proposal to build tunnels under the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta (Greenwire, May 1). "I think it's important for the governor to appoint an effective environmental representative to the commission, not a strident one," he said. "It's easy to be strident when you don't have to make collaborative decisions on behalf of the public, and the commission needs people that can constructively engage." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu May 14 12:44:43 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 19:44:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal - LaMalfa seeks to limit Trinity flows In-Reply-To: <8637E0215769514A90A7D253CB35855301277B2E@SENMSX11.calegis.net> References: <8637E0215769514A90A7D253CB35855301277B2E@SENMSX11.calegis.net> Message-ID: <791031690.531586.1431632683836.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_1e6cf09e-f910-11e4-b3c5-af3607959fc0.html?LaMalfa seeks to limit Trinity flows Posted:Wednesday, May 13, 2015 6:15 am LaMalfa seeks to limit Trinity flowsBy AMY GITTELSOHN The Trinity Journal trinityjournal.com |0?comments Congressman Doug LaMalfa, R-Richvale, sponsored an amendment to a House appropriations bill to stop releases of water to the Trinity River that go beyond amounts called for in the Trinity River Record of Decision. LaMalfa formerly represented Trinity County in the state Senate and now represents the northeastern part of the state that makes up California?s 1st Congressional District. The additional releases of water in the late summer and into early fall have been implemented in several dry years to prevent a fish kill in the Klamath where the Trinity River flows. In 2002, an estimated 34,000 fall chinook salmon, many bound for the Trinity River, died before spawning in the lower Klamath of a pathogen outbreak attributed to crowded conditions, low flows and relatively warm water. The augmented flows were lauded by many fisheries advocates and Indian tribes but fought in court, unsuccessfully, by Central Valley Project water suppliers. The supplemental flows also have detractors in Trinity County concerned with Trinity Lake water levels and with power becoming more costly because water released to the river goes through fewer power plants than that diverted for CVP uses. LaMalfa said his amendment to the Energy and Water Appropriations bill, which passed the House May 1, would prevent the Bureau of Reclamation from ?diverting water from cities and farms beyond what is required by the Trinity Record of Decision (ROD). In 2013 and 2014, the Bureau ignored the ROD to divert even more water toward environmental purposes.? The state has been deprived of water that could supply hundreds of thousands of Californians in this historic drought, he said. Trinity County?s representative in the House, Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, voted against the bill. The description of water released to the Trinity River rather than piped through mountains to Whiskeytown Lake and the CVP as a diversion ?tells you a lot about the twisted view of the universe emanating out of the Central Valley these days,? he said. LaMalfa?s amendment would take away ?critical tools fisheries agencies and others need to ensure a healthy river and fisheries both in the Trinity and Klamath river,? he said. Huffman said he doesn?t believe the amendment has a chance of passing in the U.S. Senate as well, but ?my concern is this is the first of probably dozens of attempts over the next several months to get to this result.? ?Irrigators would love to have all the water in the Trinity River without any regard for our tribes and fishing economy or anything else,? he said. Reclamation has released a draft Long-Term Plan for Protecting Late Summer Adult Salmon in the Lower Klamath River which states increasing flow rates in the lower Klamath River as fish enter it was identified as the only effective way to minimize potential for disease outbreak. The draft plan addresses conditions under which there should be a heightened flow, sources of the water and cites Reclamation?s tribal trust obligations. A National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review process with opportunity for public comment is to be conducted to assess impacts to water supply and power generation, fisheries, tribal trust resources and other resources. That process and resulting Environmental Impact Report will not be completed in time for any augmentation flows needed this year, said Erin Curtis, public affairs officer for Reclamation. The agency plans to pursue a separate environmental review for a high flow in late summer/early fall in 2015. ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu May 14 12:46:09 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 19:46:09 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Pacific Fisheries Mgmt Council letter on "Action Requested to Prevent Klamath River Fish Kill" Message-ID: <1084735753.539531.1431632769304.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> The 5/12/15 letter is 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 -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PFMC Klamath letter 5-12-15.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 128183 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun May 17 08:24:44 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 17 May 2015 15:24:44 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard: Mixed outcomes for local Chinook salmon Message-ID: <1829028720.492634.1431876284045.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.times-standard.com/general-news/20150516/mixed-outcomes-for-local-chinook-salmon Mixed outcomes for local Chinook salmon Eel River fall Chinook salmon milling in a pool in Dos Rios waiting for rain last November.?Cathy WarrenBy Tabitha Soden,?tsoden at times-standard.comPOSTED:?05/16/15, 10:13 PM PDT?|0 COMMENTSChinook salmon spawning below Outlet Creek during low flows last November.?PATRICK HigginsWhile Chinook salmon in the Eel River are maintaining healthy population levels, juvenile Chinook in the Klamath River are struggling against a deadly parasite, according to annual monitoring of migration and spawning in the two rivers.A parasite, Ceratomyxa shasta, is infecting and killing juvenile salmon before they complete their migration to the sea. The parasite is present in many rivers in the Pacific Northwest, but this year is causing the highest mortality rate among juvenile salmon in the Klamath since 2008, according to Jerri Bartholomew, a professor of microbiology at Oregon State University.?The parasite is not just one parasite, it has different genetic strains, and the different strains infect different species. What?s unusual about this year is we are only seeing one strain, and it?s the strain that affects Chinook salmon,? Bartholomew said.She said that while that is good news for other species of salmon, which have contracted the parasite in past years, it presents a problem for the Chinook.??Every species goes through cycles, but it is never good to be losing a large number of your juvenile year class,? she said.Bartholomew said this year has been one of the worst in terms on infection. As of April 30, all of the salmon tested in the Shasta to Scott reach of the Klamath river were infected with the parasite and all the salmon tested from the Scott to Salmon reach of the river had the parasite as of May 4, according to Ca-Nv Fish Health Center Data.Karuk Tribe Klamath Coordinator Craig Tucker said another disease called Ichthyophthirius multifiliis, referred to as ich, is also infecting returning adult salmon. He said these diseases result from the steady the water flows released from dams on the Klamath.?In a normal river, or a river that?s not dammed, when it rains there is a dynamic flow pattern. But when you dam a river you don?t get those dynamic flows ... and it creates a stable environment for these parasites,? Tucker said.He said one solution would be to remove the dams and restore normal flow patterns, something the tribe has been advocating for years.?Tucker said people also need to understand how the death of juveniles fits into the bigger picture.?In terms of the salmon population, these juveniles dying at the rates they?re dying, is probably one of the biggest factors affecting the health of the Klamath River salmon,? he said.Joe Janisch, the president of the Salmon Restoration Association in Fort Bragg, said that while drought and water diversion are affecting Klamath River salmon, the news is a little brighter for Eel River salmon. Despite the four-year drought, a high number of adults returned in December and January to spawn, and he said they appeared to do OK, considering the circumstances.?The salmon are never doing well or great. They?re always struggling because the system hasn?t changed much in the last 60 years,? he said.The Salmon Restoration Association helps fund the monitoring projects that look at salmon on the Eel River.Patrick Higgins, the managing director of the Eel River Recovery Project, said the monitoring project conducted in October and November last year showed that Chinook salmon are maintaining population levels estimated in the tens of thousands, a number equal to those measured by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the 1950s.In the past silt and sand, washed into the river during the 1964 flood, prevented Chinook from thriving. As the largest of Pacific salmon species they have adapted to spawning in large gravel and cobble, according to an Eel River Recovery Project press release.?The fines from the record 1964 flood have been flushed, and it left us with a record amount of spawning gravel,? Higgins said.The group estimates the number of two-year old Chinook salmon that will return to Eel River to spawn is about 26 percent of the 2013-14 population, a high number despite the four year drought.But while Chinook salmon in the Eel River are thriving, summer steelhead and coho salmon may face challenges with the drought and low tributary flows, according to the release.?Bartholomew said several management actions could help mitigate population decline, but there are no guarantees.?The problem is these actions get taken at the sacrifice of something else,? she said.Tabitha Soden can be reached at 707-441-0510. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun May 17 08:59:02 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 17 May 2015 15:59:02 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Nearly $1 billion later, salmon still in peril Message-ID: <231684656.526686.1431878342911.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/nearly-1-billion-later-salmon-still-in-peril_91460501 ? Nearly $1 billion later, salmon still in peril Fish restoration project falls short of goals ADDRESS: Damon Arthur? 5:08 PM, May 16, 201511:07 PM, May 16, 2015local news?|?homepage showcase?|?tablet showcase?|?vcs???????Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.REDDING, California - After spending nearly $1 billion on a plan to double the number of salmon and steelhead in the Sacramento River basin over the past 22 years, state and federal agencies have fallen well short of their goals and the fish remain severely underpopulated.Except for significant gains in a few Sacramento River tributaries, the work done to benefit naturally spawning salmon under the Central Valley Project Improvement Act of 1992 has not accomplished even 50 percent of its goals, according to the government agencies? own reports.By 2012, there were supposed to be 68,000 spring-run chinook salmon spawning in the Central Valley. Instead, there were 30,522, according to the bureau.Federal and state agencies have hit 30.6 percent of their target goal for the fall-run chinook, one of four different salmon runs on the river. Each run is named for the season when the majority of its fish enter freshwater as adults.The program aims to restore fish populations that plummeted after dams and diversions built in rivers and creeks blocked the fish from getting to the spawning grounds they had used for thousands of years. The development of farms, roadways and cities further changed the landscape, drying up vast areas that were once wetlands and waterways where the fish spent part of their lives.Officials with the restoration program have tried to piece back together those ecosystems fragmented by development, or at least to create areas that mimic streams and wetlands where the fish once thrived.Still, fish populations still haven?t bounced back. And even as spending on the programs approaches $1 billion, David Mooney, the Central Valley Project Improvement Act administrator, said lack of funding is an issue.?Effectiveness has varied with higher costs, lower revenues and more complexity than appears to have been anticipated by the authors of the (improvement act),? Mooney said.Critics of the program, however, disagree.?I don?t think money has been the problem,? said David Vogel, a senior scientist with Natural Resource Scientists in Red Bluff. Instead, too much money has been spent on studies, administration and monitoring fish populations, he said.?They?ve developed a fairly large bureaucracy with a lot of people, and they seem to repeating the same thing year after year,? Vogel said. ?I think there?s a lack of accountability.? Water at a cost Lawmakers who passed the act intended to restore habitat lost after the Bureau of Reclamation built the Central Valley Project.Stretching about 400 miles from Shasta Dam north of Redding to the Tehachapi Mountains south of Bakersfield, the huge Central Valley Project consists of 20 dams and reservoirs and 11 power plants. The project annually moves about 7 million acre-feet of water through 500 miles of major canals and tunnels to hundreds of farmers and millions of urban residents.About 800,000 acre-feet of that water is set aside for fish and wildlife and another 410,000 goes to state and federal wildlife refuges and wetlands.The project is widely credited with bringing irrigation water to the Central Valley and contributing to its success as an one of the richest agricultural regions in the country.But all that progress came at a price. Dams built along rivers such as the Sacramento and San Joaquin blocked access to spawning areas for salmon and steelhead ? called anadromous fish because they live parts of their lives in the ocean and part in fresh water ? and dried up vast wetlands where the streams once flowed.The bureau estimates development and flood control projects have eliminated 95 percent of the wetlands in the Central Valley. When Shasta and Keswick dams were built they blocked access to spawning grounds upstream in the McCloud and Pit rivers and other tributaries to the Sacramento River.The winter and spring runs of chinook have fared the worst in the decades since the dams were built. Because so few of those fish return annually to spawn, the spring run is listed as a threatened species under the federal Endangered Species Act, meaning it is likely to become an endangered species. The winter run is considered already endangered and at greater risk of extinction. A complex system The chinook salmon?s life cycle covers a vast territory stretching from the upper reaches of Sacramento River tributaries to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and out to the ocean.The fish are hatched in many of the streams in the area such as Salt Creek, Cow Creek, Battle Creek and Clear Creek. The small salmon fry can spend several months in fresh water, but they eventually move downstream to the main stem of the Sacramento River.Thousands of the four species of chinook ? fall, late-fall, winter and spring ? also are spawned in the Sacramento River itself. Nearly all of the wild winter-run salmon spawn in the Redding area, where the restoration project pours tons of gravel annually for spawning beds.After the salmon make their way down the Sacramento River, they hit the San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta, a series of islands and channels the fish need to navigate on their way to the ocean. By the time they reach the ocean, they have changed colors and their gills and kidneys have undergone a transformation that allows them to live in salt water.After spending two to three years in the ocean, the fish return again upstream to where they were hatched. By that time they often weigh 20 pounds or more. Challenges abound Federal officials say there are several obstacles to meeting goals set by the 1992 Central Valley Project Improvement Act, including drought, competing demands for water, lack of money and not enough control over the fish?s entire life cycle.The program has been limited mainly to doing work upstream of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta where the salmon and steelhead are hatched, said Mooney, the improvement act project administrator.Habitat improvement projects focus on improving stream conditions to increase the chances the fish can successfully spawn, hatch new young and get as many of them as possible out to the ocean before they are eaten by other fish and wildlife.Improvements include: - Installing screens at irrigation diversions to keep fish from swimming into irrigation canals and ditches. - Pouring tons of gravel into the Sacramento River and tributaries for salmon nests. - Removing fish passage barriers. - Improving channel conditions in Sacramento River tributaries. - Planting trees and shrubs along stream banks. So far, fewer than a quarter of the proposed restoration projects have been completed.The project lists 289 different actions and evaluations to complete, but from 1997 to 2012, only 67 had been completed.Bob Clarke, fisheries program supervisor for the fish and wildlife service?s Pacific Southwest Region, said the size and complexity of the area encompassed by the project has hampered efforts.?Where we haven?t met goals, that?s because it?s just a bigger system,? Clarke, whose agency works with the bureau to implement the fish recovery program.?As big as the program is, we haven?t been able to take on the programs we have wanted,? he said. ?Then there are issues beyond our control that affect the fish populations.?But Vogel said not enough ?on-the-ground? work has been done to restore fish habitat. He also said officials have known about the size and complexity of the issues for many years, but have been unwilling to change direction and adapt.Randy Smith, of Redding, a retired physician who leads major volunteer efforts to restore and clean up streams in the area, said fish restoration is not complicated. Fish need water at the right time and the proper habitat.In his view, federal and state officials have wasted money on projects that don?t work while the salmon slide toward extinction.?If you take a creature as creative and willful and independent as the salmon and you make it impossible for that species to exist then you aren?t very smart,? Smith said.Vogel credits the restoration project with doing much to improve conditions for salmon and steelhead, but said federal officials are not likely to achieve their goals until they focus more on improving conditions in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.But getting federal and state agencies to turn their attention to the Delta has been difficult, said Vogel, a former U.S. Fish and Wildlife biologist who has spent decades working on the river.?It?s incredibly frustrating for myself and many of my colleagues,? Vogel said. ?Their approach seems to be they?re pretty happy with the status quo.?Vogel said he would like to see more work done to keep young salmon from being drawn into the interior of the Delta, where they are preyed on by other fish. When they get caught in the maze of channels and islands, it is difficult for them to get out to the Pacific Ocean, he said.Further, focused studies on how the fish migrate through the Delta are also needed so that future restoration can focus on work that will have the greatest impact, he said.For example the pumping system that sends water south of the Delta creates a current that draws the fish toward them rather than to the ocean, he said. The fish are trapped at the pumps and then released closer to the San Francisco Bay, but they are preyed on by other fish when they are let go, he said.It?s treacherous in the Delta. But ?once they get to the ocean, they have a very high survival rate,? Vogel said.Clarke and Mooney said improving conditions in the Delta is a key component to restoring salmon numbers, but the program ?has not emphasized Delta work? because there are other state and federal programs involved in carrying out restoration in the Delta.Tom Stokely, a water policy analyst for the California Water Impact Network, points to water management as a third component that has led to low fish numbers. The state Department of Water Resources and the bureau have mismanaged water coming out of Shasta and Keswick dams, he said.?It comes down to the water operations are killing the fish,? Stokely said. He said bureau officials mismanaged water in Lake Shasta last fall, depleting the cold water pool in the reservoir.Salmon eggs and recently hatched fish need water temperatures below 60 degrees to survive, but water in the Sacramento River below Keswick Dam became too warm last fall, killing thousands of salmon eggs and recent hatches.Bureau officials have said lack of rainfall from the ongoing drought prevented them from keeping an adequate cold water pool in the lake to ensure egg survival. Are They Listening? Criticism of the restoration program has been going on for years. An independent review of the project written in 2008 for the bureau and the fish and wildlife service analyzed how the agencies operate and the work they have done and concluded they have been ineffective.That report, Listen to the River, criticized how the agencies work together, identify problems and prioritize projects. It also faulted the program for not doing more in the Delta.?All of these have contributed to a program that has been unable to identify and attack the fundamental system-level problems and realize the greatest biological benefit in an effective way,? the report says.Seven years after the report came out, Clarke said officials are still working to change the way they prioritize restoration projects and hold them up to a more rigorous scientific standard as to whether they are working.?It?s a process, unfortunately it?s not a process that allows you to get your results immediately,? he said.Mobile users can view our interactive graphic here.nearly $1 billion later, salmon still in peril?|?Create infographicsCopyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at att.net Sun May 17 11:01:34 2015 From: kierassociates at att.net (Kier Associates) Date: Sun, 17 May 2015 11:01:34 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Nearly $1 billion later, salmon still in peril In-Reply-To: <231684656.526686.1431878342911.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <231684656.526686.1431878342911.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001201d090cb$83cd6020$8b682060$@att.net> This calls to mind my late good friend Michael Black who began a journal article http://www.ijee.ie/articles/Vol19-1/IJEE1325.pdf on California?s ?serialistic? Sacramento River salmon conservation policies/ measures with a quote ?Fish biologists can have anything they want in the West as long as it?s not water.?. The most enduring symbol of Sacramento River serialistic salmon conservation policies/ measures for me was the three-story high Glenn-Colusa Canal riffle sifter installed by the Bureau of Reclamation to clean the upstream end of the Tehama-Colusa Canal designated as an artificial spawning channel to offset the loss of river spawning (estimated at an average annual 5,000 fall-run chinook salmon) in what became the Red Bluff Diversion Dam diversion pool. It was an impressive and costly pile of equipment that proved totally ineffectual (the channel silted up). I only wish I had a keepsake photo of it. Bill Kier From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2015 8:59 AM To: Env-trinity Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Nearly $1 billion later, salmon still in peril http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/nearly-1-billion-later-salmon-still-in-peril_91460501 Nearly $1 billion later, salmon still in peril Fish restoration project falls short of goals Damon Arthur 5:08 PM, May 16, 2015 11:07 PM, May 16, 2015 local news | homepage showcase | tablet showcase | vcs Description: Image removed by sender. Description: Image removed by sender. Description: Image removed by sender. Description: Image removed by sender. Description: Image removed by sender. Description: Image removed by sender. Description: Image removed by sender. Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Description: Image removed by sender. Description: Image removed by sender. Description: Image removed by sender. Description: Image removed by sender. Description: Image removed by sender. Description: Image removed by sender. Description: Image removed by sender. REDDING, California - After spending nearly $1 billion on a plan to double the number of salmon and steelhead in the Sacramento River basin over the past 22 years, state and federal agencies have fallen well short of their goals and the fish remain severely underpopulated. Except for significant gains in a few Sacramento River tributaries, the work done to benefit naturally spawning salmon under the Central Valley Project Improvement Act of 1992 has not accomplished even 50 percent of its goals, according to the government agencies? own reports. By 2012, there were supposed to be 68,000 spring-run chinook salmon spawning in the Central Valley. Instead, there were 30,522, according to the bureau. Federal and state agencies have hit 30.6 percent of their target goal for the fall-run chinook, one of four different salmon runs on the river. Each run is named for the season when the majority of its fish enter freshwater as adults. The program aims to restore fish populations that plummeted after dams and diversions built in rivers and creeks blocked the fish from getting to the spawning grounds they had used for thousands of years. The development of farms, roadways and cities further changed the landscape, drying up vast areas that were once wetlands and waterways where the fish spent part of their lives. Officials with the restoration program have tried to piece back together those ecosystems fragmented by development, or at least to create areas that mimic streams and wetlands where the fish once thrived. Still, fish populations still haven?t bounced back. And even as spending on the programs approaches $1 billion, David Mooney, the Central Valley Project Improvement Act administrator, said lack of funding is an issue. ?Effectiveness has varied with higher costs, lower revenues and more complexity than appears to have been anticipated by the authors of the (improvement act),? Mooney said. Critics of the program, however, disagree. ?I don?t think money has been the problem,? said David Vogel, a senior scientist with Natural Resource Scientists in Red Bluff. Instead, too much money has been spent on studies, administration and monitoring fish populations, he said. ?They?ve developed a fairly large bureaucracy with a lot of people, and they seem to repeating the same thing year after year,? Vogel said. ?I think there?s a lack of accountability.? Water at a cost Lawmakers who passed the act intended to restore habitat lost after the Bureau of Reclamation built the Central Valley Project. Stretching about 400 miles from Shasta Dam north of Redding to the Tehachapi Mountains south of Bakersfield, the huge Central Valley Project consists of 20 dams and reservoirs and 11 power plants. The project annually moves about 7 million acre-feet of water through 500 miles of major canals and tunnels to hundreds of farmers and millions of urban residents. About 800,000 acre-feet of that water is set aside for fish and wildlife and another 410,000 goes to state and federal wildlife refuges and wetlands. The project is widely credited with bringing irrigation water to the Central Valley and contributing to its success as an one of the richest agricultural regions in the country. But all that progress came at a price. Dams built along rivers such as the Sacramento and San Joaquin blocked access to spawning areas for salmon and steelhead ? called anadromous fish because they live parts of their lives in the ocean and part in fresh water ? and dried up vast wetlands where the streams once flowed. The bureau estimates development and flood control projects have eliminated 95 percent of the wetlands in the Central Valley. When Shasta and Keswick dams were built they blocked access to spawning grounds upstream in the McCloud and Pit rivers and other tributaries to the Sacramento River. The winter and spring runs of chinook have fared the worst in the decades since the dams were built. Because so few of those fish return annually to spawn, the spring run is listed as a threatened species under the federal Endangered Species Act, meaning it is likely to become an endangered species. The winter run is considered already endangered and at greater risk of extinction. A complex system The chinook salmon?s life cycle covers a vast territory stretching from the upper reaches of Sacramento River tributaries to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and out to the ocean. The fish are hatched in many of the streams in the area such as Salt Creek, Cow Creek, Battle Creek and Clear Creek. The small salmon fry can spend several months in fresh water, but they eventually move downstream to the main stem of the Sacramento River. Thousands of the four species of chinook ? fall, late-fall, winter and spring ? also are spawned in the Sacramento River itself. Nearly all of the wild winter-run salmon spawn in the Redding area, where the restoration project pours tons of gravel annually for spawning beds. After the salmon make their way down the Sacramento River, they hit the San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta, a series of islands and channels the fish need to navigate on their way to the ocean. By the time they reach the ocean, they have changed colors and their gills and kidneys have undergone a transformation that allows them to live in salt water. After spending two to three years in the ocean, the fish return again upstream to where they were hatched. By that time they often weigh 20 pounds or more. Challenges abound Federal officials say there are several obstacles to meeting goals set by the 1992 Central Valley Project Improvement Act, including drought, competing demands for water, lack of money and not enough control over the fish?s entire life cycle. The program has been limited mainly to doing work upstream of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta where the salmon and steelhead are hatched, said Mooney, the improvement act project administrator. Habitat improvement projects focus on improving stream conditions to increase the chances the fish can successfully spawn, hatch new young and get as many of them as possible out to the ocean before they are eaten by other fish and wildlife. Improvements include: * Installing screens at irrigation diversions to keep fish from swimming into irrigation canals and ditches. * Pouring tons of gravel into the Sacramento River and tributaries for salmon nests. * Removing fish passage barriers. * Improving channel conditions in Sacramento River tributaries. * Planting trees and shrubs along stream banks. So far, fewer than a quarter of the proposed restoration projects have been completed. The project lists 289 different actions and evaluations to complete, but from 1997 to 2012, only 67 had been completed. Bob Clarke, fisheries program supervisor for the fish and wildlife service?s Pacific Southwest Region, said the size and complexity of the area encompassed by the project has hampered efforts. ?Where we haven?t met goals, that?s because it?s just a bigger system,? Clarke, whose agency works with the bureau to implement the fish recovery program. ?As big as the program is, we haven?t been able to take on the programs we have wanted,? he said. ?Then there are issues beyond our control that affect the fish populations.? But Vogel said not enough ?on-the-ground? work has been done to restore fish habitat. He also said officials have known about the size and complexity of the issues for many years, but have been unwilling to change direction and adapt. Randy Smith, of Redding, a retired physician who leads major volunteer efforts to restore and clean up streams in the area, said fish restoration is not complicated. Fish need water at the right time and the proper habitat. In his view, federal and state officials have wasted money on projects that don?t work while the salmon slide toward extinction. ?If you take a creature as creative and willful and independent as the salmon and you make it impossible for that species to exist then you aren?t very smart,? Smith said. Vogel credits the restoration project with doing much to improve conditions for salmon and steelhead, but said federal officials are not likely to achieve their goals until they focus more on improving conditions in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. But getting federal and state agencies to turn their attention to the Delta has been difficult, said Vogel, a former U.S. Fish and Wildlife biologist who has spent decades working on the river. ?It?s incredibly frustrating for myself and many of my colleagues,? Vogel said. ?Their approach seems to be they?re pretty happy with the status quo.? Vogel said he would like to see more work done to keep young salmon from being drawn into the interior of the Delta, where they are preyed on by other fish. When they get caught in the maze of channels and islands, it is difficult for them to get out to the Pacific Ocean, he said. Further, focused studies on how the fish migrate through the Delta are also needed so that future restoration can focus on work that will have the greatest impact, he said. For example the pumping system that sends water south of the Delta creates a current that draws the fish toward them rather than to the ocean, he said. The fish are trapped at the pumps and then released closer to the San Francisco Bay, but they are preyed on by other fish when they are let go, he said. It?s treacherous in the Delta. But ?once they get to the ocean, they have a very high survival rate,? Vogel said. Clarke and Mooney said improving conditions in the Delta is a key component to restoring salmon numbers, but the program ?has not emphasized Delta work? because there are other state and federal programs involved in carrying out restoration in the Delta. Tom Stokely, a water policy analyst for the California Water Impact Network, points to water management as a third component that has led to low fish numbers. The state Department of Water Resources and the bureau have mismanaged water coming out of Shasta and Keswick dams, he said. ?It comes down to the water operations are killing the fish,? Stokely said. He said bureau officials mismanaged water in Lake Shasta last fall, depleting the cold water pool in the reservoir. Salmon eggs and recently hatched fish need water temperatures below 60 degrees to survive, but water in the Sacramento River below Keswick Dam became too warm last fall, killing thousands of salmon eggs and recent hatches. Bureau officials have said lack of rainfall from the ongoing drought prevented them from keeping an adequate cold water pool in the lake to ensure egg survival. Are They Listening? Criticism of the restoration program has been going on for years. An independent review of the project written in 2008 for the bureau and the fish and wildlife service analyzed how the agencies operate and the work they have done and concluded they have been ineffective. That report, Listen to the River, criticized how the agencies work together, identify problems and prioritize projects. It also faulted the program for not doing more in the Delta. ?All of these have contributed to a program that has been unable to identify and attack the fundamental system-level problems and realize the greatest biological benefit in an effective way,? the report says. Seven years after the report came out, Clarke said officials are still working to change the way they prioritize restoration projects and hold them up to a more rigorous scientific standard as to whether they are working. ?It?s a process, unfortunately it?s not a process that allows you to get your results immediately,? he said. Mobile users can view our interactive graphic here. nearly $1 billion later, salmon still in peril | Create infographics Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ~WRD000.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 823 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Mon May 18 10:44:08 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 10:44:08 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] LA Times OpEd: In the water crisis, it's time to move beyond the farms vs. cities mindset Message-ID: <009d01d09192$3f02b860$bd082920$@sisqtel.net> http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-johnson-big-picture-california-wa ter-20150517-story.html Op-Ed: In the water crisis, it's time to move beyond the farms vs. cities mindset By Nathanael Johnson At this point, just about every Californian with a pulse knows that agriculture uses 80% of the state's water, and cities 20%. This talking point is true as far as it goes, but that's not very far. You have to limit your vision to the water consumed by humans, "developed" water. This perspective blinds us to the big water picture, and it sets up an unnecessary opposition between farms and cities. How water is used in California The 80/20 view of California water leaves out the water required to keep riverine fish and riparian habitat alive. It leaves out the freshwater flows needed to keep saltwater from surging into the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. And it leaves out beauty and the gross domestic joy generated by rivers. Here's the complete picture: About 50% of California water goes toward maintaining environmental quality, 40% goes to agriculture, and 10% goes to cities (including business uses such as manufacturing). It can be counterintuitive to think of the environment as a water user - after all, that water is "used" only insofar as we leave it in the rivers. But allowing water to flow down rivers to the sea really is an active use with measurable benefits. We devalue the environment if we leave it out of the equation. And we can't judge the arguments for and against such uses if we don't acknowledge that they exist. Still, it's the ag/urban split that sticks in our minds. Whether the figure is 80% or 40%, the fact that farms use so much more water than cities evokes fury from those who see farmers as robber barons, converting a natural resource into private fortunes. There's a growing populist sentiment that irrigation water is simply making rich farmers richer. This is by no means self-evident. It's worth noting that public sentiment was once precisely reversed and irrigation was seen as a democratizing force. In 1870, giant dry-farmed wheat estates and cattle ranches dominated the Central Valley. But with irrigation, a family farmer could make a living on as little as 10 acres selling vegetables, fruit and nuts. At that time, Californians saw irrigation as a way to break up the land monopolies and foster Jeffersonian farmers. The reality, of course, is complex. In the beginning, irrigation enriched the monopolists even more than small farmers, but as Norris Hundley Jr. shows in his history of the state's water, "The Great Thirst," it also built up an agricultural middle class in places such as Fresno, Merced and Stockton. Irrigated agriculture provided for the egalitarian beginnings of Anaheim, Riverside and Ontario. It has been the means by which many immigrants - German, Swiss, Armenian, Hmong and Mexican - have made their stake in California. And the situation remains complex today: Irrigation water supports millionaires with giant tracts of land and middleclass family farmers alike. Another reason the 80% figure has gone viral is that it contains an uncomfortable truth: It takes a lot of water to grow food. Contrary to conventional wisdom, drip irrigation systems and micro sprinklers do very little to change a crop's consumption of water. It's true that less efficient techniques like flood irrigation use more water, but what isn't required by the plants isn't lost, it goes down into the aquifer or back into the river. Increasing the organic matter in soil - with techniques such as composting, mulching and reduced plowing - can improve water retention and lessen water use. But the lion's share of irrigation water goes into the plants, and that's hard to change. In the end, any cuts to irrigation mean less food production. Less food production means less economic activity. That's not cause for panic: Agriculture accounts for just 2% of California's massive economy. Nonetheless, California has the highest agriculture sales of any state, and those sales are the bulwark of many poorer counties. There are really two Californias: a wealthy coast and a poor inland that relies heavily on farmers. Whenever there is a drought, farmers suffer first - they idle land, pump groundwater. Each year, farmers have been pumping up more water than seeps down, but a law passed last year will change that. There will be even less water for farmers as the new regulations put an end to groundwater mining and the climate warms. There's no getting around it: Those cutbacks will hurt. In cities, by contrast, residents can cut water consumption with much less pain. Los Angeles has kept its water consumption flat since the 1980s while adding a million residents, thanks to improved technology (low-flow toilets!) and improved landscaping (these dry gardens are far more beautiful than turf, in my humble opinion). In a moment of crisis, it's human nature to look for villains: Liberals against conservatives, north against south, farms against cities. The 80/20 statistic neatly - far too neatly - defines the conflict. But is the objective to define our enemies and triumph over them, or do we want to find solutions for the greater commonwealth? If it's the latter, we should watch to ensure that our new groundwater law results in rules for real sustainability, move swiftly to restore water to residents whose wells have gone dry, step up our water conservation efforts and stop thinking in terms of them versus us. Most important, we must continue California's leadership in fighting climate change. It's misleading to zero in on part of the picture: If we want holistic solutions, we have to take the holistic view. Nathanael Johnson, a Bay Area journalist, writes the "Thought for Food" column at Grist.org. He is the author of "All Natural" and a contributor to Harper's Magazine, New York and "This American Life." Twitter: @SavorTooth. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 18760 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jay_glase at nps.gov Tue May 19 06:22:43 2015 From: jay_glase at nps.gov (Glase, Jay) Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 08:22:43 -0500 Subject: [env-trinity] LA Times OpEd: In the water crisis, it's time to move beyond the farms vs. cities mindset In-Reply-To: <009d01d09192$3f02b860$bd082920$@sisqtel.net> References: <009d01d09192$3f02b860$bd082920$@sisqtel.net> Message-ID: I've seen this graphic before, but have never seen a good description of how the numbers are determined. Does anyone know the math behind the figures in this graph? Since it's credited to DWR, I know there's a formula somewhere. Does this presume to account for all of the water that falls from the sky in any form, lands in California, and then goes somewhere? Does it account for evaporation, for water that stays in the mountain lakes of the Sierras and elsewhere, becomes groundwater, or is taken up and transpired by the douglas fir and ponderosa pine forests in the state? If the argument is made that most comparisons are just for "developed" water, and that the comparison needs to be expanded, then the next question might be, where do you stop? If "the gross domestic joy generated by rivers" is considered a use of water, why not count the water that goes toward the bright green buds of new growth on a pine tree in the spring? Maybe the math gets too complex at that point, but surely someone has calculated how much water a pine tree can transpire into the atmosphere in a season of growth. Hey, I just thought of something, is all the water that grows all the trees that are harvested in California part of the agricultural water? Time for some more math?! Cheers, jay On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Sari Sommarstrom wrote: > > http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-johnson-big-picture-california-water-20150517-story.html > > *Op-Ed*: In the water crisis, it's time to move beyond the farms vs. > cities mindset > > *By **Nathanael Johnson* > > > > At this point, just about every Californian with a pulse knows that > agriculture uses 80% of the state's water, and cities 20%. This talking > point is true as far as it goes, but that's not very far. You have to limit > your vision to the water consumed by humans, ?developed? water. This > perspective blinds us to the big water picture, and it sets up an > unnecessary opposition between farms and cities. > > [image: How water is used in California] > > > > The 80/20 view of California water leaves out the water > > required to keep riverine fish and riparian habitat alive. It > > leaves out the freshwater flows needed to keep saltwater > > from surging into the Sacramento-San Joaquin River > > Delta. And it leaves out beauty and the gross domestic joy > > generated by rivers. > > Here's the complete picture: About 50% of California > > water goes toward maintaining environmental quality, > > 40% goes to agriculture, and 10% goes to cities (including > > business uses such as manufacturing). It can be > > counterintuitive to think of the environment as a water > > user ? after all, that water is ?used? only insofar as we > > leave it in the rivers. But allowing water to flow down > > rivers to the sea really is an active use with measurable > > benefits. We devalue the environment if we leave it out of > > the equation. And we can't judge the arguments for and > > against such uses if we don't acknowledge that they exist. > > Still, it's the ag/urban split that sticks in our minds. > > Whether the figure is 80% or 40%, the fact that farms use > > so much more water than cities evokes fury from those > > who see farmers as robber barons, converting a natural > > resource into private fortunes. There's a growing populist > > sentiment that irrigation water is simply making rich > > farmers richer. > > This is by no means self-evident. It's worth noting that > > public sentiment was once precisely reversed and > > irrigation was seen as a democratizing force. > > In 1870, giant dry-farmed wheat estates and cattle ranches > > dominated the Central Valley. But with irrigation, a family > > farmer could make a living on as little as 10 acres selling > > vegetables, fruit and nuts. At that time, Californians saw > > irrigation as a way to break up the land monopolies and > > foster Jeffersonian farmers. > > The reality, of course, is complex. In the beginning, > > irrigation enriched the monopolists even more than small > > farmers, but as Norris Hundley Jr. shows in his history of > > the state's water, ?The Great Thirst,? it also built up an > > agricultural middle class in places such as Fresno, Merced > > and Stockton. Irrigated agriculture provided for the > > egalitarian beginnings of Anaheim, Riverside and Ontario. > > It has been the means by which many immigrants ? > > German, Swiss, Armenian, Hmong and Mexican ? have > > made their stake in California. > > And the situation remains complex today: Irrigation water > > supports millionaires with giant tracts of land and middleclass > > family farmers alike. > > Another reason the 80% figure has gone viral is that it > > contains an uncomfortable truth: It takes a lot of water to > > grow food. Contrary to conventional wisdom, drip irrigation > > systems and micro sprinklers do very little to > > change a crop's consumption of water. It's true that less efficient > > techniques like flood irrigation use more water, > > but what isn't required by the plants isn't lost, it goes down > > into the aquifer or back into the river. Increasing the > > organic matter in soil ? with techniques such as > > composting, mulching and reduced plowing ? can > > improve water retention and lessen water use. But the > > lion's share of irrigation water goes into the plants, and > > that's hard to change. In the end, any cuts to irrigation > > mean less food production. > > Less food production means less economic activity. That's > > not cause for panic: Agriculture accounts for just 2% of > > California's massive economy. Nonetheless, California has > > the highest agriculture sales of any state, and those sales > > are the bulwark of many poorer counties. There are really > > two Californias: a wealthy coast and a poor inland that > > relies heavily on farmers. > > Whenever there is a drought, farmers suffer first ? they > > idle land, pump groundwater. Each year, farmers have > > been pumping up more water than seeps down, but a law > > passed last year will change that. There will be even less > > water for farmers as the new regulations put an end to > > groundwater mining and the climate warms. There's no > > getting around it: Those cutbacks will hurt. > > In cities, by contrast, residents can cut water consumption > > with much less pain. Los Angeles has kept its water > > consumption flat since the 1980s while adding a million > > residents, thanks to improved technology (low-flow > > toilets!) and improved landscaping (these dry gardens are > > far more beautiful than turf, in my humble opinion). > > In a moment of crisis, it's human nature to look for > > villains: Liberals against conservatives, north against > > south, farms against cities. The 80/20 statistic neatly ? far > > too neatly ? defines the conflict. But is the objective to > > define our enemies and triumph over them, or do we want > > to find solutions for the greater commonwealth? > > If it's the latter, we should watch to ensure that our new > > groundwater law results in rules for real sustainability, > > move swiftly to restore water to residents whose wells have > > gone dry, step up our water conservation efforts and stop > > thinking in terms of them versus us. Most important, we > > must continue California's leadership in fighting climate > > change. It's misleading to zero in on part of the picture: If > > we want holistic solutions, we have to take the holistic > > view. > > *Nathanael Johnson, a Bay Area journalist, writes the* > > *"Thought for Food" column at Grist.org. He is the author* > > *of "All Natural" and a contributor to Harper's Magazine,* > > *New York and "This American Life." Twitter:* > > *@SavorTooth.* > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 18760 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue May 19 07:46:15 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 14:46:15 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard: Supes to request Trinity River flow, consider stormwater ordinance Message-ID: <1656529152.1878610.1432046775093.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.times-standard.com/general-news/20150516/supes-to-request-trinity-river-flow-consider-stormwater-ordinance?source=most_viewed ? Supes to request Trinity River flow, consider stormwater ordinance By?Will Houston, Eureka Times-StandardPOSTED:?05/16/15, 10:12 PM PDT?|0 COMMENTS If you go:What: Board of Supervisors meetingWhen: 9 a.m. TuesdayWhere: Supervisors? chamber, first floor, Humboldt County Courthouse, 825 Fifth St., EurekaThe full agenda can be viewed online at?http://humboldtgov.org/167/Board-of-SupervisorsAnticipating another drought-parched summer, Humboldt County supervisors are set to ask Washington, D.C., on Tuesday to help prevent a potential fish-kill by setting aside long-promised Trinity River water.?We don?t want to be in a position in that we need the water and then get caught up in six weeks of legal delays,? 3rd District Supervisor Mark Lovelace said in a previous interview with the Times-Standard in April. ?That could be devastating to the fish.?While the supervisors? letter to U.S. Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewel states that Humboldt County will likely use the water in the late summer when fish-kill conditions seem apparent, it also calls for even more foresight from the Interior Department?s Bureau of Reclamation, which controls the flow of dam water.?The county is further requesting to begin a dialogue in the form of a stakeholders group with Reclamation and other downstream users to establish a clear protocol for making such releases in future years, as well as ensuring that ample water is being held in reserve to provide for allocations for future years,? the letter concludes.The draft letter is the result of a collaborative effort between Lovelace, 5th District Supervisor Ryan Sundberg, and the Hoopa Valley Tribe.The county currently has the right to request up to 50,000 acre-feet of water to be released from Lewiston Dam on Trinity Lake annually, though receiving this allotment has led to legal challenges from Central Valley Project water suppliers and will likely lead to more once this newest request is approved by the board.?The county?s right to the water is clearly spelled out in a 1955 Congressional act and subsequent contract between the county and the agency in 1959, which promised the county 50,000 acre-feet of water annually in addition to fish protecting flows before water can be diverted to the Central Valley Project. Up until December 2014, the U.S. Interior Department considered the fish protecting flows to count toward the 50,000 acre feet before issuing an opinion formally recognizing them as separate mandates.Fish-kill preventative flows have been released from Lewiston Dam several times over the last few years to prevent the warm water temperatures and low flows that cause salmon and other fish to become vulnerable to the deadly ich parasite and gill rot disease. Last summer, the Hoopa Valley Tribe and several other tribal and local entities were able to convince the Bureau of Reclamation to release preventive flows to protect against a fish kill like that of 2002 in which an estimated 34,000 fish died.?isement IN OTHER BUSINESS The board is also set to consider the first reading of a state-mandated ordinance that would apply extensive new stormwater quality regulations for development projects in unincorporated urban areas. After the approval of a state permit in 2013 by the State Water Resources Control Board, local entities were called to adopt new stormwater regulations to take effect by July 1, 2015.?The principle is that stormwater flows through drains and pipes and culverts that lead to creeks and rivers,? county Deputy Public Works Director Hank Seemann said. ?Those are a public resource and they have beneficial uses. So the state wants to create requirements that protect those beneficial uses.?The ordinance before the board on Tuesday is a response to this state mandate and creates two approaches to improve stormwater quality. The first part of the ordinance would give the county government authority to regulate certain types of discharges into stormwater systems. Seemann said that this does not mean that these illicit discharges were allowed beforehand.?They would be subject to other prohibitions, but this brings it under the umbrella of protecting stormwater,? he said. ?It strengthens the county?s authority to require certain best management practices to minimize certain discharges of pollutants.?Communities in Humboldt County that would be affected by these regulations include the McKinleyville, Cutten, Myrtletown, Humboldt Hill, Shelter Cove, Ridgewood Heights and Pine Hill areas.The second part of the ordinance the board will consider will set new property development regulations related to stormwater for any new projects that start after July 1. Seemann said that the new low-impact development standards that developers would have to abide by would seek to reduce stormwater runoff and allow for more water to stay in the ground.?One of the effects that development has is that it replaces permeable surfaces where the water can percolate into the ground and instead creates the hardened surface where the stormwater runs off,? he said.How big the surface area of the development project is will dictate how extensive these regulations will be, Seemann said.?For a project that creates or replaces between 2,500 and 5,000 square-feet of impervious surface, there is certain level of requirements developers would need to abide by and would choose at least one measure that helps promote on-site stormwater retention.??It could be as simple as tree planting or could be installing a rain barrel that collects roof runoff and directs it to a lawn,? Seemann said. ?There are some other techniques that could be used.?Will Houston can be reached at 707-441-0504. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Reach the author at?whouston at times-standard.com@times-standard.com?or follow Will on Twitter:?@Will_S_Houston. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at att.net Tue May 19 07:53:46 2015 From: kierassociates at att.net (Kier Associates) Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 07:53:46 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] LA Times OpEd: In the water crisis, it's time to move beyond the farms vs. cities mindset In-Reply-To: References: <009d01d09192$3f02b860$bd082920$@sisqtel.net> Message-ID: <002601d09243$9cad1f80$d6075e80$@att.net> Jay Mr Johnson is simply re-chewing the same old cabbage, below. Agriculture uses 80 percent of CA?s ?developed? water (if you?re a river advocate you simply leave the ?developed? out) or 40 percent of the total water that rises across CA?s 43 million acres (that?s the 40 percent figure that the ag advocates use) Then he stumbles on to say that rivers are ?nice? ? or something to that effect But lost in Mr Johnson?s cabbage-chewing noise is that increment of CA water that is neither 1- ?developed?; nor 2- specifically designated as ?environmental? Are North Coast river discharges to the ocean to be tallied in the ?environmental? column because (some) of them are in the W&S Rivers system? Or are they simply ?undeveloped? ? neither fish nor fowl ? I?ve been using the 80 percent too long to learn the new math Bill Kier From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Glase, Jay Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 6:23 AM To: Sari Sommarstrom Cc: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] LA Times OpEd: In the water crisis, it's time to move beyond the farms vs. cities mindset I've seen this graphic before, but have never seen a good description of how the numbers are determined. Does anyone know the math behind the figures in this graph? Since it's credited to DWR, I know there's a formula somewhere. Does this presume to account for all of the water that falls from the sky in any form, lands in California, and then goes somewhere? Does it account for evaporation, for water that stays in the mountain lakes of the Sierras and elsewhere, becomes groundwater, or is taken up and transpired by the douglas fir and ponderosa pine forests in the state? If the argument is made that most comparisons are just for "developed" water, and that the comparison needs to be expanded, then the next question might be, where do you stop? If "the gross domestic joy generated by rivers" is considered a use of water, why not count the water that goes toward the bright green buds of new growth on a pine tree in the spring? Maybe the math gets too complex at that point, but surely someone has calculated how much water a pine tree can transpire into the atmosphere in a season of growth. Hey, I just thought of something, is all the water that grows all the trees that are harvested in California part of the agricultural water? Time for some more math?! Cheers, jay On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 12:44 PM, Sari Sommarstrom wrote: http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-johnson-big-picture-california-water-20150517-story.html Op-Ed: In the water crisis, it's time to move beyond the farms vs. cities mindset By Nathanael Johnson At this point, just about every Californian with a pulse knows that agriculture uses 80% of the state's water, and cities 20%. This talking point is true as far as it goes, but that's not very far. You have to limit your vision to the water consumed by humans, ?developed? water. This perspective blinds us to the big water picture, and it sets up an unnecessary opposition between farms and cities. How water is used in California The 80/20 view of California water leaves out the water required to keep riverine fish and riparian habitat alive. It leaves out the freshwater flows needed to keep saltwater from surging into the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. And it leaves out beauty and the gross domestic joy generated by rivers. Here's the complete picture: About 50% of California water goes toward maintaining environmental quality, 40% goes to agriculture, and 10% goes to cities (including business uses such as manufacturing). It can be counterintuitive to think of the environment as a water user ? after all, that water is ?used? only insofar as we leave it in the rivers. But allowing water to flow down rivers to the sea really is an active use with measurable benefits. We devalue the environment if we leave it out of the equation. And we can't judge the arguments for and against such uses if we don't acknowledge that they exist. Still, it's the ag/urban split that sticks in our minds. Whether the figure is 80% or 40%, the fact that farms use so much more water than cities evokes fury from those who see farmers as robber barons, converting a natural resource into private fortunes. There's a growing populist sentiment that irrigation water is simply making rich farmers richer. This is by no means self-evident. It's worth noting that public sentiment was once precisely reversed and irrigation was seen as a democratizing force. In 1870, giant dry-farmed wheat estates and cattle ranches dominated the Central Valley. But with irrigation, a family farmer could make a living on as little as 10 acres selling vegetables, fruit and nuts. At that time, Californians saw irrigation as a way to break up the land monopolies and foster Jeffersonian farmers. The reality, of course, is complex. In the beginning, irrigation enriched the monopolists even more than small farmers, but as Norris Hundley Jr. shows in his history of the state's water, ?The Great Thirst,? it also built up an agricultural middle class in places such as Fresno, Merced and Stockton. Irrigated agriculture provided for the egalitarian beginnings of Anaheim, Riverside and Ontario. It has been the means by which many immigrants ? German, Swiss, Armenian, Hmong and Mexican ? have made their stake in California. And the situation remains complex today: Irrigation water supports millionaires with giant tracts of land and middleclass family farmers alike. Another reason the 80% figure has gone viral is that it contains an uncomfortable truth: It takes a lot of water to grow food. Contrary to conventional wisdom, drip irrigation systems and micro sprinklers do very little to change a crop's consumption of water. It's true that less efficient techniques like flood irrigation use more water, but what isn't required by the plants isn't lost, it goes down into the aquifer or back into the river. Increasing the organic matter in soil ? with techniques such as composting, mulching and reduced plowing ? can improve water retention and lessen water use. But the lion's share of irrigation water goes into the plants, and that's hard to change. In the end, any cuts to irrigation mean less food production. Less food production means less economic activity. That's not cause for panic: Agriculture accounts for just 2% of California's massive economy. Nonetheless, California has the highest agriculture sales of any state, and those sales are the bulwark of many poorer counties. There are really two Californias: a wealthy coast and a poor inland that relies heavily on farmers. Whenever there is a drought, farmers suffer first ? they idle land, pump groundwater. Each year, farmers have been pumping up more water than seeps down, but a law passed last year will change that. There will be even less water for farmers as the new regulations put an end to groundwater mining and the climate warms. There's no getting around it: Those cutbacks will hurt. In cities, by contrast, residents can cut water consumption with much less pain. Los Angeles has kept its water consumption flat since the 1980s while adding a million residents, thanks to improved technology (low-flow toilets!) and improved landscaping (these dry gardens are far more beautiful than turf, in my humble opinion). In a moment of crisis, it's human nature to look for villains: Liberals against conservatives, north against south, farms against cities. The 80/20 statistic neatly ? far too neatly ? defines the conflict. But is the objective to define our enemies and triumph over them, or do we want to find solutions for the greater commonwealth? If it's the latter, we should watch to ensure that our new groundwater law results in rules for real sustainability, move swiftly to restore water to residents whose wells have gone dry, step up our water conservation efforts and stop thinking in terms of them versus us. Most important, we must continue California's leadership in fighting climate change. It's misleading to zero in on part of the picture: If we want holistic solutions, we have to take the holistic view. Nathanael Johnson, a Bay Area journalist, writes the "Thought for Food" column at Grist.org. He is the author of "All Natural" and a contributor to Harper's Magazine, New York and "This American Life." Twitter: @SavorTooth. _______________________________________________ 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: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 18760 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Tue May 19 09:00:37 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 09:00:37 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] FW: OSU News Release - California Central Valley Salmon Future In-Reply-To: <0E2EBD280CC5EE408DF55663F22716A1AC61D44D@EX2.oregonstate.edu> References: <0E2EBD280CC5EE408DF55663F22716A1AC61D44D@EX2.oregonstate.edu> Message-ID: <004d01d0924c$f31bce80$d9536b80$@sisqtel.net> Bleak Future for Central Valley Wild Salmon In a recently published paper by Sierra Franks and Robert Lackey of Oregon State University, most surveyed fisheries experts concluded that by 2100 wild salmon in the California Central Valley will be extirpated or minimally abundant if current trends continue. The experts provided their candid assessments with a promise of complete and permanent anonymity. Despite restoration efforts spanning decades and involving large expenditures, runs of wild salmon in the Central Valley continue to decline. The causes of the decline are many and have been well studied. Given the most probable policy and ecological scenarios (i.e. effects of continued harvest, continued stocking from hatcheries, changing climate, continued human population growth and associated demands for scarce water resources) and based on expert judgment by fisheries experts, Franks and Lackey projected the most likely future of wild salmon runs in the Central Valley in 2100 and it is not promising. The paper was published in the current issue of San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science and is available for free download. ************************** Web Link: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/3vt5z15p ************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: OSU-News-Release-Central-Valley-Salmon-Paper-Franks-Lackey-2015.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 39440 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kierassociates at att.net Tue May 19 09:44:45 2015 From: kierassociates at att.net (Kier Associates) Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 09:44:45 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] FW: OSU News Release - California Central Valley Salmon Future In-Reply-To: <004d01d0924c$f31bce80$d9536b80$@sisqtel.net> References: <0E2EBD280CC5EE408DF55663F22716A1AC61D44D@EX2.oregonstate.edu> <004d01d0924c$f31bce80$d9536b80$@sisqtel.net> Message-ID: <004101d09253$1d5dece0$5819c6a0$@att.net> Should anyone be interested, the breakdown by occupation of the 26 individuals who participated in the Franks-Lackey survey is as follows: Current Federal: 7 Retired Federal: 1 Current State: 3 Retired State: 3 University System: 5 NGO/Other: 7 I promised Ms. Franks that I would provide her my take on the several questions, but have failed so far to do so. It would be interesting, of course, to have survey results from an even larger population of experts Bill Kier From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Sari Sommarstrom Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 9:01 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] FW: OSU News Release - California Central Valley Salmon Future Bleak Future for Central Valley Wild Salmon In a recently published paper by Sierra Franks and Robert Lackey of Oregon State University, most surveyed fisheries experts concluded that by 2100 wild salmon in the California Central Valley will be extirpated or minimally abundant if current trends continue. The experts provided their candid assessments with a promise of complete and permanent anonymity. Despite restoration efforts spanning decades and involving large expenditures, runs of wild salmon in the Central Valley continue to decline. The causes of the decline are many and have been well studied. Given the most probable policy and ecological scenarios (i.e. effects of continued harvest, continued stocking from hatcheries, changing climate, continued human population growth and associated demands for scarce water resources) and based on expert judgment by fisheries experts, Franks and Lackey projected the most likely future of wild salmon runs in the Central Valley in 2100 and it is not promising. The paper was published in the current issue of San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science and is available for free download. ************************** Web Link: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/3vt5z15p ************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue May 19 10:03:44 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 17:03:44 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] 3 links: California drought: People support water conservation, in theory Message-ID: <248734278.1981740.1432055024030.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Poll: Large majority of Californians support water restrictions amid droughtDavid Siders, Sacramento BeeNearly two-thirds of Californians support mandatory water restrictions ordered by Gov. Jerry Brown amid the state?s historic drought, though many fear it will be hard to cut back and think farmers can do more to conserve, according to a new Field Poll.??California drought: People support water conservation, in theoryKurtis Alexander, San Francisco ChronicleCalifornians widely support Gov. Jerry Brown?s call for mandatory water cuts amid the deepening drought, according to a new poll of state residents ? but many don?t know if they can pitch in.?Poll: Most Californians Support Water RestrictionsEd Joyce, Capital Public RadioA new Field Poll shows almost two-thirds of Californians surveyed support Governor Jerry Brown's urban water reduction plan. The poll says nearly 89 percent of people surveyed believe the current water shortage in California is serious. ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From unofelice at gmail.com Tue May 19 12:49:47 2015 From: unofelice at gmail.com (Felice Pace) Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 12:49:47 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Scientists on the Klamath River's salmon disease epidemic Message-ID: Last year up to 100% of the juvenile salmon which were captured and tested while migrating down the Klamath River in hopes of reaching the Pacific Ocean were found to be diseased. Only 8% of the juvenile salmon fitted with radio transmitters made it to the Klamath Estuary and to the Pacific Ocean. This year few juvenile salmon are showing up in down-migrant monitoring traps; up to 100% of juvenile salmon tested are already diseased even before the hottest months with the worst water quality have arrived. Independent scientists at Oregon State University say that "severe infection by the myxozoan parasite *Ceratomyxa shasta* has, in large part, been responsible for the declining numbers of juvenile KR fall Chinook and coho salmon and subsequent impacts on later adult returns." They add that "the reduction of the commercial (ocean salmon) catch by 90% in 2006 was a direct result of the weak returns of Chinook salmon to the Klamath River (KR)." Read the entire statement by OSU scientists and access related information at: http://microbiology.science.oregonstate.edu/content/disease-effects-wild-populations. The Klamath River's unprecedented salmon disease epidemic is negatively impacting coastal economies in Oregon and California, not to mention Klamath River and tribal communities. Why is it then that we read nothing about this in the press? Why are the tribes, fishing organizations and environmental groups which claim to be champions and defenders of Klamath Salmon silent? And how is it that a Biological Opinion (on operation of the Bureau of Reclamation's Klamath Irrigation Project) can stand unchallenged when that Opinion robs the Klamath of the flushing spring flows which scientists say are one of the few things humans can do to stem a Pacific Salmon disease epidemic that is both unprecedented and the direct result of the Klamath's terrible water quality? Most importantly, which tribe, fishing or environmental organization will end the silence and step up to challenge the Biological Opinion which is killing most of the juvenile salmon produced in the Klamath River, its tributaries and even the Iron Gate Hatchery? Felice Pace Klamath, CA 95548 707-954-6588 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t.schlosser at msaj.com Tue May 19 12:58:44 2015 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Thomas P. Schlosser) Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 12:58:44 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Scientists on the Klamath River's salmon disease epidemic In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <555B95F4.7030002@msaj.com> The BiOp need not be challenged, instead the agencies should reinitiate consultation and adopt new protective measures to avoid jeopardy. The new fish health information should be enough to get NMFS to reopen the biological opinion protecting coho salmon voluntarily. There is a disease condition for BOR's operations on BiOp p. 392, Table 13.6 "Summary of annual incidental take of SONCC coho salmon expected to occur as a result of the proposed action". It says, for C. shasta: "Measured by a surrogate of *up to 54 percent (via histology or 49 percent via QPCR) of the total annual Chinook salmon juveniles in the mainstem Klamath River between the Shasta River and the Trinity River may be infected with C. shasta during the months of May to July.*" An infection rate of 90-100% of juveniles is twice the incidental take that was anticipated; it should be enough to trigger reinitiation. BiOp page 410 says: "As provided in 50 CFR ?402.16, reinitiation of formal consultation is required where discretionary Federal agency involvement or control over the action has been retained (or is authorized by law) and if: (1) *the amount or extent of incidental take is exceeded*; (2) new information reveals effects of the agency action that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not considered in this opinion;" Tom On 5/19/2015 12:49 PM, Felice Pace wrote: > Last year up to 100% of the juvenile salmon which were captured and > tested while migrating down the Klamath River in hopes of reaching the > Pacific Ocean were found to be diseased. Only 8% of the juvenile > salmon fitted with radio transmitters made it to the Klamath Estuary > and to the Pacific Ocean. This year few juvenile salmon are showing up > in down-migrant monitoring traps; up to 100% of juvenile salmon tested > are already diseased even before the hottest months with the worst > water quality have arrived. > > Independent scientists at Oregon State University say that "severe > infection by the myxozoan parasite /Ceratomyxa shasta/ has, in large > part, been responsible for the declining numbers of juvenile KR fall > Chinook and coho salmon and subsequent impacts on later adult > returns." They add that "the reduction of the commercial (ocean > salmon) catch by 90% in 2006 was a direct result of the weak returns > of Chinook salmon to the Klamath River (KR)." > > Read the entire statement by OSU scientists and access related > information at: > http://microbiology.science.oregonstate.edu/content/disease-effects-wild-populations. > > The Klamath River's unprecedented salmon disease epidemic is > negatively impacting coastal economies in Oregon and California, not > to mention Klamath River and tribal communities. Why is it then that > we read nothing about this in the press? Why are the tribes, fishing > organizations and environmental groups which claim to be champions and > defenders of Klamath Salmon silent? And how is it that a Biological > Opinion (on operation of the Bureau of Reclamation's Klamath > Irrigation Project) can stand unchallenged when that Opinion robs the > Klamath of the flushing spring flows which scientists say are one of > the few things humans can do to stem a Pacific Salmon disease epidemic > that is both unprecedented and the direct result of the Klamath's > terrible water quality? > > Most importantly, which tribe, fishing or environmental organization > will end the silence and step up to challenge the Biological Opinion > which is killing most of the juvenile salmon produced in the Klamath > River, its tributaries and even the Iron Gate Hatchery? > > Felice Pace > Klamath, CA 95548 > 707-954-6588 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 May 20 07:42:00 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 14:42:00 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] County formally requests promised Trinity River flows Message-ID: <1143039376.2665978.1432132920754.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.times-standard.com/general-news/20150519/county-formally-requests-promised-trinity-river-flows ? County formally requests promised Trinity River flows Times-Standard file photo The Board of Supervisors on Tuesday approved sending a letter to the Department of the Interior that formally requests its promised 50,000 acre-feet of Trinity River.?By?Will Houston, Eureka Times-StandardPOSTED:?05/19/15, 9:48 PM PDT?|0 COMMENTSThe Iron Gate Dam spanning the Klamath River near Hornbrook, California, is shown in this August 2009 photo. Monitoring is currently showing an increased likelihood of a salmon kill on the middle mainstem Klamath River between the dam in Siskiyou County and Weitchpec.?FILE AP PhotoThe Humboldt County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday voted unanimously to send a letter to the federal government making a formal request for its promised 50,000 acre-feet of Trinity River water in advance of another summer of drought and possible litigation.Passed as part of the board?s consent calender ? with 5th District Supervisor Ryan Sundberg absent ? the letter to the U.S. Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell requests that the Interior?s Bureau of Reclamation reserve the county?s annual 50,000 acre-feet of Trinity Reservoir water. The letter states that the water will be used to protect human health and safety in the Klamath-Trinity river system as well as to address the needs of fisheries.?The optimal timing and flow regime of such releases, however, will likely not be determinable until the need is dire,? the letter states.Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries Director Mike Orcutt was one of the tribal members who collaborated with the county in the formation of the letter. By requesting the flows early, it allows more time for the county and Bureau of Reclamation to work out a scheduling process as well as to give leg room for any legal challenges by Central Valley water suppliers.?A lot of people are expecting that their water supply, including this water out of the Trinity River, will be litigated,? Orcutt said.This water was promised to the county 60 years ago after Congress passed the 1955 Trinity River Division Act and signed a subsequent contract with the county in 1959. The Trinity River Division Act also established that water from the bureau?s Trinity River Division can only be sent to the Central Valley if there is sufficient water to protect Trinity River fish. Until December, the bureau held the stance that these fish protecting releases counted toward the county?s 50,000 acre-feet. This belief changed when the Interior Department released a legal opinion on Dec. 23 formally recognizing that the two water provisions were separate.?Second District Congressman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, has been urging the Interior Department to recognize this distinction and released a statement on Tuesday lending support for the county?s request.?The government has tribal trust obligations and obligations to the public to ensure that it uses all available means to protect our treasured salmon runs,? Huffman said. ?Honoring this promise will go a long way to meeting those commitments.?Orcutt said this 50,000 acre-feet is especially important this year after a federal judge ruled in October 2014 that the Bureau of Reclamation will be required to cite better legal authority to release Trinity Reservoir water to protect Klamath River salmon. Orcutt said the tribe is appealing the decision as juvenile fish move between the Klamath River and its tributary the Trinity River.??One of our concerns is that the fish out of the Trinity have to go down the Klamath,? Orcutt said.Hoopa Valley Tribal Councilman Ryan Jackson said that the tribe has been meeting with the bureau?s Mid-Pacific Region Director Dave Murillo who ?gave us assurances that he will do whatever is necessary to protect the fishery.?Last summer, Murillo had reversed his decision to deny the Hoopa Valley, Karuk and Yurok tribes? call for fish kill preventative releases to the Trinity River from Lewiston Dam after meeting with tribes and touring the river.The Klamath Basin Monitoring Program currently shows that the likelihood of a salmon kill on the middle mainstem Klamath River between the Iron Gate Dam in Siskiyou County and Weitchpec has increased due to a high presence of a deadly parasite, Ceratomyxa shasta. According to fish monitoring data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Department?s California-Nevada Fish Health Center, all of the salmon tested in the Shasta to Scott reach of the Klamath River on April 30 were infected with the parasite and all the salmon tested from the Scott to Salmon reach of the river had the parasite as of May 4.Klamath River tributaries like the Trinity River were showing no signs of fish kill conditions as of Tuesday afternoon, with Orcutt stating that higher flow releases were being to wind down. The lower Klamath River between Weitchpec and the Klamath River estuary are currently showing heightening, but not immediate, fish kill conditions, according to the Klamath Basin Monitoring Program.The county?s letter also requests that the bureau, county, scientific organizations and tribes form a collaborative working group. The group would be charged with developing a long-term management plan that will ensure the county will have several years of its promised water stored in Trinity Reservoir, even with factors such as the ongoing drought and Central Valley diversions drawing down the supply.Will Houston can be reached at 707-441-0504. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Reach the author at?whouston at times-standard.com@times-standard.com?or follow Will on Twitter:?@Will_S_Houston. - Full bio and more articles by Will Houston -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed May 20 07:56:04 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 14:56:04 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] California farms added workers in 2014, even amid drought Message-ID: <2040915231.2698213.1432133764398.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article21450660.html ? WATER & DROUGHT ?MAY 19, 2015 California farms added workers in 2014, even amid drought The state had 6,000 more farmworkers in 2014 than in 2013The shift toward more lucrative crops requires more laborFarmworkers cut the shoots from undesirable rootstocks on a pomegranate tree in Mendota. Most land fallowed in California?s four-year drought had been devoted to crops such as hay and wheat that do not require a lot of workers. Vegetables, nuts and berries, which require more workers, have increased in production.?|?Hector Amezcua?hamezcua at sacbee.com??BY PHILLIP REESE AND DALE KASLERpreese at sacbee.comDespite the drought, the number of workers employed in California?s agricultural industry rose to its highest level in at least 24 years, as many farmers shifted toward labor-intensive, permanent crops, according to the latest state and federal statistics.The employment figures paint a more complicated picture than the message from some state officials and agricultural employers who publicly lament the drought?s impact on farmworkers. For example, Gov. Jerry Brown last month told a national television audience that ?farmworkers who are at the very low end of the economic scale here are out of work.?The state?s agricultural workforce would have grown faster last year if not for drought ? but it still grew, several farm economists said.??There?s no doubt in the data that the impact of the drought ? has been smaller than we expected, surprisingly so,? said Jeffrey Michael, director of the?Center for Business and Policy Research?at the University of the Pacific.The effect of the drought on California agriculture and its workforce is a sensitive topic. Agriculture takes 80 percent of the water used by people in California, though its share falls to 40 percent of the state?s supply when the water used for fish and other environmental purposes is taken into account.Brown largely excluded farmers from an executive order mandating that urban customers reduce water consumption by 25 percent this year. But hundreds of farmers in the Central Valley have been told to expect no water deliveries from the federal government, and hundreds more have seen their water rights curtailed by the state.Largely because of a lack of water, farmers last year fallowed roughly 500,000 acres, satellite photos and federal statistics indicate. That?s equivalent to more than 5 percent of the state?s irrigated cropland.Most land fallowed was devoted to crops such as rice and wheat that do not require a high number of workers, Michael and other economists said. Meanwhile, fruit and berry production, which often requires more workers, increased.Overall, there was more farm work available in California last year than during any other year at least since 1990, when modern record-keeping began, according to the state Employment Development Department. And hired farmworkers collectively made more money, too, separate federal data show.California farms employed about 417,000 workers, on average, each month during 2014, up by 6,000 from 2013, state figures show. Farm employment increased by about 30,000 from 2004 to 2014.With average pay of roughly $9 per hour, front-line farm employees are among the lowest-paid workers in California. But hired farmworker wages and salaries rose 2 percent to $6.5 billion from 2013 to 2014, after adjusting for inflation, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.Several labor economists said they were surprised by the trend. A widely cited UC Davis report released in July predicted that the drought would result in ?17,100 jobs lost? in 2014.Daniel Sumner, a UC Davis agricultural economist who co-authored the report, said, ?I?m not going to stand by that number and say, ?Gee we must have nailed it.? ??But, he and others said, the state would have added thousands more farm jobs if not for the drought. Put another way, the farm labor market could have grown faster if more water were available. Had fallowed acres contained crops, workers would have been needed to sustain them.?You cannot grow crops on half a million acres with no labor,? said Richard Howitt, a UC Davis agricultural economist and another report co-author.417,000?Average number of California farmworkers last year6,000?Growth in farmworkers from 2013 to 201430,000?Growth in farmworkers from 2004 to 2014Fields fallowed last year mostly had been used to grow wheat, rice, hay, corn and cotton, Michael said, citing USDA statistics. Acreage devoted to nuts, wine grapes and some vegetables increased.?There?s still a lot of labor-intensive crops ? that are keeping people busy,? said Lupe Sandoval, managing director of the California Farm Labor Contractor Association. ?We still have a lot of strawberries, we still have a lot of grapes. ? The cherry harvest is just getting underway. That?s three to four weeks of pretty intensive labor.?Marc Grossman, spokesman for the United Farm Workers in California, said workers in his union have been in high demand during the drought. Most union workers toil in strawberry, wine grape and vegetable fields. ?Union members have been working in the last few years more hours rather than less,? he said.Employment patterns vary from place to place ? and even from farm to farm ? across California. The data ?doesn?t mean people didn?t lose their jobs,? Sumner said.Mike Daddow, a fourth-generation rice grower in southern Sutter County, is fallowing 150 of his 650 acres for the second year in a row. He employs six workers this year instead of the usual 10.Three of his employees are part-timers, and normally ?you really push the overtime,? and guys get a lot more hours, he said. Not last year, or this year. ?The three part-time guys had shorter hours (last year) and, of course, no overtime.?Several labor economists said they could not yet predict how the drought would effect employment during 2015. Farms employed about 5,000 fewer workers during the first three months of 2015 as compared to the same period of 2014, state figures show. Hiring tends to peak during the summer.??I would hesitate to make the kind of predictions we did in the past, because clearly it didn?t come true in 2014,? Michael said.Phillip Reese:?(916) 321-1137,?@PhillipHReeseWATER & DROUGHT? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vina_frye at fws.gov Wed May 20 09:26:12 2015 From: vina_frye at fws.gov (Frye, Vina) Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 09:26:12 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group meeting Message-ID: Hi Folks, The Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group will meet on June 16-17, in Weaverville. See the details below. If you have further questions please feel free to call Joe Polos or me. [image: Inline image 1] Best regards, Vina Vina Frye Fish Biologist 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: image.png Type: image/png Size: 983262 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu May 21 06:32:43 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 13:32:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon Message-ID: <1541623679.3414440.1432215163416.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/disease-killing-young-klamath-river-salmon_18847031 ? Disease killing young Klamath River salmon ADDRESS: Damon Arthur? 5:50 PM, May 20, 20155:51 PM, May 20, 2015local news?|?homepage showcase?|?tablet showcase?|?happening now?Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.JEFF BARNARD/AP PHOTOSHOW CAPTIONKLAMATH RIVER, California - A disease flourishing in warm drought conditions in the Klamath River is killing young salmon and steelhead trying to migrate out to sea.And while in some sections of the river disease has been found in nearly all of the fish tested, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation officials also said Wednesday the drought has left little water available to send downstream to improve conditions.The Klamath Fish Health Assessment Team says conditions in the river are at orange, which means a fish kill is likely and federal and state agencies need to be alerted.?Orange is probably underplaying the crisis,? said Craig Tucker, natural resources policy advocate for the Karuk Tribe, one of several groups with the assessment team that has biologists monitoring the river.Scott Foott, project leader for the California-Nevada Fish Health Center in Anderson, said about 90 percent of the fish from Klamath brought to his center for testing have the disease, called ceratonova Shasta.Foott didn?t know how many fish were dying of the disease in the river, but said mortality rate among fish with the disease is very high. Fish biologists said conditions in the river are bad this year because of the lack of rain and runoff from snowmelt.Randy Turner, the fish health assessment team coordinator, said with low flows and warm water, worms that carry the disease have flourished on the streambed.The problem isn?t as bad in years when the river is cooler and runs higher and faster in the winter and spring because the current kicks up the gravel and cobble on the streambed, disrupting the worms? life cycle, he said.The worst section of the Klamath River is from the Shasta River west of Interstate 5 to more than 80 miles downstream to the Salmon River, Turner said.Brian Person, acting area manager of the bureau?s Yreka office, said Wednesday that after consulting with other agencies, they could not send more water downstream to improve conditions for the fish.?We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water supply at this point,? Person said.The bureau, as well as other federal and state wildlife agencies, would continue to monitor the fish in the river and could at some point decide to send more water downstream if conditions change, Person said.If the readiness level on the river goes from orange to red ? which means a fish kill is occurring ? there is probably little officials can do because so little water is available upstream in the river, Tucker said.Even if more water was sent downstream there probably isn?t enough available to benefit the young salmon, Tucker said. And if they use extra water in the spring to help the young salmon swimming out to sea, there might not be enough water in the fall to help the salmon returning from the ocean to spawn.During the past few years bureau officials have had to release more water from the Trinity River to prevent a different disease from killing spawning salmon in the Klamath. That disease, called ?ich,? has affected areas below where the Trinity flows into the Klamath River.The young fish dying from the ceratonova Shasta in the Klamath River are upstream of its confluence with the Trinity River, Turner said.It is likely a large percentage of this year?s salmon hatch will not make it out to sea, which means there will be fewer adult salmon returning back upstream to spawn in three years, Tucker said.?I think we?re definitely going to take a hit when the adults return,? he said.Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t.schlosser at msaj.com Thu May 21 08:09:00 2015 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Thomas P. Schlosser) Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 08:09:00 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon In-Reply-To: <1541623679.3414440.1432215163416.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1541623679.3414440.1432215163416.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <555DF50C.5020609@msaj.com> It's worth remebering that when Reclamation says (below) that there's too little water to help now ("We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water supply at this point,? Person said.") they are still using a 2014 Annual Operations Plan for the Klamath Project which, at page 2 calculates the project supply of water to be diverted from the Klamath at *239,000 acre-feet*. This is what they consider to be "most optimal." Tom On 5/21/2015 6:32 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/disease-killing-young-klamath-river-salmon_18847031 > > > Disease killing young Klamath River salmon > > Damon Arthur > > 5:50 PM, May 20, 2015 > 5:51 PM, May 20, 2015 > local news | homepage > showcase | tablet > showcase | happening > now > > Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material > may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. > JEFF BARNARD/AP PHOTO > SHOW CAPTION > KLAMATH RIVER, California - A disease flourishing in warm drought > conditions in the Klamath River is killing young salmon and steelhead > trying to migrate out to sea. > And while in some sections of the river disease has been found in > nearly all of the fish tested, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation officials > also said Wednesday the drought has left little water available to > send downstream to improve conditions. > The Klamath Fish Health Assessment Team says conditions in the river > are at orange, which means a fish kill is likely and federal and state > agencies need to be alerted. > ?Orange is probably underplaying the crisis,? said Craig Tucker, > natural resources policy advocate for the Karuk Tribe, one of several > groups with the assessment team that has biologists monitoring the river. > Scott Foott, project leader for the California-Nevada Fish Health > Center in Anderson, said about 90 percent of the fish from Klamath > brought to his center for testing have the disease, called ceratonova > Shasta. > Foott didn?t know how many fish were dying of the disease in the > river, but said mortality rate among fish with the disease is very > high. Fish biologists said conditions in the river are bad this year > because of the lack of rain and runoff from snowmelt. > Randy Turner, the fish health assessment team coordinator, said with > low flows and warm water, worms that carry the disease have flourished > on the streambed. > The problem isn?t as bad in years when the river is cooler and runs > higher and faster in the winter and spring because the current kicks > up the gravel and cobble on the streambed, disrupting the worms? life > cycle, he said. > The worst section of the Klamath River is from the Shasta River west > of Interstate 5 to more than 80 miles downstream to the Salmon River, > Turner said. > Brian Person, acting area manager of the bureau?s Yreka office, said > Wednesday that after consulting with other agencies, they could not > send more water downstream to improve conditions for the fish. > ?We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water > supply at this point,? Person said. > The bureau, as well as other federal and state wildlife agencies, > would continue to monitor the fish in the river and could at some > point decide to send more water downstream if conditions change, > Person said. > If the readiness level on the river goes from orange to red ? which > means a fish kill is occurring ? there is probably little officials > can do because so little water is available upstream in the river, > Tucker said. > Even if more water was sent downstream there probably isn?t enough > available to benefit the young salmon, Tucker said. And if they use > extra water in the spring to help the young salmon swimming out to > sea, there might not be enough water in the fall to help the salmon > returning from the ocean to spawn. > During the past few years bureau officials have had to release more > water from the Trinity River to prevent a different disease from > killing spawning salmon in the Klamath. That disease, called ?ich,? > has affected areas below where the Trinity flows into the Klamath River. > The young fish dying from the ceratonova Shasta in the Klamath River > are upstream of its confluence with the Trinity River, Turner said. > It is likely a large percentage of this year?s salmon hatch will not > make it out to sea, which means there will be fewer adult salmon > returning back upstream to spawn in three years, Tucker said. > ?I think we?re definitely going to take a hit when the adults return,? > he said. > Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material > may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 t.schlosser at msaj.com Thu May 21 09:57:06 2015 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Thomas P. Schlosser) Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 09:57:06 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon In-Reply-To: <555DF50C.5020609@msaj.com> References: <1541623679.3414440.1432215163416.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <555DF50C.5020609@msaj.com> Message-ID: <555E0E62.8010208@msaj.com> I grabbed the wrong KPOP by mistake; the 2015 Annual Operations Plan, page 2, calls for diverting*254,500 af to irrigation*, a policy choice to favor irrigation over fisheries requirements. On 5/21/2015 8:09 AM, Thomas P. Schlosser wrote: > It's worth remebering that when Reclamation says (below) that there's > too little water to help now ("We decided that is not the most optimal > use of a very short water supply at this point,? Person said.") they > are still using a 2014 Annual Operations Plan for the Klamath Project > which, at page 2 calculates the project supply of water to be diverted > from the Klamath at *239,000 acre-feet*. This is what they consider to > be "most optimal." > Tom > > On 5/21/2015 6:32 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: >> http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/disease-killing-young-klamath-river-salmon_18847031 >> >> >> Disease killing young Klamath River salmon >> >> Damon Arthur >> >> 5:50 PM, May 20, 2015 >> 5:51 PM, May 20, 2015 >> local news | homepage >> showcase | tablet >> showcase | happening >> now >> >> Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This >> material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. >> JEFF BARNARD/AP PHOTO >> SHOW CAPTION >> KLAMATH RIVER, California - A disease flourishing in warm drought >> conditions in the Klamath River is killing young salmon and steelhead >> trying to migrate out to sea. >> And while in some sections of the river disease has been found in >> nearly all of the fish tested, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation officials >> also said Wednesday the drought has left little water available to >> send downstream to improve conditions. >> The Klamath Fish Health Assessment Team says conditions in the river >> are at orange, which means a fish kill is likely and federal and >> state agencies need to be alerted. >> ?Orange is probably underplaying the crisis,? said Craig Tucker, >> natural resources policy advocate for the Karuk Tribe, one of several >> groups with the assessment team that has biologists monitoring the river. >> Scott Foott, project leader for the California-Nevada Fish Health >> Center in Anderson, said about 90 percent of the fish from Klamath >> brought to his center for testing have the disease, called ceratonova >> Shasta. >> Foott didn?t know how many fish were dying of the disease in the >> river, but said mortality rate among fish with the disease is very >> high. Fish biologists said conditions in the river are bad this year >> because of the lack of rain and runoff from snowmelt. >> Randy Turner, the fish health assessment team coordinator, said with >> low flows and warm water, worms that carry the disease have >> flourished on the streambed. >> The problem isn?t as bad in years when the river is cooler and runs >> higher and faster in the winter and spring because the current kicks >> up the gravel and cobble on the streambed, disrupting the worms? life >> cycle, he said. >> The worst section of the Klamath River is from the Shasta River west >> of Interstate 5 to more than 80 miles downstream to the Salmon River, >> Turner said. >> Brian Person, acting area manager of the bureau?s Yreka office, said >> Wednesday that after consulting with other agencies, they could not >> send more water downstream to improve conditions for the fish. >> ?We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water >> supply at this point,? Person said. >> The bureau, as well as other federal and state wildlife agencies, >> would continue to monitor the fish in the river and could at some >> point decide to send more water downstream if conditions change, >> Person said. >> If the readiness level on the river goes from orange to red ? which >> means a fish kill is occurring ? there is probably little officials >> can do because so little water is available upstream in the river, >> Tucker said. >> Even if more water was sent downstream there probably isn?t enough >> available to benefit the young salmon, Tucker said. And if they use >> extra water in the spring to help the young salmon swimming out to >> sea, there might not be enough water in the fall to help the salmon >> returning from the ocean to spawn. >> During the past few years bureau officials have had to release more >> water from the Trinity River to prevent a different disease from >> killing spawning salmon in the Klamath. That disease, called ?ich,? >> has affected areas below where the Trinity flows into the Klamath River. >> The young fish dying from the ceratonova Shasta in the Klamath River >> are upstream of its confluence with the Trinity River, Turner said. >> It is likely a large percentage of this year?s salmon hatch will not >> make it out to sea, which means there will be fewer adult salmon >> returning back upstream to spawn in three years, Tucker said. >> ?I think we?re definitely going to take a hit when the adults >> return,? he said. >> Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This >> material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 21 12:14:33 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 19:14:33 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] E&E: Calif. House bill in works could portend wider Western drought legislation Message-ID: <915607019.3680100.1432235673253.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060018935 ? WATER:? Calif. House bill in works could portend wider Western drought legislation? Nick Juliano and Annie Snider, E&E reportersE&E Daily: Thursday, May 21, 2015House Republicans from California are readying legislation to address their home state's ongoing drought by focusing on water transfers and storage while attempting to avoid the most controversial proposals to roll back environmental regulations that sank earlier legislative efforts.A bill is expected to be introduced as soon as next month, after lawmakers return from their upcoming weeklong Memorial Day recess. Details are being closely guarded, but sources familiar with the effort say the California-specific legislation would likely become part of a broader bill addressing drought conditions across the West.A?draft bill?circulating among stakeholders would tweak Endangered Species Act protections for fish that inhabit the state's main water delivery system in order to send more water south, similar to bills that passed the House last year. But a GOP aide said the proposal was not a reflection of the "current state of play" on a California water bill, which would focus primarily on delivering water south and increasing storage capacity.Rep. Jim Costa, a moderate Democrat who represents parts of California's agriculture-heavy Central Valley, said he has offered Republicans some suggestions for their bill but that the authors have been "understandably" tight-lipped about its contents. He said he expects a bill to be introduced the week of June 1, following the congressional recess, and added that action is even more necessary this year as conditions continue to deteriorate because of the drought."Just as last year we were attempting to deal with both short-term and long-term solutions, we were not successful, and things have not gotten any better," Costa said.The goal of the California Republicans writing the bill is to arrive at a proposal that could win support from at least six Senate Democrats whose votes would be needed to avoid a filibuster in that chamber and to win President Obama's signature, these sources say. But it remains to be seen whether such consensus would be possible.Key targets include Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein of California, Michael Bennet of Colorado and Tom Udall of New Mexico, an aide involved in the process said. But House Republicans are largely writing off the chance of securing support from more liberal Westerners such as Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada or California Sen. Barbara Boxer, who objected to earlier drought bills over proposed changes to environmental laws such as the Endangered Species Act.Costa reiterated the advice he said he gave Boxer last year -- "at some point, she's got to decide whether she wants to try to help solve some of these problems or whether she's satisfied with the status quo" -- but said he did not know whether she is involved in negotiations."There may be engagement," he said. "But I'm not aware of it."Regarding concerns over the effects of drought relief on wildlife, Costa recalled studies he read arguing that the effects of climate change may drive some species extinct regardless of what is done in response to the drought and suggested that lawmakers needed to narrow their focus."A lot of species we're attempting to save may become extinct anyway," Costa told reporters yesterday. "And so we're not having the conversation -- if, in fact, biologists believe that to be the case in the next 40 to 60 years -- where do we best use our resources to manage those species that we can maintain?"Costa said he spoke with Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski earlier this week about a Western drought bill the Alaska Republican is working on. And he plans to meet today with California Secretary for Natural Resources John Laird, who is on Capitol Hill this week meeting with various lawmakers about the drought.Costa also praised the Obama administration, particularly Deputy Interior Secretary Mike Connor, who has been spearheading the drought response. But the federal government's overall approach has been focused mostly on supporting the California state government and waiting for consensus to emerge among the state's congressional delegation, "which has been an elusive goal," he noted."In terms of taking any big action, I think, on an issue that has been as contentious as water has been in California for decades, they're not going to take the leadership role, is my point," Costa said of the administration. "But have they been involved? Yes."Murkowski is also following the negotiations with an eye toward West-wide collaboration."Senator Murkowski recognizes the seriousness of the drought conditions in California and throughout the West and stands ready to help her colleagues in the Senate and the House find a solution that addresses these serious concerns," spokesman Mike Tadeo said.In a separate interview with?E&E Daily?yesterday, Connor said his department is in close contact with lawmakers as they work on legislation."We've been providing a lot of technical support to particularly Senator Feinstein and her staff as they've gone through various machinations of potential drought legislation," he said. "We haven't taken a position on any legislation at this point in time."Connor, who served as commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation before moving up to the Interior Department's No. 2 spot last year, said that the administration has been focused on finding room for additional flexibility and boosting water deliveries while still working within the Endangered Species Act. To that end, the extra funding appropriators have sent their way has been key, he said. Yesterday, Interior Secretary Sally Jewell announced $50 million in grants from the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to improve water efficiency and conservation in California and 11 other Western states."The resources that we've been provided through the appropriations process I think have been well invested," Connor said. "I think the monitoring, the science, the data gathering activities have helped us be more flexible in our operations, so we could certainly do more of that."The Senate Appropriations Committee is slated to mark up its energy and water development funding bill, which includes the Bureau of Reclamation, later this morning. The bill passed out of subcommittee includes $50 million in emergency drought relief funds, and Feinstein has signaled she may push to increase that amount.Connor said he would welcome a broader conversation in Congress about drought across the West, where the current parched conditions are exacerbating a growing gap between supply and demand in many booming regions.He noted that in the West, where communities' water supplies can come from far-flung sources, impacts in one area can have knock-on effects in others. For instance, he pointed out that Southern California gets water both from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, known as the Bay Delta, and from the Colorado River."There's a nexus there, and when we lose flexibility in both systems like we're having now with the drought in both areas, it certainly increases the challenges that we all have," he said. "We're working with a lot of state and local entities on ways to create resilience long-term, given the fact that projections are for us to continue to experience challenges, and there may be some legislation that's needed out of that, or there may be just some actions that we can take through negotiated agreements that help us get more flexibility into the systems."Agricultural producers in the San Joaquin Valley who backed last year's attempts by the House are getting impatient."We're not holding our breath for a drought bill out of Congress," said John Broeske, executive director of the group Families Protecting the Valley. "For anything meaningful like a redo of the [San Joaquin] River restoration or a modification of the ESA, even with a Republican House and Senate, there is still the Obama veto to overcome."Reporter Debra Kahn contributed. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bgutermuth at usbr.gov Fri May 22 15:28:24 2015 From: bgutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F.) Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 15:28:24 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Final Limekiln Gulch Channel Rehabilitation site EA/IS is posted on-line Message-ID: Dear Interested parties - The Co-Leads (Reclamation, the Bureau of Land Management, and the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board) for the Limekiln Gulch Channel Rehabilitation site Environmental Assessment / Initial Study (EA/IS) have posted the Final EA/IS on-line for your review at: http://www.trrp.net/2015/eais_limekilngulch/ The Final EA/IS updates the Draft document by incorporating: 1) additional information on public involvement with the project since the draft release, 2) cultural section updates to include mitigation measures, and 3) addition of Appendix B: Response to comments. The Limekiln Gulch Channel Rehabilitation Project is proposed for implementation this summer on the Trinity River at the Limekiln Gulch site between Poker Bar and Steel Bridge Road. Happy Memorial Day- Brandt Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Scientist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S. Main ST. Weaverville CA 96093 530.623.1806 Voice http://www.trrp.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gregking at asis.com Thu May 21 16:35:36 2015 From: gregking at asis.com (Greg King) Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 16:35:36 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon In-Reply-To: <555E0E62.8010208@msaj.com> References: <1541623679.3414440.1432215163416.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <555DF50C.5020609@msaj.com> <555E0E62.8010208@msaj.com> Message-ID: <47D49F3B-D03C-467B-B10A-B31B80FD0A7F@asis.com> Too bad all the alleged "greens" and tribal reps bought the PacifiCorp/Bush Administration lie that negotiating with them for the KBRA ? rather than insisting that PC build the court-ordered fish ladders, whose nearly $400 million cost could have cajoled PC to tear down the dams, which weren't worth that much; and rather than continue to pursue the required 401 Certification for the dams, which would have been very difficult for PC to obtain given the virtual impossibility of the water behind the dams satisfying this provision of the Clean Water Act; and rather than enforcing the ESA biological opinion requirement of a minimum flow of 1,000 cfs at Iron Gate ? would be the Klamath's panacea rather than its undoing, as we're seeing today with PC's and the irrigators' ongoing water grab. Combine this folly with the underhandedness of many if not most of the people who negotiated in favor of the corporate-government deal and it's no wonder that today almost no one wants to step up to defend the beleaguered Klamath. What a mess. Thank you Tom, and the Hoopa Tribe, for continuing to move forward with integrity. Greg King On May 21, 2015, at 9:57 AM, Thomas P. Schlosser wrote: > I grabbed the wrong KPOP by mistake; the 2015 Annual Operations Plan, page 2, calls for diverting 254,500 af to irrigation, a policy choice to favor irrigation over fisheries requirements. > > On 5/21/2015 8:09 AM, Thomas P. Schlosser wrote: >> It's worth remebering that when Reclamation says (below) that there's too little water to help now ("We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water supply at this point,? Person said.") they are still using a 2014 Annual Operations Plan for the Klamath Project which, at page 2 calculates the project supply of water to be diverted from the Klamath at 239,000 acre-feet. This is what they consider to be "most optimal." >> Tom >> >> On 5/21/2015 6:32 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: >>> http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/disease-killing-young-klamath-river-salmon_18847031 >>> >>> Disease killing young Klamath River salmon >>> Damon Arthur >>> 5:50 PM, May 20, 2015 >>> 5:51 PM, May 20, 2015 >>> local news | homepage showcase | tablet showcase | happening now >>> >>> Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. >>> JEFF BARNARD/AP PHOTOSHOW CAPTION >>> KLAMATH RIVER, California - A disease flourishing in warm drought conditions in the Klamath River is killing young salmon and steelhead trying to migrate out to sea. >>> And while in some sections of the river disease has been found in nearly all of the fish tested, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation officials also said Wednesday the drought has left little water available to send downstream to improve conditions. >>> The Klamath Fish Health Assessment Team says conditions in the river are at orange, which means a fish kill is likely and federal and state agencies need to be alerted. >>> ?Orange is probably underplaying the crisis,? said Craig Tucker, natural resources policy advocate for the Karuk Tribe, one of several groups with the assessment team that has biologists monitoring the river. >>> Scott Foott, project leader for the California-Nevada Fish Health Center in Anderson, said about 90 percent of the fish from Klamath brought to his center for testing have the disease, called ceratonova Shasta. >>> Foott didn?t know how many fish were dying of the disease in the river, but said mortality rate among fish with the disease is very high. Fish biologists said conditions in the river are bad this year because of the lack of rain and runoff from snowmelt. >>> Randy Turner, the fish health assessment team coordinator, said with low flows and warm water, worms that carry the disease have flourished on the streambed. >>> The problem isn?t as bad in years when the river is cooler and runs higher and faster in the winter and spring because the current kicks up the gravel and cobble on the streambed, disrupting the worms? life cycle, he said. >>> The worst section of the Klamath River is from the Shasta River west of Interstate 5 to more than 80 miles downstream to the Salmon River, Turner said. >>> Brian Person, acting area manager of the bureau?s Yreka office, said Wednesday that after consulting with other agencies, they could not send more water downstream to improve conditions for the fish. >>> ?We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water supply at this point,? Person said. >>> The bureau, as well as other federal and state wildlife agencies, would continue to monitor the fish in the river and could at some point decide to send more water downstream if conditions change, Person said. >>> If the readiness level on the river goes from orange to red ? which means a fish kill is occurring ? there is probably little officials can do because so little water is available upstream in the river, Tucker said. >>> Even if more water was sent downstream there probably isn?t enough available to benefit the young salmon, Tucker said. And if they use extra water in the spring to help the young salmon swimming out to sea, there might not be enough water in the fall to help the salmon returning from the ocean to spawn. >>> During the past few years bureau officials have had to release more water from the Trinity River to prevent a different disease from killing spawning salmon in the Klamath. That disease, called ?ich,? has affected areas below where the Trinity flows into the Klamath River. >>> The young fish dying from the ceratonova Shasta in the Klamath River are upstream of its confluence with the Trinity River, Turner said. >>> It is likely a large percentage of this year?s salmon hatch will not make it out to sea, which means there will be fewer adult salmon returning back upstream to spawn in three years, Tucker said. >>> ?I think we?re definitely going to take a hit when the adults return,? he said. >>> Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 -- Greg King President/Executive Director Siskiyou Land Conservancy P.O. Box 4209 Arcata, CA 95518 707-498-4900 gregking at asis.com www.SiskiyouLand.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at att.net Sat May 23 08:34:48 2015 From: kierassociates at att.net (Kier Associates) Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 08:34:48 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon In-Reply-To: <47D49F3B-D03C-467B-B10A-B31B80FD0A7F@asis.com> References: <1541623679.3414440.1432215163416.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <555DF50C.5020609@msaj.com> <555E0E62.8010208@msaj.com> <47D49F3B-D03C-467B-B10A-B31B80FD0A7F@asis.com> Message-ID: <001501d0956e$024c4b40$06e4e1c0$@att.net> Greg One comment: The fish/river conservation community did in fact sort of dance in the street when the administrative law judge ruled for the fish agencies that PacifiCorp would have to build fish ladders/somehow provide fish passage on the river - but that's because members of the fish conservation community by and large don't understand how the states regulate utilities like PacifiCorp. Those fish-ladders/whatever would have clearly been a cost of doing business, recoverable by PacifiCorp through its rate base. That is, rate-payers would have paid for those fish-passage facilities. PacifiCorp would have not only passed those costs on to its ratepayers with the express permission of the two state PUCs but would have collected its usual profit (something like 9 percent at the time of the administrative law judge's ruling) on that $400 million. 'Not making a case for the KBRA here but simply trying to expose my fish-conservation brothers and sisters to the mysterious ways of state-regulated utilities economics (I do agree that winning the Section 401 Clean Water Act permit from the states needed to complete the hydro project relicensing process, would have been a near impossibility given just how solid the cooperation was among the Tribes, the states and the fish agencies in documenting and communicating the adverse water quality impact of PacifiCorp's project. But I think it's also worth noting that we have some PG&E hydro projects in CA, for which relicensing has not been completed, that are running on yr-to-yr permission from FERC - and have been doing so for decades) 'Best, Bill Kier From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces+kierassociates=att.net at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.u s] On Behalf Of Greg King Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 4:36 PM To: Thomas P. Schlosser Cc: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon Too bad all the alleged "greens" and tribal reps bought the PacifiCorp/Bush Administration lie that negotiating with them for the KBRA - rather than insisting that PC build the court-ordered fish ladders, whose nearly $400 million cost could have cajoled PC to tear down the dams, which weren't worth that much; and rather than continue to pursue the required 401 Certification for the dams, which would have been very difficult for PC to obtain given the virtual impossibility of the water behind the dams satisfying this provision of the Clean Water Act; and rather than enforcing the ESA biological opinion requirement of a minimum flow of 1,000 cfs at Iron Gate - would be the Klamath's panacea rather than its undoing, as we're seeing today with PC's and the irrigators' ongoing water grab. Combine this folly with the underhandedness of many if not most of the people who negotiated in favor of the corporate-government deal and it's no wonder that today almost no one wants to step up to defend the beleaguered Klamath. What a mess. Thank you Tom, and the Hoopa Tribe, for continuing to move forward with integrity. Greg King On May 21, 2015, at 9:57 AM, Thomas P. Schlosser wrote: I grabbed the wrong KPOP by mistake; the 2015 Annual Operations Plan, page 2, calls for diverting 254,500 af to irrigation, a policy choice to favor irrigation over fisheries requirements. On 5/21/2015 8:09 AM, Thomas P. Schlosser wrote: It's worth remebering that when Reclamation says (below) that there's too little water to help now ("We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water supply at this point," Person said.") they are still using a 2014 Annual Operations Plan for the Klamath Project which, at page 2 calculates the project supply of water to be diverted from the Klamath at 239,000 acre-feet. This is what they consider to be "most optimal." Tom On 5/21/2015 6:32 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/disease-killing-young-klamath-river-s almon_18847031 Disease killing young Klamath River salmon Damon Arthur 5:50 PM, May 20, 2015 5:51 PM, May 20, 2015 local news | homepage showcase | tablet showcase | happening now Description: Image removed by sender. Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. JEFF BARNARD/AP PHOTO SHOW CAPTION KLAMATH RIVER, California - A disease flourishing in warm drought conditions in the Klamath River is killing young salmon and steelhead trying to migrate out to sea. And while in some sections of the river disease has been found in nearly all of the fish tested, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation officials also said Wednesday the drought has left little water available to send downstream to improve conditions. The Klamath Fish Health Assessment Team says conditions in the river are at orange, which means a fish kill is likely and federal and state agencies need to be alerted. "Orange is probably underplaying the crisis," said Craig Tucker, natural resources policy advocate for the Karuk Tribe, one of several groups with the assessment team that has biologists monitoring the river. Scott Foott, project leader for the California-Nevada Fish Health Center in Anderson, said about 90 percent of the fish from Klamath brought to his center for testing have the disease, called ceratonova Shasta. Foott didn't know how many fish were dying of the disease in the river, but said mortality rate among fish with the disease is very high. Fish biologists said conditions in the river are bad this year because of the lack of rain and runoff from snowmelt. Randy Turner, the fish health assessment team coordinator, said with low flows and warm water, worms that carry the disease have flourished on the streambed. The problem isn't as bad in years when the river is cooler and runs higher and faster in the winter and spring because the current kicks up the gravel and cobble on the streambed, disrupting the worms' life cycle, he said. The worst section of the Klamath River is from the Shasta River west of Interstate 5 to more than 80 miles downstream to the Salmon River, Turner said. Brian Person, acting area manager of the bureau's Yreka office, said Wednesday that after consulting with other agencies, they could not send more water downstream to improve conditions for the fish. "We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water supply at this point," Person said. The bureau, as well as other federal and state wildlife agencies, would continue to monitor the fish in the river and could at some point decide to send more water downstream if conditions change, Person said. If the readiness level on the river goes from orange to red - which means a fish kill is occurring - there is probably little officials can do because so little water is available upstream in the river, Tucker said. Even if more water was sent downstream there probably isn't enough available to benefit the young salmon, Tucker said. And if they use extra water in the spring to help the young salmon swimming out to sea, there might not be enough water in the fall to help the salmon returning from the ocean to spawn. During the past few years bureau officials have had to release more water from the Trinity River to prevent a different disease from killing spawning salmon in the Klamath. That disease, called "ich," has affected areas below where the Trinity flows into the Klamath River. The young fish dying from the ceratonova Shasta in the Klamath River are upstream of its confluence with the Trinity River, Turner said. It is likely a large percentage of this year's salmon hatch will not make it out to sea, which means there will be fewer adult salmon returning back upstream to spawn in three years, Tucker said. "I think we're definitely going to take a hit when the adults return," he said. Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. _______________________________________________ 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 -- Greg King President/Executive Director Siskiyou Land Conservancy P.O. Box 4209 Arcata, CA 95518 707-498-4900 gregking at asis.com www.SiskiyouLand.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ~WRD000.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 823 bytes Desc: not available URL: From t.schlosser at msaj.com Sat May 23 12:44:08 2015 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Thomas P. Schlosser) Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 19:44:08 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon In-Reply-To: <001501d0956e$024c4b40$06e4e1c0$@att.net> References: <1541623679.3414440.1432215163416.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <555DF50C.5020609@msaj.com> <555E0E62.8010208@msaj.com> <47D49F3B-D03C-467B-B10A-B31B80FD0A7F@asis.com>, <001501d0956e$024c4b40$06e4e1c0$@att.net> Message-ID: No, simply incurring relicensing costs doesn't mean the PUC allows them to be imposed on ratepayers. These costs would be unreasonable for the power involved and could not be approved. This is why the PUCs have allowed the dam removal cost surcharges to be imposed instead. It's why PacifiCorp favors removal too, though they want it delayed as long as possible. Sent from my phone On May 23, 2015, at 8:35 AM, Kier Associates > wrote: Greg One comment: The fish/river conservation community did in fact sort of dance in the street when the administrative law judge ruled for the fish agencies that PacifiCorp would have to build fish ladders/somehow provide fish passage on the river ? but that?s because members of the fish conservation community by and large don?t understand how the states regulate utilities like PacifiCorp. Those fish-ladders/whatever would have clearly been a cost of doing business, recoverable by PacifiCorp through its rate base. That is, rate-payers would have paid for those fish-passage facilities. PacifiCorp would have not only passed those costs on to its ratepayers with the express permission of the two state PUCs but would have collected its usual profit (something like 9 percent at the time of the administrative law judge?s ruling) on that $400 million. ?Not making a case for the KBRA here but simply trying to expose my fish-conservation brothers and sisters to the mysterious ways of state-regulated utilities economics (I do agree that winning the Section 401 Clean Water Act permit from the states needed to complete the hydro project relicensing process, would have been a near impossibility given just how solid the cooperation was among the Tribes, the states and the fish agencies in documenting and communicating the adverse water quality impact of PacifiCorp?s project. But I think it?s also worth noting that we have some PG&E hydro projects in CA, for which relicensing has not been completed, that are running on yr-to-yr permission from FERC ? and have been doing so for decades) ?Best, Bill Kier From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces+kierassociates=att.net at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Greg King Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 4:36 PM To: Thomas P. Schlosser Cc: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon Too bad all the alleged "greens" and tribal reps bought the PacifiCorp/Bush Administration lie that negotiating with them for the KBRA ? rather than insisting that PC build the court-ordered fish ladders, whose nearly $400 million cost could have cajoled PC to tear down the dams, which weren't worth that much; and rather than continue to pursue the required 401 Certification for the dams, which would have been very difficult for PC to obtain given the virtual impossibility of the water behind the dams satisfying this provision of the Clean Water Act; and rather than enforcing the ESA biological opinion requirement of a minimum flow of 1,000 cfs at Iron Gate ? would be the Klamath's panacea rather than its undoing, as we're seeing today with PC's and the irrigators' ongoing water grab. Combine this folly with the underhandedness of many if not most of the people who negotiated in favor of the corporate-government deal and it's no wonder that today almost no one wants to step up to defend the beleaguered Klamath. What a mess. Thank you Tom, and the Hoopa Tribe, for continuing to move forward with integrity. Greg King On May 21, 2015, at 9:57 AM, Thomas P. Schlosser > wrote: I grabbed the wrong KPOP by mistake; the 2015 Annual Operations Plan, page 2, calls for diverting 254,500 af to irrigation, a policy choice to favor irrigation over fisheries requirements. On 5/21/2015 8:09 AM, Thomas P. Schlosser wrote: It's worth remebering that when Reclamation says (below) that there's too little water to help now ("We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water supply at this point,? Person said.") they are still using a 2014 Annual Operations Plan for the Klamath Project which, at page 2 calculates the project supply of water to be diverted from the Klamath at 239,000 acre-feet. This is what they consider to be "most optimal." Tom On 5/21/2015 6:32 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/disease-killing-young-klamath-river-salmon_18847031 Disease killing young Klamath River salmon Damon Arthur 5:50 PM, May 20, 2015 5:51 PM, May 20, 2015 local news | homepage showcase | tablet showcase | happening now <~WRD000.jpg> Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. JEFF BARNARD/AP PHOTO SHOW CAPTION KLAMATH RIVER, California - A disease flourishing in warm drought conditions in the Klamath River is killing young salmon and steelhead trying to migrate out to sea. And while in some sections of the river disease has been found in nearly all of the fish tested, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation officials also said Wednesday the drought has left little water available to send downstream to improve conditions. The Klamath Fish Health Assessment Team says conditions in the river are at orange, which means a fish kill is likely and federal and state agencies need to be alerted. ?Orange is probably underplaying the crisis,? said Craig Tucker, natural resources policy advocate for the Karuk Tribe, one of several groups with the assessment team that has biologists monitoring the river. Scott Foott, project leader for the California-Nevada Fish Health Center in Anderson, said about 90 percent of the fish from Klamath brought to his center for testing have the disease, called ceratonova Shasta. Foott didn?t know how many fish were dying of the disease in the river, but said mortality rate among fish with the disease is very high. Fish biologists said conditions in the river are bad this year because of the lack of rain and runoff from snowmelt. Randy Turner, the fish health assessment team coordinator, said with low flows and warm water, worms that carry the disease have flourished on the streambed. The problem isn?t as bad in years when the river is cooler and runs higher and faster in the winter and spring because the current kicks up the gravel and cobble on the streambed, disrupting the worms? life cycle, he said. The worst section of the Klamath River is from the Shasta River west of Interstate 5 to more than 80 miles downstream to the Salmon River, Turner said. Brian Person, acting area manager of the bureau?s Yreka office, said Wednesday that after consulting with other agencies, they could not send more water downstream to improve conditions for the fish. ?We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water supply at this point,? Person said. The bureau, as well as other federal and state wildlife agencies, would continue to monitor the fish in the river and could at some point decide to send more water downstream if conditions change, Person said. If the readiness level on the river goes from orange to red ? which means a fish kill is occurring ? there is probably little officials can do because so little water is available upstream in the river, Tucker said. Even if more water was sent downstream there probably isn?t enough available to benefit the young salmon, Tucker said. And if they use extra water in the spring to help the young salmon swimming out to sea, there might not be enough water in the fall to help the salmon returning from the ocean to spawn. During the past few years bureau officials have had to release more water from the Trinity River to prevent a different disease from killing spawning salmon in the Klamath. That disease, called ?ich,? has affected areas below where the Trinity flows into the Klamath River. The young fish dying from the ceratonova Shasta in the Klamath River are upstream of its confluence with the Trinity River, Turner said. It is likely a large percentage of this year?s salmon hatch will not make it out to sea, which means there will be fewer adult salmon returning back upstream to spawn in three years, Tucker said. ?I think we?re definitely going to take a hit when the adults return,? he said. Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. _______________________________________________ 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 -- Greg King President/Executive Director Siskiyou Land Conservancy P.O. Box 4209 Arcata, CA 95518 707-498-4900 gregking at asis.com www.SiskiyouLand.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ~WRD000.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 823 bytes Desc: ~WRD000.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ~WRD000.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 823 bytes Desc: ~WRD000.jpg URL: From kierassociates at att.net Sat May 23 13:20:37 2015 From: kierassociates at att.net (Kier Associates) Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 13:20:37 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon In-Reply-To: References: <1541623679.3414440.1432215163416.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <555DF50C.5020609@msaj.com> <555E0E62.8010208@msaj.com> <47D49F3B-D03C-467B-B10A-B31B80FD0A7F@asis.com>, <001501d0956e$024c4b40$06e4e1c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <000c01d09595$ef505770$cdf10650$@att.net> I respectively disagree, Tom. The PUCs have a cozy relationship with the regulated utilities (in my view) and they would - perhaps after some counterarguments from their 'ombudsman' offices - have allowed recovery of the fish-passage costs. I don't think the puny output of the KHP would have served as an argument against incurring the fish-passage costs. I don't see that kind of cost-effectiveness consideration being applied by the PUCs elsewhere. Do you? The PUCs have allowed the dam removal cost surcharges to fall on the ratepayers because a decommissioning deal was struck (lest we forget) at the highest possible levels, by the two Governors and the Sec'y of the Interior. The PUCs' surcharge imposition was pro forma given the political level of that decommissioning deal-making 'Best, Bill Kier From: Thomas P. Schlosser [mailto:t.schlosser at msaj.com] Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2015 12:44 PM To: Kier Associates Cc: Greg King; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon No, simply incurring relicensing costs doesn't mean the PUC allows them to be imposed on ratepayers. These costs would be unreasonable for the power involved and could not be approved. This is why the PUCs have allowed the dam removal cost surcharges to be imposed instead. It's why PacifiCorp favors removal too, though they want it delayed as long as possible. Sent from my phone On May 23, 2015, at 8:35 AM, Kier Associates wrote: Greg One comment: The fish/river conservation community did in fact sort of dance in the street when the administrative law judge ruled for the fish agencies that PacifiCorp would have to build fish ladders/somehow provide fish passage on the river - but that's because members of the fish conservation community by and large don't understand how the states regulate utilities like PacifiCorp. Those fish-ladders/whatever would have clearly been a cost of doing business, recoverable by PacifiCorp through its rate base. That is, rate-payers would have paid for those fish-passage facilities. PacifiCorp would have not only passed those costs on to its ratepayers with the express permission of the two state PUCs but would have collected its usual profit (something like 9 percent at the time of the administrative law judge's ruling) on that $400 million. 'Not making a case for the KBRA here but simply trying to expose my fish-conservation brothers and sisters to the mysterious ways of state-regulated utilities economics (I do agree that winning the Section 401 Clean Water Act permit from the states needed to complete the hydro project relicensing process, would have been a near impossibility given just how solid the cooperation was among the Tribes, the states and the fish agencies in documenting and communicating the adverse water quality impact of PacifiCorp's project. But I think it's also worth noting that we have some PG&E hydro projects in CA, for which relicensing has not been completed, that are running on yr-to-yr permission from FERC - and have been doing so for decades) 'Best, Bill Kier From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces+kierassociates=att.net at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.u s] On Behalf Of Greg King Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 4:36 PM To: Thomas P. Schlosser Cc: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon Too bad all the alleged "greens" and tribal reps bought the PacifiCorp/Bush Administration lie that negotiating with them for the KBRA - rather than insisting that PC build the court-ordered fish ladders, whose nearly $400 million cost could have cajoled PC to tear down the dams, which weren't worth that much; and rather than continue to pursue the required 401 Certification for the dams, which would have been very difficult for PC to obtain given the virtual impossibility of the water behind the dams satisfying this provision of the Clean Water Act; and rather than enforcing the ESA biological opinion requirement of a minimum flow of 1,000 cfs at Iron Gate - would be the Klamath's panacea rather than its undoing, as we're seeing today with PC's and the irrigators' ongoing water grab. Combine this folly with the underhandedness of many if not most of the people who negotiated in favor of the corporate-government deal and it's no wonder that today almost no one wants to step up to defend the beleaguered Klamath. What a mess. Thank you Tom, and the Hoopa Tribe, for continuing to move forward with integrity. Greg King On May 21, 2015, at 9:57 AM, Thomas P. Schlosser wrote: I grabbed the wrong KPOP by mistake; the 2015 Annual Operations Plan, page 2, calls for diverting 254,500 af to irrigation, a policy choice to favor irrigation over fisheries requirements. On 5/21/2015 8:09 AM, Thomas P. Schlosser wrote: It's worth remebering that when Reclamation says (below) that there's too little water to help now ("We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water supply at this point," Person said.") they are still using a 2014 Annual Operations Plan for the Klamath Project which, at page 2 calculates the project supply of water to be diverted from the Klamath at 239,000 acre-feet. This is what they consider to be "most optimal." Tom On 5/21/2015 6:32 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/disease-killing-young-klamath-river-s almon_18847031 Disease killing young Klamath River salmon Damon Arthur 5:50 PM, May 20, 2015 5:51 PM, May 20, 2015 local news | homepage showcase | tablet showcase | happening now <~WRD000.jpg> Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. JEFF BARNARD/AP PHOTO SHOW CAPTION KLAMATH RIVER, California - A disease flourishing in warm drought conditions in the Klamath River is killing young salmon and steelhead trying to migrate out to sea. And while in some sections of the river disease has been found in nearly all of the fish tested, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation officials also said Wednesday the drought has left little water available to send downstream to improve conditions. The Klamath Fish Health Assessment Team says conditions in the river are at orange, which means a fish kill is likely and federal and state agencies need to be alerted. "Orange is probably underplaying the crisis," said Craig Tucker, natural resources policy advocate for the Karuk Tribe, one of several groups with the assessment team that has biologists monitoring the river. Scott Foott, project leader for the California-Nevada Fish Health Center in Anderson, said about 90 percent of the fish from Klamath brought to his center for testing have the disease, called ceratonova Shasta. Foott didn't know how many fish were dying of the disease in the river, but said mortality rate among fish with the disease is very high. Fish biologists said conditions in the river are bad this year because of the lack of rain and runoff from snowmelt. Randy Turner, the fish health assessment team coordinator, said with low flows and warm water, worms that carry the disease have flourished on the streambed. The problem isn't as bad in years when the river is cooler and runs higher and faster in the winter and spring because the current kicks up the gravel and cobble on the streambed, disrupting the worms' life cycle, he said. The worst section of the Klamath River is from the Shasta River west of Interstate 5 to more than 80 miles downstream to the Salmon River, Turner said. Brian Person, acting area manager of the bureau's Yreka office, said Wednesday that after consulting with other agencies, they could not send more water downstream to improve conditions for the fish. "We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water supply at this point," Person said. The bureau, as well as other federal and state wildlife agencies, would continue to monitor the fish in the river and could at some point decide to send more water downstream if conditions change, Person said. If the readiness level on the river goes from orange to red - which means a fish kill is occurring - there is probably little officials can do because so little water is available upstream in the river, Tucker said. Even if more water was sent downstream there probably isn't enough available to benefit the young salmon, Tucker said. And if they use extra water in the spring to help the young salmon swimming out to sea, there might not be enough water in the fall to help the salmon returning from the ocean to spawn. During the past few years bureau officials have had to release more water from the Trinity River to prevent a different disease from killing spawning salmon in the Klamath. That disease, called "ich," has affected areas below where the Trinity flows into the Klamath River. The young fish dying from the ceratonova Shasta in the Klamath River are upstream of its confluence with the Trinity River, Turner said. It is likely a large percentage of this year's salmon hatch will not make it out to sea, which means there will be fewer adult salmon returning back upstream to spawn in three years, Tucker said. "I think we're definitely going to take a hit when the adults return," he said. Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. _______________________________________________ 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 -- Greg King President/Executive Director Siskiyou Land Conservancy P.O. Box 4209 Arcata, CA 95518 707-498-4900 gregking at asis.com www.SiskiyouLand.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at att.net Sat May 23 13:21:59 2015 From: kierassociates at att.net (Kier Associates) Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 13:21:59 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon References: <1541623679.3414440.1432215163416.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <555DF50C.5020609@msaj.com> <555E0E62.8010208@msaj.com> <47D49F3B-D03C-467B-B10A-B31B80FD0A7F@asis.com>, <001501d0956e$024c4b40$06e4e1c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <001101d09596$1fe811c0$5fb83540$@att.net> And I respectfully disagree, as well ('fingers sometimes get ahead of my brain .) From: Kier Associates [mailto:kierassociates at att.net] Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2015 1:21 PM To: 'Thomas P. Schlosser' Cc: 'Greg King'; 'env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us' Subject: RE: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon I respectively disagree, Tom. The PUCs have a cozy relationship with the regulated utilities (in my view) and they would - perhaps after some counterarguments from their 'ombudsman' offices - have allowed recovery of the fish-passage costs. I don't think the puny output of the KHP would have served as an argument against incurring the fish-passage costs. I don't see that kind of cost-effectiveness consideration being applied by the PUCs elsewhere. Do you? The PUCs have allowed the dam removal cost surcharges to fall on the ratepayers because a decommissioning deal was struck (lest we forget) at the highest possible levels, by the two Governors and the Sec'y of the Interior. The PUCs' surcharge imposition was pro forma given the political level of that decommissioning deal-making 'Best, Bill Kier From: Thomas P. Schlosser [mailto:t.schlosser at msaj.com] Sent: Saturday, May 23, 2015 12:44 PM To: Kier Associates Cc: Greg King; env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon No, simply incurring relicensing costs doesn't mean the PUC allows them to be imposed on ratepayers. These costs would be unreasonable for the power involved and could not be approved. This is why the PUCs have allowed the dam removal cost surcharges to be imposed instead. It's why PacifiCorp favors removal too, though they want it delayed as long as possible. Sent from my phone On May 23, 2015, at 8:35 AM, Kier Associates wrote: Greg One comment: The fish/river conservation community did in fact sort of dance in the street when the administrative law judge ruled for the fish agencies that PacifiCorp would have to build fish ladders/somehow provide fish passage on the river - but that's because members of the fish conservation community by and large don't understand how the states regulate utilities like PacifiCorp. Those fish-ladders/whatever would have clearly been a cost of doing business, recoverable by PacifiCorp through its rate base. That is, rate-payers would have paid for those fish-passage facilities. PacifiCorp would have not only passed those costs on to its ratepayers with the express permission of the two state PUCs but would have collected its usual profit (something like 9 percent at the time of the administrative law judge's ruling) on that $400 million. 'Not making a case for the KBRA here but simply trying to expose my fish-conservation brothers and sisters to the mysterious ways of state-regulated utilities economics (I do agree that winning the Section 401 Clean Water Act permit from the states needed to complete the hydro project relicensing process, would have been a near impossibility given just how solid the cooperation was among the Tribes, the states and the fish agencies in documenting and communicating the adverse water quality impact of PacifiCorp's project. But I think it's also worth noting that we have some PG&E hydro projects in CA, for which relicensing has not been completed, that are running on yr-to-yr permission from FERC - and have been doing so for decades) 'Best, Bill Kier From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces+kierassociates=att.net at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.u s] On Behalf Of Greg King Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 4:36 PM To: Thomas P. Schlosser Cc: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon Too bad all the alleged "greens" and tribal reps bought the PacifiCorp/Bush Administration lie that negotiating with them for the KBRA - rather than insisting that PC build the court-ordered fish ladders, whose nearly $400 million cost could have cajoled PC to tear down the dams, which weren't worth that much; and rather than continue to pursue the required 401 Certification for the dams, which would have been very difficult for PC to obtain given the virtual impossibility of the water behind the dams satisfying this provision of the Clean Water Act; and rather than enforcing the ESA biological opinion requirement of a minimum flow of 1,000 cfs at Iron Gate - would be the Klamath's panacea rather than its undoing, as we're seeing today with PC's and the irrigators' ongoing water grab. Combine this folly with the underhandedness of many if not most of the people who negotiated in favor of the corporate-government deal and it's no wonder that today almost no one wants to step up to defend the beleaguered Klamath. What a mess. Thank you Tom, and the Hoopa Tribe, for continuing to move forward with integrity. Greg King On May 21, 2015, at 9:57 AM, Thomas P. Schlosser wrote: I grabbed the wrong KPOP by mistake; the 2015 Annual Operations Plan, page 2, calls for diverting 254,500 af to irrigation, a policy choice to favor irrigation over fisheries requirements. On 5/21/2015 8:09 AM, Thomas P. Schlosser wrote: It's worth remebering that when Reclamation says (below) that there's too little water to help now ("We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water supply at this point," Person said.") they are still using a 2014 Annual Operations Plan for the Klamath Project which, at page 2 calculates the project supply of water to be diverted from the Klamath at 239,000 acre-feet. This is what they consider to be "most optimal." Tom On 5/21/2015 6:32 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/disease-killing-young-klamath-river-s almon_18847031 Disease killing young Klamath River salmon Damon Arthur 5:50 PM, May 20, 2015 5:51 PM, May 20, 2015 local news | homepage showcase | tablet showcase | happening now <~WRD000.jpg> Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. JEFF BARNARD/AP PHOTO SHOW CAPTION KLAMATH RIVER, California - A disease flourishing in warm drought conditions in the Klamath River is killing young salmon and steelhead trying to migrate out to sea. And while in some sections of the river disease has been found in nearly all of the fish tested, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation officials also said Wednesday the drought has left little water available to send downstream to improve conditions. The Klamath Fish Health Assessment Team says conditions in the river are at orange, which means a fish kill is likely and federal and state agencies need to be alerted. "Orange is probably underplaying the crisis," said Craig Tucker, natural resources policy advocate for the Karuk Tribe, one of several groups with the assessment team that has biologists monitoring the river. Scott Foott, project leader for the California-Nevada Fish Health Center in Anderson, said about 90 percent of the fish from Klamath brought to his center for testing have the disease, called ceratonova Shasta. Foott didn't know how many fish were dying of the disease in the river, but said mortality rate among fish with the disease is very high. Fish biologists said conditions in the river are bad this year because of the lack of rain and runoff from snowmelt. Randy Turner, the fish health assessment team coordinator, said with low flows and warm water, worms that carry the disease have flourished on the streambed. The problem isn't as bad in years when the river is cooler and runs higher and faster in the winter and spring because the current kicks up the gravel and cobble on the streambed, disrupting the worms' life cycle, he said. The worst section of the Klamath River is from the Shasta River west of Interstate 5 to more than 80 miles downstream to the Salmon River, Turner said. Brian Person, acting area manager of the bureau's Yreka office, said Wednesday that after consulting with other agencies, they could not send more water downstream to improve conditions for the fish. "We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water supply at this point," Person said. The bureau, as well as other federal and state wildlife agencies, would continue to monitor the fish in the river and could at some point decide to send more water downstream if conditions change, Person said. If the readiness level on the river goes from orange to red - which means a fish kill is occurring - there is probably little officials can do because so little water is available upstream in the river, Tucker said. Even if more water was sent downstream there probably isn't enough available to benefit the young salmon, Tucker said. And if they use extra water in the spring to help the young salmon swimming out to sea, there might not be enough water in the fall to help the salmon returning from the ocean to spawn. During the past few years bureau officials have had to release more water from the Trinity River to prevent a different disease from killing spawning salmon in the Klamath. That disease, called "ich," has affected areas below where the Trinity flows into the Klamath River. The young fish dying from the ceratonova Shasta in the Klamath River are upstream of its confluence with the Trinity River, Turner said. It is likely a large percentage of this year's salmon hatch will not make it out to sea, which means there will be fewer adult salmon returning back upstream to spawn in three years, Tucker said. "I think we're definitely going to take a hit when the adults return," he said. Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. _______________________________________________ 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 -- Greg King President/Executive Director Siskiyou Land Conservancy P.O. Box 4209 Arcata, CA 95518 707-498-4900 gregking at asis.com www.SiskiyouLand.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gregking at asis.com Sat May 23 09:56:50 2015 From: gregking at asis.com (Greg King) Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 09:56:50 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon In-Reply-To: <001501d0956e$024c4b40$06e4e1c0$@att.net> References: <1541623679.3414440.1432215163416.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <555DF50C.5020609@msaj.com> <555E0E62.8010208@msaj.com> <47D49F3B-D03C-467B-B10A-B31B80FD0A7F@asis.com> <001501d0956e$024c4b40$06e4e1c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <8E36293B-5F4C-4C61-BBFF-0790B29A3EFF@asis.com> Excellent learned input Bill! Many thanks. Greg On May 23, 2015, at 8:34 AM, "Kier Associates" wrote: > Greg > > One comment: > > The fish/river conservation community did in fact sort of dance in the street when the administrative law judge ruled for the fish agencies that PacifiCorp would have to build fish ladders/somehow provide fish passage on the river ? but that?s because members of the fish conservation community by and large don?t understand how the states regulate utilities like PacifiCorp. > > Those fish-ladders/whatever would have clearly been a cost of doing business, recoverable by PacifiCorp through its rate base. That is, rate-payers would have paid for those fish-passage facilities. PacifiCorp would have not only passed those costs on to its ratepayers with the express permission of the two state PUCs but would have collected its usual profit (something like 9 percent at the time of the administrative law judge?s ruling) on that $400 million. > > ?Not making a case for the KBRA here but simply trying to expose my fish-conservation brothers and sisters to the mysterious ways of state-regulated utilities economics > > (I do agree that winning the Section 401 Clean Water Act permit from the states needed to complete the hydro project relicensing process, would have been a near impossibility given just how solid the cooperation was among the Tribes, the states and the fish agencies in documenting and communicating the adverse water quality impact of PacifiCorp?s project. But I think it?s also worth noting that we have some PG&E hydro projects in CA, for which relicensing has not been completed, that are running on yr-to-yr permission from FERC ? and have been doing so for decades) > > ?Best, > > Bill Kier > From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces+kierassociates=att.net at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Greg King > Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 4:36 PM > To: Thomas P. Schlosser > Cc: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon > > Too bad all the alleged "greens" and tribal reps bought the PacifiCorp/Bush Administration lie that negotiating with them for the KBRA ? rather than insisting that PC build the court-ordered fish ladders, whose nearly $400 million cost could have cajoled PC to tear down the dams, which weren't worth that much; and rather than continue to pursue the required 401 Certification for the dams, which would have been very difficult for PC to obtain given the virtual impossibility of the water behind the dams satisfying this provision of the Clean Water Act; and rather than enforcing the ESA biological opinion requirement of a minimum flow of 1,000 cfs at Iron Gate ? would be the Klamath's panacea rather than its undoing, as we're seeing today with PC's and the irrigators' ongoing water grab. Combine this folly with the underhandedness of many if not most of the people who negotiated in favor of the corporate-government deal and it's no wonder that today almost no one wants to step up to defend the beleaguered Klamath. What a mess. > > Thank you Tom, and the Hoopa Tribe, for continuing to move forward with integrity. > > Greg King > > On May 21, 2015, at 9:57 AM, Thomas P. Schlosser wrote: > > > I grabbed the wrong KPOP by mistake; the 2015 Annual Operations Plan, page 2, calls for diverting 254,500 af to irrigation, a policy choice to favor irrigation over fisheries requirements. > > On 5/21/2015 8:09 AM, Thomas P. Schlosser wrote: > It's worth remebering that when Reclamation says (below) that there's too little water to help now ("We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water supply at this point,? Person said.") they are still using a 2014 Annual Operations Plan for the Klamath Project which, at page 2 calculates the project supply of water to be diverted from the Klamath at 239,000 acre-feet. This is what they consider to be "most optimal." > Tom > > On 5/21/2015 6:32 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/disease-killing-young-klamath-river-salmon_18847031 > > Disease killing young Klamath River salmon > Damon Arthur > 5:50 PM, May 20, 2015 > 5:51 PM, May 20, 2015 > local news | homepage showcase | tablet showcase | happening now > <~WRD000.jpg> > Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. > JEFF BARNARD/AP PHOTO > SHOW CAPTION > KLAMATH RIVER, California - A disease flourishing in warm drought conditions in the Klamath River is killing young salmon and steelhead trying to migrate out to sea. > And while in some sections of the river disease has been found in nearly all of the fish tested, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation officials also said Wednesday the drought has left little water available to send downstream to improve conditions. > The Klamath Fish Health Assessment Team says conditions in the river are at orange, which means a fish kill is likely and federal and state agencies need to be alerted. > ?Orange is probably underplaying the crisis,? said Craig Tucker, natural resources policy advocate for the Karuk Tribe, one of several groups with the assessment team that has biologists monitoring the river. > Scott Foott, project leader for the California-Nevada Fish Health Center in Anderson, said about 90 percent of the fish from Klamath brought to his center for testing have the disease, called ceratonova Shasta. > Foott didn?t know how many fish were dying of the disease in the river, but said mortality rate among fish with the disease is very high. Fish biologists said conditions in the river are bad this year because of the lack of rain and runoff from snowmelt. > Randy Turner, the fish health assessment team coordinator, said with low flows and warm water, worms that carry the disease have flourished on the streambed. > The problem isn?t as bad in years when the river is cooler and runs higher and faster in the winter and spring because the current kicks up the gravel and cobble on the streambed, disrupting the worms? life cycle, he said. > The worst section of the Klamath River is from the Shasta River west of Interstate 5 to more than 80 miles downstream to the Salmon River, Turner said. > Brian Person, acting area manager of the bureau?s Yreka office, said Wednesday that after consulting with other agencies, they could not send more water downstream to improve conditions for the fish. > ?We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water supply at this point,? Person said. > The bureau, as well as other federal and state wildlife agencies, would continue to monitor the fish in the river and could at some point decide to send more water downstream if conditions change, Person said. > If the readiness level on the river goes from orange to red ? which means a fish kill is occurring ? there is probably little officials can do because so little water is available upstream in the river, Tucker said. > Even if more water was sent downstream there probably isn?t enough available to benefit the young salmon, Tucker said. And if they use extra water in the spring to help the young salmon swimming out to sea, there might not be enough water in the fall to help the salmon returning from the ocean to spawn. > During the past few years bureau officials have had to release more water from the Trinity River to prevent a different disease from killing spawning salmon in the Klamath. That disease, called ?ich,? has affected areas below where the Trinity flows into the Klamath River. > The young fish dying from the ceratonova Shasta in the Klamath River are upstream of its confluence with the Trinity River, Turner said. > It is likely a large percentage of this year?s salmon hatch will not make it out to sea, which means there will be fewer adult salmon returning back upstream to spawn in three years, Tucker said. > ?I think we?re definitely going to take a hit when the adults return,? he said. > Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > -- > Greg King > President/Executive Director > Siskiyou Land Conservancy > P.O. Box 4209 > Arcata, CA 95518 > 707-498-4900 > gregking at asis.com > www.SiskiyouLand.org > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity -- Greg King President/Executive Director Siskiyou Land Conservancy P.O. Box 4209 Arcata, CA 95518 707-498-4900 gregking at asis.com www.SiskiyouLand.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From phillipsguy1 at gmail.com Sat May 23 15:57:57 2015 From: phillipsguy1 at gmail.com (Guy Phillips) Date: Sat, 23 May 2015 23:57:57 +0100 Subject: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon In-Reply-To: <001501d0956e$024c4b40$06e4e1c0$@att.net> References: <1541623679.3414440.1432215163416.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <555DF50C.5020609@msaj.com> <555E0E62.8010208@msaj.com> <47D49F3B-D03C-467B-B10A-B31B80FD0A7F@asis.com> <001501d0956e$024c4b40$06e4e1c0$@att.net> Message-ID: Bill, I would only add three things: (1) that it is 9% (more or less) for each and every year that the $400 million is still on the books, not just one time. (2) all of the "greens" and tribes knew of the fact that the expenditure would be rate-based, including any expenditure that would have simply removed the dams--i.e., that spending money on Klamath is a profit center for the utility, not a financial loss, whatever the outcome. (3) if FERC (or the regulators in general) had ordered removal of the dams (or fish ladders), the state PUC's would have just rate-based the cost and (1) and (2) would have applied. Cost-effectiveness matters far less than what the regulators require. gp On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Kier Associates wrote: > Greg > > > > One comment: > > > > The fish/river conservation community did in fact sort of dance in the > street when the administrative law judge ruled for the fish agencies that > PacifiCorp would have to build fish ladders/somehow provide fish passage on > the river ? but that?s because members of the fish conservation community > by and large don?t understand how the states regulate utilities like > PacifiCorp. > > > > Those fish-ladders/whatever would have clearly been a cost of doing > business, recoverable by PacifiCorp through its rate base. That is, > rate-payers would have paid for those fish-passage facilities. PacifiCorp > would have not only passed those costs on to its ratepayers with the > express permission of the two state PUCs but would have collected its usual > profit (something like 9 percent at the time of the administrative law > judge?s ruling) on that $400 million. > > > > ?Not making a case for the KBRA here but simply trying to expose my > fish-conservation brothers and sisters to the mysterious ways of > state-regulated utilities economics > > > > (I do agree that winning the Section 401 Clean Water Act permit from the > states needed to complete the hydro project relicensing process, would have > been a near impossibility given just how solid the cooperation was among > the Tribes, the states and the fish agencies in documenting and > communicating the adverse water quality impact of PacifiCorp?s project. But > I think it?s also worth noting that we have some PG&E hydro projects in CA, > for which relicensing has not been completed, that are running on yr-to-yr > permission from FERC ? and have been doing so *for decades*) > > > > ?Best, > > > > Bill Kier > > *From:* env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces+kierassociates= > att.net at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] *On Behalf Of *Greg King > *Sent:* Thursday, May 21, 2015 4:36 PM > *To:* Thomas P. Schlosser > *Cc:* env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > *Subject:* Re: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon > > > > Too bad all the alleged "greens" and tribal reps bought the > PacifiCorp/Bush Administration lie that negotiating with them for the KBRA > ? rather than insisting that PC build the court-ordered fish ladders, whose > nearly $400 million cost could have cajoled PC to tear down the dams, which > weren't worth that much; and rather than continue to pursue the required > 401 Certification for the dams, which would have been very difficult for PC > to obtain given the virtual impossibility of the water behind the dams > satisfying this provision of the Clean Water Act; and rather than enforcing > the ESA biological opinion requirement of a minimum flow of 1,000 cfs at > Iron Gate ? would be the Klamath's panacea rather than its undoing, as > we're seeing today with PC's and the irrigators' ongoing water grab. > Combine this folly with the underhandedness of many if not most of the > people who negotiated in favor of the corporate-government deal and it's no > wonder that today almost no one wants to step up to defend the beleaguered > Klamath. What a mess. > > > > Thank you Tom, and the Hoopa Tribe, for continuing to move forward with > integrity. > > > > Greg King > > > > On May 21, 2015, at 9:57 AM, Thomas P. Schlosser > wrote: > > > > I grabbed the wrong KPOP by mistake; the 2015 Annual Operations Plan, page > 2, calls for diverting* 254,500 af to irrigation*, a policy choice to > favor irrigation over fisheries requirements. > > On 5/21/2015 8:09 AM, Thomas P. Schlosser wrote: > > It's worth remebering that when Reclamation says (below) that there's too > little water to help now ("We decided that is not the most optimal use of a > very short water supply at this point,? Person said.") they are still using > a 2014 Annual Operations Plan for the Klamath Project which, at page 2 > calculates the project supply of water to be diverted from the Klamath at *239,000 > acre-feet*. This is what they consider to be "most optimal." > Tom > > On 5/21/2015 6:32 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > > > http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/disease-killing-young-klamath-river-salmon_18847031 > > > Disease killing young Klamath River salmon > Damon Arthur > > 5:50 PM, May 20, 2015 > > 5:51 PM, May 20, 2015 > > local news | homepage showcase > | tablet showcase > | happening now > > > [image: Description: Image removed by sender.] > > Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may > not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. > > JEFF BARNARD/AP PHOTO > > SHOW CAPTION > > KLAMATH RIVER, California - A disease flourishing in warm drought > conditions in the Klamath River is killing young salmon and steelhead > trying to migrate out to sea. > > And while in some sections of the river disease has been found in nearly > all of the fish tested, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation officials also said > Wednesday the drought has left little water available to send downstream to > improve conditions. > > The Klamath Fish Health Assessment Team says conditions in the river are > at orange, which means a fish kill is likely and federal and state agencies > need to be alerted. > > ?Orange is probably underplaying the crisis,? said Craig Tucker, natural > resources policy advocate for the Karuk Tribe, one of several groups with > the assessment team that has biologists monitoring the river. > > Scott Foott, project leader for the California-Nevada Fish Health Center > in Anderson, said about 90 percent of the fish from Klamath brought to his > center for testing have the disease, called ceratonova Shasta. > > Foott didn?t know how many fish were dying of the disease in the river, > but said mortality rate among fish with the disease is very high. Fish > biologists said conditions in the river are bad this year because of the > lack of rain and runoff from snowmelt. > > Randy Turner, the fish health assessment team coordinator, said with low > flows and warm water, worms that carry the disease have flourished on the > streambed. > > The problem isn?t as bad in years when the river is cooler and runs higher > and faster in the winter and spring because the current kicks up the gravel > and cobble on the streambed, disrupting the worms? life cycle, he said. > > The worst section of the Klamath River is from the Shasta River west of > Interstate 5 to more than 80 miles downstream to the Salmon River, Turner > said. > > Brian Person, acting area manager of the bureau?s Yreka office, said > Wednesday that after consulting with other agencies, they could not send > more water downstream to improve conditions for the fish. > > ?We decided that is not the most optimal use of a very short water supply > at this point,? Person said. > > The bureau, as well as other federal and state wildlife agencies, would > continue to monitor the fish in the river and could at some point decide to > send more water downstream if conditions change, Person said. > > If the readiness level on the river goes from orange to red ? which means > a fish kill is occurring ? there is probably little officials can do > because so little water is available upstream in the river, Tucker said. > > Even if more water was sent downstream there probably isn?t enough > available to benefit the young salmon, Tucker said. And if they use extra > water in the spring to help the young salmon swimming out to sea, there > might not be enough water in the fall to help the salmon returning from the > ocean to spawn. > > During the past few years bureau officials have had to release more water > from the Trinity River to prevent a different disease from killing spawning > salmon in the Klamath. That disease, called ?ich,? has affected areas below > where the Trinity flows into the Klamath River. > > The young fish dying from the ceratonova Shasta in the Klamath River are > upstream of its confluence with the Trinity River, Turner said. > > It is likely a large percentage of this year?s salmon hatch will not make > it out to sea, which means there will be fewer adult salmon returning back > upstream to spawn in three years, Tucker said. > > ?I think we?re definitely going to take a hit when the adults return,? he > said. > > Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may > not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > -- > > Greg King > > President/Executive Director > > Siskiyou Land Conservancy > > P.O. Box 4209 > > Arcata, CA 95518 > > 707-498-4900 > > gregking at asis.com > > www.SiskiyouLand.org > > > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ~WRD000.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 823 bytes Desc: not available URL: From gregking at asis.com Sun May 24 17:15:56 2015 From: gregking at asis.com (Greg King) Date: Sun, 24 May 2015 17:15:56 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Smith River estuary + toxics [Disease killing young Klamath River salmon] In-Reply-To: <000601d09630$e2c5e100$a851a300$@att.net> References: <1541623679.3414440.1432215163416.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <555DF50C.5020609@msaj.com> <555E0E62.8010208@msaj.com> <47D49F3B-D03C-467B-B10A-B31B80FD0A7F@asis.com> <001501d0956e$024c4b40$06e4e1c0$@att.net> <000301d095af$28ff74b0$7afe5e10$@att.net> <000601d09630$e2c5e100$a851a300$@att.net> Message-ID: <633D46E4-DD5B-4A7A-AE79-3A93D27101E2@asis.com> While I've got you all here, send your friends to speak at the Del Norte Supes meeting this Tuesday. Here's our ad that ran in yesterday's Triplicate. The time is actually 10 a.m., not 9. On May 24, 2015, at 7:49 AM, "Kier Associates" wrote: > Tom and Greg > > I?ll get off of/quit abusing that ?env-trinity? list, but I do want to share with you just how goofy is the 100-yr-old utility regulatory process, for your own edification/use > -- > The ?goofiness-by-the-numbers? layout below is from Guy Phillips, who is vacationing in Ireland with his wife as we speak and shouldn?t be responding to my emails ? but his passion/commitment to environmental protection/restoration is why I?ve maintained my 40-yr association/friendship with him. > > Walk through it and you?ll see why I?m trying to get the word out that heaping costs on these hydro projects doesn?t hurt the projects/make them want to vacate public waterways ? it benefits them ? a hard concept for us linear thinkers to wrap our brains around. > > Sixteen years ago we had a contract to plan/assist the restoration of winter-run chinook salmon on Battle Cr (which comes near-freezing off the flanks of Mt Lassen) with some decommissioning of the PG&E hydro project there. There came a pt in the planning process/negotiations with PG&E where we fish-types were clearly over our heads. So I brought Guy Phillips in and, in short order, PG&E told my clients they could have what they wanted ? but only if they got rid of Kier and Phillips. Which they did (and got screwed in the bargain) > -- > When the ?stakeholders? began their what-to-do-with-the-Klamath Hydro Project conversation we brought Guy into the Klamath via a CA Coastal Conservancy grant to the fishermen?s PCFFA/IFR > > Guy was frankly loath to come into the Klamath discussion after the inglorious manner we were shown the door on Battle Cr ? but he?s a good soul and accommodated us. > > In short order Guy determined that the most sensible route would be to form a non-profit, buy the KHP from PacifiCorp (it would have been dirt cheap ? see Guy?s valuation of it below) and use the energy proceeds to dismantle the project. Guy explored the idea with his friends at both the CA and OR PUCs. They supported. I shopped for charitable donations among some of the older SF Bay Area enviros (all Republicans ? sigh, those were the days) with some promising success. > > But we ran into a brick wall with the enviros who had joined the (82-, 84-?) stakeholder Klamath restoration group-grope. The best established among them ran us and our idea off. Guy says, below, that he doesn?t know why. He does ? it?s just too painful to talk about. It was about billable hours for the key enviro ? the leader of the enviro pack > > That, as much as anything is why we?re going at KHP decommissioning at glacial speed with iffy legislative prospects > > ?Best, > > Bill > From: Guy Phillips [mailto:phillipsguy1 at gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2015 1:40 AM > To: Kier Associates > Subject: Re: FW: [env-trinity] Disease killing young Klamath River salmon > > OK Bill, here goes. (I think that you may have a copy of the powerpoint that I used to brief the "settlement" parties on this). > > 1. The PUCs care more about what a utility is required by law (statute, regulation, order) to do than they care about whether implementing the law is cost effective. Every utility, every regulator, knows that the PUCs are NOT going to second guess regulatory orders. > > 2. So the game is "make me do it" whereby the utility's incentive is to get regulators to order the utility to do expensive capital projects. Then the utility goes to the PUCs and says "the ratepayers must pay for this because we have no choice". The PUCs duly require the utility to do it and roll the costs into something called the "ratebase". > > 3. This thing called the ratebase is the "remaining book value" of the total capital expenditure by the utility on all assets they own. This is the depreciated net remaining value. That is the source of the ONLY profits that the utility earns--the ONLY profits. The utility does NOT make one thin dime on actual electricity sales--except as how these built-in profits are calculated on the basis of the ratebase. > > 4. The utility earns its "allowed" (by the PUCs) rate of return based ONLY on a percentage of the ratebase. For example, if the ratebase is $100 million and the allowed rate of return is 9%, the utility gets to earn $9 million in profit--rate of return--each and every year as the assets depreciate over the lifetime of the assets. > > 5. So, why does the utility want to have regulators "make me do it"? Because, as I said, they know the PUCs will simply authorize the costs and roll those costs into the ratebase because the PUCs understand that they cannot inhibit the utility's ability to comply with the law. > > 6. So the name of the game for utility managers is: find places in the whole system where we can get someone to order us to spend money on it. It is the ONLY pathway to increase profits for the utility-- it is their growth strategy. > > 7. So what does/did that matter in the Klamath case? As I laid out repeatedly to the Klamath parties (and had two experts from the Calif PUC come to the meetings to verify--don't just believe me!), the ratebase for the Klamath project when this all began (as I recall) was something on the order of $35 million (mostly due to a refurbishment recently completed that was also due to regulatory compliance--otherwise the ratebase would have been substantially lower). At that time, as I recall, their allowed rate of return was on the order of 8%. That means that the profit margin for the Klamath project was only $2.8 million per year. Hardly an attractive asset in a company as large as this one. So, being "forced" to spend $400 million on the Klamath project would increase its yield/profit for the utility by another $32 million PER YEAR! The Klamath project would go from yielding $2.8 million per year to almost $35 million! What a deal! And we get to say that we're doing it for the environment as well! What heroes we'll be! > > 8. But the catch here is that they have to look like they don't want to do it. They have to look like they are being forced to, required to, do it by regulators. Otherwise they run the risk that the PUCs will, in fact, look at the cost effectiveness and then there is some risk that they wont be allowed to earn a rate of return on the investment. > > 9. Hence all the posturing. > > I pointed out to the parties that in California alone, ten times the entire size of the Klamath system gets routinely decommissioned each and every year by the utilities and the costs are routinely included in the ratebase. No questions. Why not do that for the Klamath? > > And all the other hydros all across the country. Let's actually change the game! Let's stop nibbling at their toes. Let's actually do something for the rivers and the fish. No go. > > This troubled me immensely. Obviously still does. The "enviros" and their compatriots will continue to lose or minimize opportunities all across the US in this game because they refuse to change their own game--they refuse to play hardball and instead get co-opted in the utilities' games. The enviros et al need their own paradigm change and, based on my numerous experiences, they refuse to do so. I have my own beliefs about why that is true but those are just my opinions. > > My friends at the PUCs see this and are chagrined. They are captured by the same game and would love to see the paradigm change and long for the enviros to change it. The paradigm change has to come from the outside. But it ain't gunna happen. > > Those opinions, however, are why I got down off the pulpit and retired. And I'll stop my sermon now. > > I applaud you for hanging in there. I am too heartbroken. > > Guy > > On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 12:21 AM, Kier Associates wrote: > Below my notes the Hoopa Valley Tribe?s respected att?y Tom Schlosser asserts that because the fish-passage would have been expensive relative to the productivity of the project the PUCs wouldn?t have allowed the fish-laddering/cost recovery ? to which I respectively and respectfully disagree. But, ?splain to me again why having to undertake a large capital improvement to the KHP would have been advantageous (not simply a neutral) for PacifiCorp > Bill > > -- Greg King President/Executive Director Siskiyou Land Conservancy P.O. Box 4209 Arcata, CA 95518 707-498-4900 gregking at asis.com www.SiskiyouLand.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TriplicateAd_5_23_15.jpg Type: image/jpg Size: 1194428 bytes Desc: not available URL: From twashburn at usbr.gov Tue May 26 11:16:21 2015 From: twashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy) Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 11:16:21 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Trinity Message-ID: Beginning on May 28, 2015, please operate Trinity Power Plant at approximately 3,600 af daily. Use Carr Power Plant and Spring Creek Power Plant to regulate Lewiston and Whiskeytown. Comment: Sacramento Temp Ops Issued by: Thuy Washburn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue May 26 11:23:23 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 18:23:23 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?California_Magazine=3A_Groundwater_Zero?= =?utf-8?q?=3A_California=E2=80=99s_Glass_Is_Less_Than_Half_Full=2C_and_Sa?= =?utf-8?q?cramento=E2=80=99s_Policies_May_Dilute_Conservation_Efforts?= Message-ID: <136685030.2474151.1432664603220.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://alumni.berkeley.edu/california-magazine/just-in/2015-05-25/groundwater-zero-californias-glass-less-half-full-and ?The former Trinity Lake You are here CALIFORNIA MAGAZINE?/?JUST IN Groundwater Zero: California?s Glass Is Less Than Half Full, and Sacramento?s Policies May Dilute Conservation Efforts? By Glen MartinThe drought is worrisome, of course.; In response to state demands for a 25 percent reduction in urban consumption, municipal water districts are enforcing strictures on usage. Homeowners have steeled themselves, however unwillingly, to withering lawns and wilting hydrangeas. Most people have seen the news reports about some kind of fish or another dying in the Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta. And we?ve all heard that the cost of our baby salad greens is going to skyrocket, which can really bollix up menu plans for balanced and healthy?meals.But the real problem is that people aren?t worried?enough,?says Gray Brechin, a visiting scholar at UC Berkeley?s Department of Geography, the founder and project scholar of the?Living New Deal Project?(co-sponsored by Berkeley) and an author best known for?Imperial San Francisco,an examination of the wide-ranging influence of prominent San Francisco families on the environment and economy over the past 150?years.This blithe disregard for the catastrophic implications of the drought is manifest even at UC Berkeley?which should be setting the standard for an appropriate response, says?Brechin.?The quads are still lush and green,? says Brechin. ?They?re still being irrigated. In the gym, there are little signs requesting water conservation because of the drought, but people are still taking 20 minute showers. It?s deeply discouraging, given that this is one of the greatest research and educational institutions in the?country.?Brechin maintains that contrary to general public reaction, the current drought is much more than your average run-of-the-mill crisis. It has the potential for truly apocalyptic consequences. Another year or two of low rainfall, he observes, and many of California?s reservoirs will hit ?dead pool??that point at which water can no longer be obtained through gravity. Further, already overdrawn state aquifers will be tapped out.?We?re already seeing it in the land subsidence at various places throughout the San Joaquin Valley,? says Brechin. ?As aquifers are drawn down, the overlying land collapses, and that?s not a small thing. It points to permanent damage to the structure of the aquifer, to a reduction in its water-holding capacity. Even if the rains return, the aquifer will be severely limited in the amount of water it can?hold.?And the environment? It?s already going down the tubes, and fast, says?Brechin.?The destruction of the Delta is well underway,? says Brechin, citing?studies?by Russian hydrologist Michael Rozengurt demonstrating that estuarine ecosystems collapse whenever freshwater exports top 25 to 30 percent. ?Currently, Delta exports are at 50 percent,? says Brechin. ?Our water exports?most of which go to corporate agriculture in the San Joaquin Valley?are dooming Bay/Delta?fisheries.?What?s needed, says Brechin, is a Manhattan Project mode of response that emphasizes conservation, water recycling, stormwater harvest, rigorous metering of both surface water and groundwater?and agricultural land retirement in the western San Joaquin Valley and Tulare Basin. Brechin was one of the first academicians to study and warn about the implications of intensive irrigated agriculture in the western San Joaquin?Valley.?It was clear to me from the start that it would be a toxic disaster because of the selenium, arsenic, boron, salt and other elements and compounds in the soils,? says Brechin. ?All those materials are mobilized by irrigation and the regular flushing required to remove salt from the root zone, and the resulting tailwater ends up in the waterways of the San Joaquin Valley, causing massive pollution all the way to San Francisco Bay. That?s how we ended up with the Kesterson disaster in the 1980s? (referring to the death of thousands of birds at Kesterson Wildlife Refuge due to selenium?poisoning).By retiring such ?impaired? lands, says Brechin, several million acre-feet of water could be conserved per year (an acre-foot is about 326,000 gallons, enough to support two large households?annually).But instead of responding in a fashion suited to the situation, says Brechin, the state is focused on promoting massive infrastructure projects and accommodating powerful agribusiness?interests.?Governor Brown?s Twin Tunnels is simply a retread of the Peripheral Canal that he unsuccessfully pushed during his first terms in the 1980s,? says Brechin. ?It will saddle taxpayers with billions in new debt and do nothing to increase water supplies?it would be strictly a trans-Delta conveyance project. What it?will?do is assure the ultimate destruction of the Delta, in that it will make it easier to export ever-increasing amounts of any water that does exist to the?south.?Indeed, Brechin says, he is deeply perplexed by the Governor?s general approach to the water?crisis.?Gov?ernor Brown?s Twin Tun?nels will as?sure the ul?ti?mate de?struc?tion of the Delta, in that it will make it easi?er to ex?port ever-in?creas?ing amounts of any wa?ter that does ex?ist to the?south.??He declared a 25 percent reduction on urban use, but no reductions for agriculture, which uses 80 percent of the state?s developed water,? he says. ?Right this minute, thousands of acres of new almonds?a crop that uses a tremendous amount of water?are being planted in the western San Joaquin Valley. So far, Water 2.0 is really about Jerry Brown 2.0. Jerry Brown 1.0?the ?small is beautiful? Jerry Brown?seemed to understand the limits of natural resources, and the implications of those limits for society. But Jerry 2.0 is more like his father, Pat Brown. Pat built the State Water Project, which delivered?and still delivers?cheap water to agribusiness. With the Twin Tunnels, Jerry appears intent on capping that?legacy.?Adding to Brechin?s frustration is the transfer of the Water Resources Center Archives from Berkeley?s College of Engineering to the University of California at Riverside and the California State University at San Bernardino. This is no small thing, Brechin emphasizes. Information is power, after all, and with the dissemination of the archives, the ability of researchers and average citizens to understand and affect water policy has been?diluted.?These archives were mandated by the state legislature in 1956 to serve as the definitive repository for all information on California?s water,? says Brechin. ?They were an incredibly valuable and widely used resource. Plus, the archive librarian, Linda Vida, held monthly colloquia that were heavily attended by researchers and policy-makers. Now the archives have been sent to two separate universities that are relatively difficult to reach. The material is not adequately maintained, and the colloquia have been?discontinued.?But back to possible Mad Max scenarios: What will happen with another year or two of scant rainfall? First, says Brechin, expect agricultural deliveries to be terminated, agribiz muscle notwithstanding. When push comes to shove, the cities ultimately will wield more power and influence than corporate farmers in the western San Joaquin, most of whom have junior water rights?claims.And after?that??Well, we might look to Buenos Aires for an idea,? says Brechin. ?It?s about to run out of water. I gave a talk at a San Francisco breakfast club last year, and a developer approached me and asked what I think would happen if Lake Mead reaches dead pool. I said we?ll have to evacuate Las Vegas. He laughed, and said ?That?ll never happen.? But it could easily happen. Because Lake Mead is where Las Vegas gets its water. And when there?s no water?well,?there?s no water.?Posted on May 21, 2015 - 11:58am?Filed under:?Law + PolicyRelated topics:?UC BerkeleyGray BrechinCalifornia droughtwater policyJerry BrownWater Resources Center ArchivesMad Max -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njharris30 at gmail.com Tue May 26 11:57:27 2015 From: njharris30 at gmail.com (Nathan Harris) Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 11:57:27 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Willow Creek trap in-season update Message-ID: Please see the attached documents for weekly catch data from the Willow Creek traps. Nathan Harris Biologist Yurok Tribal Fisheries Program Trinity River Division 3723 N. Hwy 96 Willow Creek, CA 95573 Office: (530) 629-3333 x1703 Cell: (707) 616-8742 njharris30 at gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: trapping update summary 5.26.15.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 13947 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Willow Creek RST raw catch update 2015.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 30710 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue May 26 12:04:48 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 19:04:48 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] California farm economy surprisingly resilient amid drought Message-ID: <1701134156.2545424.1432667088476.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article21958428.htmlMAY 23, 2015 California farm economy surprisingly resilient amid droughtAn estimated 800,000-plus acres will sit idle this yearGross farm revenue, employment actually increased slightly last yearFood prices remain steady despite crop declinesBY DALE KASLER AND PHILLIP REESE dkasler at sacbee.com The land is bare, except for a few weeds, and the ground is cracked. For the second year in a row, Dan Errotabere is fallowing one third of his ranch: 1,700 acres of California farmland that might have grown tomatoes, garlic, onions and garbanzo beans.?I can?t do this every year,? Errotabere said, inspecting an idle field on his family?s Fresno County farm. ?I?ve got to grow. I?ve got to farm.?This is the state of California agriculture in the fourth year of record-setting drought. With deliveries of surface water through state and federal pipelines slashed by 70 percent overall, the state?s 77,000 growers are struggling to produce the diverse agricultural bounty that makes California the nation?s leading farm state. At least 800,000 acres likely will sit idle this year, or nearly 9 percent of the statewide total, according to the California Farm Water Coalition. The coalition says about 690,000 acres were taken out of production last year due to drought, although other estimates have been lower.Even as many farmers cut back their planting, California?s farm economy overall has been surprisingly resilient. Farm employment increased by more than 1 percent last year. Gross farm revenue from crop production actually increased by two-tenths of 1 percent last year, to $33.09 billion, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The revenue figures don?t take into account animal agriculture, such as beef and dairy production.The statistics don?t mean farmers and their employees are having an easy time of it. Rather, the data show how farmers are coping with the shortages of water. Forced to make choices, they?re diverting more of their dwindling water supplies to keep high-value crops going. Almond prices, for example, have been sky high, and farmers such as Errotabere have idled other crops to preserve their almond orchards and reap the financial rewards. As for jobs, many of the crops that have held up the best also happen to be the most labor intensive, such as strawberries, which has helped pump up employment.?The agricultural economy is, in a general sense, not that bad if you have a product to sell,? said Dave Kranz, spokesman for the California Farm Bureau Federation. ?If you don?t, you?re not going to be able to take advantage of that.?Without question the drought is reining in a sector of the economy that?s been a juggernaut. Between 2003 and 2013, annual agricultural output adjusted for inflation grew by 24 percent, to $46.4 billion. The full impact of the unplanted acreage won?t be known for months, but it?s obvious that many farmers are cutting back.Some 27,000 acres of California grapevines have been ripped up in the past year, and another 20,000 acres of orange and lemon trees are expected to get bulldozed this year. Sacramento Valley?s rice crop likely will shrivel by at least 25 percent, and growers fear they?re losing access to critical export markets because they can?t meet obligations to customers.While crop revenue grew last year, the profitability of farming was depressed. Farmers in much of the state had to pay considerably more for their water, said farm economist Vernon Crowder, a senior vice president at Rabobank.?Sometimes aggregate numbers lose sight of the very real challenges that farmers are experiencing on a local level, the incredible difficulties some of them are experiencing in getting water,? said Mark Jansen, chief executive of Blue Diamond Growers, the giant almond cooperative based in Sacramento. Almond production is expected to decline slightly this year as water problems interfere with yields.So far the drought hasn?t had huge impacts on consumers. California?s celebrated wine grapes will be relatively plentiful. Overall food prices haven?t risen much. Much of the drop in production has occurred with crops, such as rice, where California contributes a relatively small share of the world?s supply and doesn?t have much impact on price. The crops in which California dominates world production ? almonds, strawberries, many vegetables ? have seen only limited declines in output.?Consumers mostly won?t notice at all,? UC Davis farm economist Daniel Sumner said. ?Your California rolls might be a nickel more expensive because the price of rice became more expensive.?No apologies for water useChanging consumer tastes have spurred a revolution in California agriculture that began well before the drought. In the past decade, farmers have nearly doubled the number of acres devoted to almonds and pistachios in order to meet growing global demand, taking out hundreds of thousands of acres of cotton and other lower-value commodities. With last year?s almond crop estimated at nearly $6.5 billion, almonds have overtaken wine grapes as the second-largest California farm commodity, trailing only the dairy industry.?I grow what people want,? said Errotabere, whose operation includes 900 acres of almonds and 100 acres of pistachios.No one?s rushing to thank him. Environmentalists and others have been pummeling farmers for taking 80 percent of the water used by people in California. (Farmers say they account for just 40 percent of the state?s supply when river water left to the environment is taken into account). Critics have been particularly scornful of almond growers south of the Delta for planting comparatively thirsty permanent trees in a region where water rights are weak and the supply has been unreliable for years.The farmers? response: They are reacting to booming worldwide demand for almonds and using good economic sense by putting the water on a high-value crop. Farmers are continuing to plant new almond orchards.?I don?t apologize for using water,? said Errotabere, whose family has been farming in the San Joaquin Valley since the 1920s. ?We need it to grow crops. I?m a pretty good steward.?Errotabere, 59, farms in one of the most drought-stricken regions of the state. Much of his farm sits in the giant Westlands Water District, which normally buys its water from the federal government?s vast statewide plumbing network, the Central Valley Project. Not so this year: Westlands is getting no water whatsoever from the project, for the second year in a row.That doesn?t mean farms in the region have gone completely dry. Westlands growers expect to pump 650,000 acre-feet of groundwater this year, said the district?s general manager Tom Birmingham. An acre-foot is 326,000 gallons.The pumping leaves no one particularly happy. Westlands still expects half its fields to lay fallow, and growers are wary about wells going dry.?Groundwater is a finite supply,? Errotabere said, standing alongside a well irrigating a tomato patch. ?We?re already taking out too much.? The Legislature enacted the state?s first groundwater regulations last year, although local agencies have another five to seven years to develop plans for implementation.A Westlands board member, Errotabere, like many farmers in the parched San Joaquin Valley, criticized government policies that he said has resulted in too much river water being diverted for fish in recent years. To him, the situation raises troubling questions about farming?s future in California.?Ultimately, the question is, does California want agriculture?? Errotabere said. ?We?re farming in an urban state (where) the connection to agriculture over the years has drifted apart. We?re not understood.?Even with higher prices for almonds, Errotabere said the drought has taken a toll. He used to pay $150 an acre-foot for water delivered by the Central Valley Project. Now he spends about $200 to pump water from underground, and hundreds more for whatever supplies can be scrounged on the open market.Every acre that?s quiet, he said, represents 30 hours of lost labor, at about $12 an hour. With 1,700 acres out of production, that?s about $600,000 in lost wages.?We?re not a big faceless company here,? he said. ?This is family farming.?Broader fallout from idled fieldsThe drought?s impact goes beyond the farm fields. Holt of California, a farm-equipment dealer with offices from Redding to Los Banos, reported a 30 percent drop in sales of its largest machines ? the tractors and combines that sell for anywhere from $200,000 to $500,000 apiece.?Farmers are being very careful with their capital,? said Kent Monroe, president of Holt. ?I would say that?s all drought-related, with the farmers not willing to take the risk on a capital outlay.?Standing last week in a field that normally would be under several inches of Sacramento River water but this year has been left idle, Colusa County rice grower Donald Bransford gestured toward a series of businesses that depend on farmers to raise crops.?That seed plant employs people,? Bransford said. ?That?s a storage facility; it employs people. There are some rice mills over here.?Even commodities that had withstood the effect of drought in prior years are a source of anxiety. Last year, the tomato industry in California delivered a record crop, 14 million tons worth, as farmers responded to record prices offered by manufacturers of pasta sauce and other products. So far this year, prices haven?t been set and it?s unclear how big the crop will be.?Most growers are struggling with the water issues,? said Winters farmer Bruce Rominger, chairman of the California Tomato Growers Association. ?A lot of those people are out in the market, trying to buy water.?California?s giant dairy industry, the state?s largest farm commodity, is losing its price cushion. Producers enjoyed a 24 percent jump in revenue last year, to around $9.4 billion, thanks to increased milk prices, according to a study produced by UC Davis for the industry-supported California Milk Advisory Board. The high prices helped dairy farmers cope with the drought, which drove up the cost of feed.The situation is different this year. Annie AcMoody, director of economic analysis at Western United Dairymen, said farmers are getting squeezed because feed prices are still high but milk prices have plunged by one-third. Now in retrenchment mode, California dairy farmers have scaled back production 3 percent compared with last year, AcMoody said.Rice growers along the Sacramento River, whose historic water rights are strong compared with other regions of California, are using that positioning to create their own financial buffer. They?ve lost 25 percent of their federal water this year ? a heavy hit, but far better than the zero water deliveries for landholders with lesser rights. Many growers have agreed to sell a portion of their remaining water, mainly to farmers in Westlands and other districts south of the Delta, for $665 an acre-foot.Selling the water is probably a bit more lucrative than actually planting rice at today?s crop prices, said Bransford, who is president of the Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District.But it also means fallowing more fields, which puts more stress on the valley?s rice industry. Production fell 25 percent last year and probably will decline further in 2015.One casualty is the export business, which normally consumes about 55 percent of the valley?s rice crop. The diminished output is hurting sales; so is the strength of the U.S. dollar, which makes California?s rice comparatively more expensive. Valley farmers are starting to lose business in Turkey, Jordan and certain other markets they spent years cultivating, said Kirk Messick of Farmers? Rice Cooperative, a Sacramento marketing firm owned by farmers.Getting those customers back won?t happen overnight.?When you lose a market, you just don?t lose it for a year,? said Tim Johnson, chief executive of the California Rice Commission. ?It takes a number of years to get that market back (and) re-establish relationships.?Dale Kasler: (916) 321-1066, @dakaslerreprints Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article21958428.html#storylink=cpy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Tue May 26 16:27:32 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 16:27:32 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] California farm economy surprisingly resilient amid drought In-Reply-To: <1701134156.2545424.1432667088476.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1701134156.2545424.1432667088476.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <130701d0980b$8b131450$a1393cf0$@sisqtel.net> Gross Farm Revenue is different than Per Farm Revenue. And Net Farm Income is much different than Gross Farm Income? From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 12:05 PM To: Env-trinity Subject: [env-trinity] California farm economy surprisingly resilient amid drought http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article21958428.html MAY 23, 2015 California farm economy surprisingly resilient amid drought An estimated 800,000-plus acres will sit idle this year Gross farm revenue, employment actually increased slightly last year Food prices remain steady despite crop declines BY DALE KASLER AND PHILLIP REESE dkasler at sacbee.com The land is bare, except for a few weeds, and the ground is cracked. For the second year in a row, Dan Errotabere is fallowing one third of his ranch: 1,700 acres of California farmland that might have grown tomatoes, garlic, onions and garbanzo beans. ?I can?t do this every year,? Errotabere said, inspecting an idle field on his family?s Fresno County farm. ?I?ve got to grow. I?ve got to farm.? This is the state of California agriculture in the fourth year of record-setting drought. With deliveries of surface water through state and federal pipelines slashed by 70 percent overall, the state?s 77,000 growers are struggling to produce the diverse agricultural bounty that makes California the nation?s leading farm state. At least 800,000 acres likely will sit idle this year, or nearly 9 percent of the statewide total, according to the California Farm Water Coalition. The coalition says about 690,000 acres were taken out of production last year due to drought, although other estimates have been lower. Even as many farmers cut back their planting, California?s farm economy overall has been surprisingly resilient. Farm employment increased by more than 1 percent last year. Gross farm revenue from crop production actually increased by two-tenths of 1 percent last year, to $33.09 billion, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The revenue figures don?t take into account animal agriculture, such as beef and dairy production. The statistics don?t mean farmers and their employees are having an easy time of it. Rather, the data show how farmers are coping with the shortages of water. Forced to make choices, they?re diverting more of their dwindling water supplies to keep high-value crops going. Almond prices, for example, have been sky high, and farmers such as Errotabere have idled other crops to preserve their almond orchards and reap the financial rewards. As for jobs, many of the crops that have held up the best also happen to be the most labor intensive, such as strawberries, which has helped pump up employment. ?The agricultural economy is, in a general sense, not that bad if you have a product to sell,? said Dave Kranz, spokesman for the California Farm Bureau Federation. ?If you don?t, you?re not going to be able to take advantage of that.? Without question the drought is reining in a sector of the economy that?s been a juggernaut. Between 2003 and 2013, annual agricultural output adjusted for inflation grew by 24 percent, to $46.4 billion. The full impact of the unplanted acreage won?t be known for months, but it?s obvious that many farmers are cutting back. Some 27,000 acres of California grapevines have been ripped up in the past year, and another 20,000 acres of orange and lemon trees are expected to get bulldozed this year. Sacramento Valley?s rice crop likely will shrivel by at least 25 percent, and growers fear they?re losing access to critical export markets because they can?t meet obligations to customers. While crop revenue grew last year, the profitability of farming was depressed. Farmers in much of the state had to pay considerably more for their water, said farm economist Vernon Crowder, a senior vice president at Rabobank. ?Sometimes aggregate numbers lose sight of the very real challenges that farmers are experiencing on a local level, the incredible difficulties some of them are experiencing in getting water,? said Mark Jansen, chief executive of Blue Diamond Growers, the giant almond cooperative based in Sacramento. Almond production is expected to decline slightly this year as water problems interfere with yields. So far the drought hasn?t had huge impacts on consumers. California?s celebrated wine grapes will be relatively plentiful. Overall food prices haven?t risen much. Much of the drop in production has occurred with crops, such as rice, where California contributes a relatively small share of the world?s supply and doesn?t have much impact on price. The crops in which California dominates world production ? almonds, strawberries, many vegetables ? have seen only limited declines in output. ?Consumers mostly won?t notice at all,? UC Davis farm economist Daniel Sumner said. ?Your California rolls might be a nickel more expensive because the price of rice became more expensive.? No apologies for water use Changing consumer tastes have spurred a revolution in California agriculture that began well before the drought. In the past decade, farmers have nearly doubled the number of acres devoted to almonds and pistachios in order to meet growing global demand, taking out hundreds of thousands of acres of cotton and other lower-value commodities. With last year?s almond crop estimated at nearly $6.5 billion, almonds have overtaken wine grapes as the second-largest California farm commodity, trailing only the dairy industry. ?I grow what people want,? said Errotabere, whose operation includes 900 acres of almonds and 100 acres of pistachios. No one?s rushing to thank him. Environmentalists and others have been pummeling farmers for taking 80 percent of the water used by people in California. (Farmers say they account for just 40 percent of the state?s supply when river water left to the environment is taken into account). Critics have been particularly scornful of almond growers south of the Delta for planting comparatively thirsty permanent trees in a region where water rights are weak and the supply has been unreliable for years. The farmers? response: They are reacting to booming worldwide demand for almonds and using good economic sense by putting the water on a high-value crop. Farmers are continuing to plant new almond orchards. ?I don?t apologize for using water,? said Errotabere, whose family has been farming in the San Joaquin Valley since the 1920s. ?We need it to grow crops. I?m a pretty good steward.? Errotabere, 59, farms in one of the most drought-stricken regions of the state. Much of his farm sits in the giant Westlands Water District, which normally buys its water from the federal government?s vast statewide plumbing network, the Central Valley Project. Not so this year: Westlands is getting no water whatsoever from the project, for the second year in a row. That doesn?t mean farms in the region have gone completely dry. Westlands growers expect to pump 650,000 acre-feet of groundwater this year, said the district?s general manager Tom Birmingham. An acre-foot is 326,000 gallons. The pumping leaves no one particularly happy. Westlands still expects half its fields to lay fallow, and growers are wary about wells going dry. ?Groundwater is a finite supply,? Errotabere said, standing alongside a well irrigating a tomato patch. ?We?re already taking out too much.? The Legislature enacted the state?s first groundwater regulations last year, although local agencies have another five to seven years to develop plans for implementation. A Westlands board member, Errotabere, like many farmers in the parched San Joaquin Valley, criticized government policies that he said has resulted in too much river water being diverted for fish in recent years. To him, the situation raises troubling questions about farming?s future in California. ?Ultimately, the question is, does California want agriculture?? Errotabere said. ?We?re farming in an urban state (where) the connection to agriculture over the years has drifted apart. We?re not understood.? Even with higher prices for almonds, Errotabere said the drought has taken a toll. He used to pay $150 an acre-foot for water delivered by the Central Valley Project. Now he spends about $200 to pump water from underground, and hundreds more for whatever supplies can be scrounged on the open market. Every acre that?s quiet, he said, represents 30 hours of lost labor, at about $12 an hour. With 1,700 acres out of production, that?s about $600,000 in lost wages. ?We?re not a big faceless company here,? he said. ?This is family farming.? Broader fallout from idled fields The drought?s impact goes beyond the farm fields. Holt of California, a farm-equipment dealer with offices from Redding to Los Banos, reported a 30 percent drop in sales of its largest machines ? the tractors and combines that sell for anywhere from $200,000 to $500,000 apiece. ?Farmers are being very careful with their capital,? said Kent Monroe, president of Holt. ?I would say that?s all drought-related, with the farmers not willing to take the risk on a capital outlay.? Standing last week in a field that normally would be under several inches of Sacramento River water but this year has been left idle, Colusa County rice grower Donald Bransford gestured toward a series of businesses that depend on farmers to raise crops. ?That seed plant employs people,? Bransford said. ?That?s a storage facility; it employs people. There are some rice mills over here.? Even commodities that had withstood the effect of drought in prior years are a source of anxiety. Last year, the tomato industry in California delivered a record crop, 14 million tons worth, as farmers responded to record prices offered by manufacturers of pasta sauce and other products. So far this year, prices haven?t been set and it?s unclear how big the crop will be. ?Most growers are struggling with the water issues,? said Winters farmer Bruce Rominger, chairman of the California Tomato Growers Association. ?A lot of those people are out in the market, trying to buy water.? California?s giant dairy industry, the state?s largest farm commodity, is losing its price cushion. Producers enjoyed a 24 percent jump in revenue last year, to around $9.4 billion, thanks to increased milk prices, according to a study produced by UC Davis for the industry-supported California Milk Advisory Board. The high prices helped dairy farmers cope with the drought, which drove up the cost of feed. The situation is different this year. Annie AcMoody, director of economic analysis at Western United Dairymen, said farmers are getting squeezed because feed prices are still high but milk prices have plunged by one-third. Now in retrenchment mode, California dairy farmers have scaled back production 3 percent compared with last year, AcMoody said. Rice growers along the Sacramento River, whose historic water rights are strong compared with other regions of California, are using that positioning to create their own financial buffer. They?ve lost 25 percent of their federal water this year ? a heavy hit, but far better than the zero water deliveries for landholders with lesser rights. Many growers have agreed to sell a portion of their remaining water, mainly to farmers in Westlands and other districts south of the Delta, for $665 an acre-foot. Selling the water is probably a bit more lucrative than actually planting rice at today?s crop prices, said Bransford, who is president of the Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District. But it also means fallowing more fields, which puts more stress on the valley?s rice industry. Production fell 25 percent last year and probably will decline further in 2015. One casualty is the export business, which normally consumes about 55 percent of the valley?s rice crop. The diminished output is hurting sales; so is the strength of the U.S. dollar, which makes California?s rice comparatively more expensive. Valley farmers are starting to lose business in Turkey, Jordan and certain other markets they spent years cultivating, said Kirk Messick of Farmers? Rice Cooperative, a Sacramento marketing firm owned by farmers. Getting those customers back won?t happen overnight. ?When you lose a market, you just don?t lose it for a year,? said Tim Johnson, chief executive of the California Rice Commission. ?It takes a number of years to get that market back (and) re-establish relationships.? Dale Kasler: (916) 321-1066, @dakasler reprints Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article21958428.html#storylink=cpy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Tue May 26 16:41:00 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 16:41:00 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] AP: California looks Down Under for drought advice Message-ID: <13ae01d0980d$6cdb69e0$46923da0$@sisqtel.net> California looks Down Under for drought advice Associated Press By KRISTEN GELINEAU and ELLEN KNICKMEYER http://news.yahoo.com/california-looks-down-under-drought-advice-134750332.h tml SYDNEY (AP) - California's longest and sharpest drought on record has its increasingly desperate water stewards looking for solutions in Australia, the world's driest inhabited continent. The struggle to survive with little water is a constant thread in the history of Australia, whose people now view drought as an inevitable feature of the land poet Dorothea Mackellar dubbed "a sunburnt country." Four years into a drought forcing mandatory 25 percent water cutbacks this year, Californians have taken a keen interest in how Australia coped with its "Big Dry," a torturous drought that stretched across the millennium, from the late 1990s through 2012. Australia's city dwellers had to accept tough water restrictions as cattle collapsed and died in barren fields, monstrous wildfires killed 173 people, and scores of farms went under. But by the time the rains returned, Australia had fundamentally changed how it handles water, following landmark reforms to more carefully mete out allocations and cutbacks. Today, Australia treats water as a commodity to be conserved and traded. The system also better measures what water is available, and efficiency programs have cut average daily water use to 55 gallons, compared with 105 gallons per day for each Californian. The hard-earned lesson is that long droughts are here to stay, says drought-policy expert Linda Botterill of the University of Canberra. "We can expect longer, deeper and more severe droughts in Australia, and I believe the same applies in the U.S.," Botterill says. "As a result, we need to develop strategies that are not knee-jerk responses, but that are planned risk-management strategies." That's why California water officials routinely cite Australia's experience and invite Australian water ministers to come speak. It's also why Felicia Marcus, who runs California's Water Resources Control Board, can talk in minute detail about the stormwater-capture system watering soccer fields in Perth. But Californians may find Australia's medicine tough to swallow. Australians are accustomed to living in a dry land, expect government intervention in a crisis and largely support making sacrifices for the common good. For much of their history, many Californians have enjoyed abundant water, or were able to divert enough of it to turn deserts green, and highly paid lawyers ensure that property rights remain paramount. "The outstanding feature of the California drought is the way in which it's been allowed to become incredibly serious, with - from an Australian perspective - an absolutely pathetic and nominal sort of response," said Daniel Connell, an environmental policy expert at The Australian National University. "The main difference between California and Australia is they're dominated by a legalistic approach and dominated by rights, and we've got a much more public-policy approach." Australia hardly has all the answers. Some of its drought responses faced sharp criticism, and some experts believe Australia already is losing some of its gains. Still, Americans suffering their own "Big Dry" may benefit from some comparisons: WHOSE WATER IS IT? AUSTRALIA: Too many water entitlements had been allocated for Australia's main river system, which winds thousands of miles across four states that produce a third of the nation's food. Overuse and drought so depleted the Murray-Darling Basin that by 2002, the mouth of the Murray had to be dredged to keep it flowing into the sea. Australia responded by capping entitlements, canceling inactive licenses and buying back hundreds of billions of gallons from irrigators to restore the rivers and sell to other users when rain is plentiful. Water use is strictly metered to ensure license holders use only what they are allocated. Precise measurements also track the availability of water, which affects its price as shares are bought and sold on a water trading market worth $1.2 billion a year in U.S. dollars. The amount of water represented in entitlements doled out to farms, industries and towns depends on what's in the river; in drought, it can dwindle to virtually nothing. This is where water trading becomes critical. License holders can buy or sell their entitlements to others, keeping agriculture afloat. A farmer of a thirsty crop like cotton might not profit when both the share of water and the price of cotton is low. But if an orchard grower in desperate need buys that water, the cotton farmer can live off the sale while the orchard owner reaps a profitable harvest. CALIFORNIA: Gov. Jerry Brown calls the state's system of divvying up water rights, which dates to the Gold Rush of the mid-1800s, "somewhat archaic." The largest state economy in the U.S. still follows the maxim "first in time, first in right," which gives overarching priority to nearly 4,000 so-called senior water rights holders who staked claims before 1914 or own acreage abutting a river or stream. In drought, authorities must completely deny water to most other claimants before they touch the water of senior water-rights holders. San Francisco, for example, has stronger water rights than many other cities because in 1902, Mayor James Phelan hiked up the Sierra Nevada and tacked a water claim to an oak tree along the bank of the Tuolumne River. "Revising the water-rights system is a thermo-nuclear issue in California," John Laird, California's secretary for natural resources, said last month. If the state's water shortages go on long enough, however, at some point "almost everything has to be on the table." ___ WATCHING THE FLOW AUSTRALIA: Marcus says California should follow Australia's example in measuring and publicly declaring how water is used. Thousands of gauges across Australia measure rainfall, authorities in each state and territory measure surface water at stream gauging stations, and underground water is monitored through a complex process involving the drilling of bores and controlled pumping tests. Water data collection agencies report to the federal Bureau of Meteorology, which makes the data available online. CALIFORNIA: California has been one of the most lax U.S. states in tracking water use, but the drought is changing this. Legislation enacted last year requires the state to gradually phase in monitoring, for the first time, of how much groundwater Californians are pumping. Meanwhile, roughly a quarter-million California households and businesses still lack water meters; state requirements to have them don't apply until 2025. The state has relied on an honor system, with rights holders self-reporting what water they have withdrawn from rivers and streams every three years. Gov. Brown's budget proposed last week would require rights holders to install monitors and report water usage to the state annually. ___ TIGHTENING THE TAP AUSTRALIA: During the Millennium Drought, all major cities imposed limits or bans on watering lawns and washing cars, and inspectors fined people who broke the rules. The restrictions, public-service campaigns and installation of water-saving appliances reduced Australians' household water use from 85 gallons per person per day in 2000 to 55 gallons today. CALIFORNIA: After some regions all but ignored calls for voluntary cutbacks, Brown's administration mandated a statewide 25 percent cut in water use by cities and towns, and ordered more farmers to stop pumping from rivers and streams. Marcus said the one piece of advice that seemed universal in both Australia and California "was conserve, conserve, conserve, as early as you can, because it's the cheapest, most economical way to buy time" while tougher water-saving measures are phased in. California still is struggling with enforcement, however. ___ DO MORE WITH LESS AUSTRALIA: Years before the Big Dry, Australians were encouraged to use less water. In 1995, Sydney's water authority was ordered to slash per-capita demand by 35 percent by 2011, and it met that target by reducing pressure and leaks in pipes, boosting businesses' water efficiency, and offering low-cost, water-saving technologies in homes, such as dual-flush toilets, low-flow showerheads and rainwater tanks for gardens, toilets and laundry. When the drought struck, government rebates became so widespread that such devices are now common in many Australian homes. Such efficiency measures can be implemented quickly, economically and easily, says Stuart White, an Australian sustainability expert who has advised Californians on drought response. "The water efficiency program is the unsung hero of this whole thing," says White, director of the Institute for Sustainable Futures at the University of Technology, Sydney. "In some cities, it's quite possible we would have reached death's door if it hadn't been in place." CALIFORNIA: Communities across California offer rebates on drought-friendly plumbing and appliances. But the rooftop-rain collectors, stormwater cisterns and bathwater-recycling for gardens, all commonplace in parts of Australia, are rarities here. Increasing numbers of communities are rewriting ordinances to allow families to recycle water from rains and from showers. ___ MIRACLES OF TECHNOLOGY AUSTRALIA: Billions were spent on desalination plants in major cities - a decision that remains hugely divisive. Many of the plants are not currently operating because cheaper water is available for now in Australia, prompting critics to dismiss them as expensive and power-hungry flops that will create greenhouse gases and worsen the continent's climate-change woes. Supporters say the plants will protect the country from the next inevitable drought. CALIFORNIA: While calling for conservation, Brown has pinned his drought focus on an ambitious infrastructure project - a $17 billion plan, opposed by environmental groups, to build 39 miles of tunnel to take Northern California water to Southern California's bigger farmers. Desalination plants in the works include one, for San Diego, that will be the biggest such operation in the Western Hemisphere. ___ Knickmeyer reported from San Francisco -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1173 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Thu Jun 4 13:27:29 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 13:27:29 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] SDN: French company plans water pipeline from Klamath to Southern California Message-ID: <10f601d09f04$e1d08890$a57199b0$@sisqtel.net> http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc &p_docid=155C0C7940CABA70&p_docnum=1&p_theme=gatehouse&s_site=YCSB&p_product =YCSB French company plans water pipeline from Klamath to Southern California David Smith ?Siskiyou Daily News ? June 3, 2015 @sdndavidsmith PARIS, France - California's search for drought solutions has attained a global reach, with one French company proposing to extend the useful life of Klamath River water for the rain-starved fields to the south. Via Marina, a subsidiary of France's VINCI Construction, submitted a prefeasibility study to the state in February detailing the proposed use of its patented water delivery system. Dubbed a "submarine river," the system utilizes an underwater pipeline to deliver water from the mouth of a river to a separate location. Via Marina's vision for California is the establishment of a submarine river taking water from the mouth of the Klamath and Eel rivers and delivering it to parched areas in Central and Southern California. Still in its infancy, the proposal is considered a first step in what Via Marina founding partner and Managing Committee Chairman F?lix Bogliolo hopes will be a serious look at a unique solution to the ongoing drought problem. Speaking with the Siskiyou Daily News by email and Skype, Bogliolo shared insights about his company's vision and how it interacts with California's complex water politics. He explained that the system is installed at a river's "salt wedge limit," where the transition from fresh to salt water is just beginning. "At that point, all users upstream have been fully served with all the water they need for their uses, and downstream, there can't be any more human users," he said. Bogliolo added that there is still one important user within the river's influence - the ecosystem - and its needs would require consideration when determining how much water could be diverted through the submarine river. That determination would be made in what Via Marina hopes is the next step for the state: a full feasibility study that would examine potential impacts on the environment, the costs of construction and other aspects of what would be a large scale project along California's coast. In the 1970s, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation studied the concept of an undersea aqueduct that would pull from the Klamath and Eel rivers, at the time finding that such a system could deliver approximately 4 million acrefeet of water annually. The cost, using April 1973 prices, was estimated to be $20 billion, plus an annual investment and operations costs of about $1.8 billion. Thanks to advances in engineering and construction - united in Via Marina's system - the company believes that those costs would be significantly less today, according to Bogliolo. He said that the company is currently working with the Chilean government and its citizens to explore a proposal to take water from a southern river and bring it north, where climate changes are hindering an already dry region. He added that such a water delivery is expected to help boost the ability to expand agriculture to areas where land is plentiful but where water is needed to put it into production. The fallowed fields of California's Central Valley could benefit in much the same way, according to Bogliolo, who called attention to the burgeoning human population and its continuing need for more food as space to produce it becomes scarce. He said that the company envisions the proposal as one that can benefit not just agriculture but possibly municipal, industrial and environmental needs as well. He does not see it as a cure all, however; he said that he believes there would still be a need for continued conservation and preservation in water use. "Obviously, this is a last resort measure. All measures of good governance, preservation, reasonable use and savings should be, immediately and in any case, put in place and strictly observed and enforced," he said, "and not only to cope with the current drought but over the long run so that they deeply form part of the normal California way of life or culture." Asked how he would sell the project politically - beyond the scientific considerations - Bogliolo said that he sees the issue as one requiring solidarity with fellow citizens in need. "Northern folks are happy to eat good southern vegetables or fruits and drink excellent southern wine. Southerns could use northern water to grow them, and it wouldn't hurt Northern California," he said. Whether the state agrees is still in question, both regarding the likelihood of a feasibility study being conducted and whether it is under serious consideration. The Siskiyou Daily News contacted the Department of Water Resources, North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board and California Office of Emergency Services, all of which either failed to respond by press time or pointed to one of the other agencies for answers. Bogliolo sees it as the state's prerogative to figure out whether it wants to explore the issue and expressed it in simple terms. "It's a matter of conducting a rational decision-making process, taking into account all facets of the issue at stake: scientific, technical, commercial, environmental, political, financial and human, weighing all of the pros and cons," he said. He also offered to come to the Klamath region to discuss the issue with citizens, scientists and government officials free of charge. With the ongoing need to fill the gap between water needs and water available, Bogliolo said that the ball is in California's court when it comes to figuring out whether his company has the best solution. "Because of that gap, California has a problem, a permanent and long-standing one, one that comes from long ago, that will only get worse with climate change and that the next few rain drops won't solve," he said. "It just happens that Via Marina has a solution, a solution that is at the same time efficient, permanent, environmentally sustainable and cost effective, contrary to many others." This conceptual drawing from Via Marina shows a proposed pipeline that would run from the mouth of the Klamath River to Southern California underneath the Pacific Ocean. http://nl.newsbank.com/graphic/transparent.gif _____ Copyright 2015 Siskiyou Daily News. All Rights Reserved. http://nl.newsbank.com/graphic/transparent.gif _____ Copyright 2015 Siskiyou Daily News. All Rights Reserved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 168 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kierassociates at att.net Thu Jun 4 14:14:19 2015 From: kierassociates at att.net (Kier Associates) Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 14:14:19 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] SDN: French company plans water pipeline from Klamath to Southern California In-Reply-To: <10f601d09f04$e1d08890$a57199b0$@sisqtel.net> References: <10f601d09f04$e1d08890$a57199b0$@sisqtel.net> Message-ID: <005701d09f0b$6cdd1830$46974890$@att.net> What is it about the French? Turn to any natural disaster, civil war, genocide, drought, tragic situation in the world and there, right in the middle of it, will be Frenchmen with a business-engineering solution ready to cash in they should scrap the ?R? and simply call this one ?Via Mania?. From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Sari Sommarstrom Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 1:27 PM To: 'Env-trinity' Subject: [env-trinity] SDN: French company plans water pipeline from Klamath to Southern California http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc &p_docid=155C0C7940CABA70&p_docnum=1&p_theme=gatehouse&s_site=YCSB&p_product =YCSB French company plans water pipeline from Klamath to Southern California David Smith ?Siskiyou Daily News ? June 3, 2015 @sdndavidsmith PARIS, France - California's search for drought solutions has attained a global reach, with one French company proposing to extend the useful life of Klamath River water for the rain-starved fields to the south. Via Marina, a subsidiary of France's VINCI Construction, submitted a prefeasibility study to the state in February detailing the proposed use of its patented water delivery system. Dubbed a "submarine river," the system utilizes an underwater pipeline to deliver water from the mouth of a river to a separate location. Via Marina's vision for California is the establishment of a submarine river taking water from the mouth of the Klamath and Eel rivers and delivering it to parched areas in Central and Southern California. Still in its infancy, the proposal is considered a first step in what Via Marina founding partner and Managing Committee Chairman F?lix Bogliolo hopes will be a serious look at a unique solution to the ongoing drought problem. Speaking with the Siskiyou Daily News by email and Skype, Bogliolo shared insights about his company's vision and how it interacts with California's complex water politics. He explained that the system is installed at a river's "salt wedge limit," where the transition from fresh to salt water is just beginning. "At that point, all users upstream have been fully served with all the water they need for their uses, and downstream, there can't be any more human users," he said. Bogliolo added that there is still one important user within the river's influence - the ecosystem - and its needs would require consideration when determining how much water could be diverted through the submarine river. That determination would be made in what Via Marina hopes is the next step for the state: a full feasibility study that would examine potential impacts on the environment, the costs of construction and other aspects of what would be a large scale project along California's coast. In the 1970s, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation studied the concept of an undersea aqueduct that would pull from the Klamath and Eel rivers, at the time finding that such a system could deliver approximately 4 million acrefeet of water annually. The cost, using April 1973 prices, was estimated to be $20 billion, plus an annual investment and operations costs of about $1.8 billion. Thanks to advances in engineering and construction - united in Via Marina's system - the company believes that those costs would be significantly less today, according to Bogliolo. He said that the company is currently working with the Chilean government and its citizens to explore a proposal to take water from a southern river and bring it north, where climate changes are hindering an already dry region. He added that such a water delivery is expected to help boost the ability to expand agriculture to areas where land is plentiful but where water is needed to put it into production. The fallowed fields of California's Central Valley could benefit in much the same way, according to Bogliolo, who called attention to the burgeoning human population and its continuing need for more food as space to produce it becomes scarce. He said that the company envisions the proposal as one that can benefit not just agriculture but possibly municipal, industrial and environmental needs as well. He does not see it as a cure all, however; he said that he believes there would still be a need for continued conservation and preservation in water use. "Obviously, this is a last resort measure. All measures of good governance, preservation, reasonable use and savings should be, immediately and in any case, put in place and strictly observed and enforced," he said, "and not only to cope with the current drought but over the long run so that they deeply form part of the normal California way of life or culture." Asked how he would sell the project politically - beyond the scientific considerations - Bogliolo said that he sees the issue as one requiring solidarity with fellow citizens in need. "Northern folks are happy to eat good southern vegetables or fruits and drink excellent southern wine. Southerns could use northern water to grow them, and it wouldn't hurt Northern California," he said. Whether the state agrees is still in question, both regarding the likelihood of a feasibility study being conducted and whether it is under serious consideration. The Siskiyou Daily News contacted the Department of Water Resources, North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board and California Office of Emergency Services, all of which either failed to respond by press time or pointed to one of the other agencies for answers. Bogliolo sees it as the state's prerogative to figure out whether it wants to explore the issue and expressed it in simple terms. "It's a matter of conducting a rational decision-making process, taking into account all facets of the issue at stake: scientific, technical, commercial, environmental, political, financial and human, weighing all of the pros and cons," he said. He also offered to come to the Klamath region to discuss the issue with citizens, scientists and government officials free of charge. With the ongoing need to fill the gap between water needs and water available, Bogliolo said that the ball is in California's court when it comes to figuring out whether his company has the best solution. "Because of that gap, California has a problem, a permanent and long-standing one, one that comes from long ago, that will only get worse with climate change and that the next few rain drops won't solve," he said. "It just happens that Via Marina has a solution, a solution that is at the same time efficient, permanent, environmentally sustainable and cost effective, contrary to many others." This conceptual drawing from Via Marina shows a proposed pipeline that would run from the mouth of the Klamath River to Southern California underneath the Pacific Ocean. http://nl.newsbank.com/graphic/transparent.gif _____ Copyright 2015 Siskiyou Daily News. All Rights Reserved. http://nl.newsbank.com/graphic/transparent.gif _____ Copyright 2015 Siskiyou Daily News. All Rights Reserved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 168 bytes Desc: not available URL: From pcatanese at dhscott.com Thu Jun 4 22:00:38 2015 From: pcatanese at dhscott.com (Paul Catanese) Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 05:00:38 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] SDN: French company plans water pipeline from Klamath to Southern California In-Reply-To: <005701d09f0b$6cdd1830$46974890$@att.net> References: <10f601d09f04$e1d08890$a57199b0$@sisqtel.net>, <005701d09f0b$6cdd1830$46974890$@att.net> Message-ID: They do hit the nail on the head however. the "burgeoning " population growth in California.trying to fit 5lbs of dung in a 2 pound bag never works and over the past 30 years that's what we have done in California both through legal and illegal immigration. Frankly not another housing development should be contemplated without a sustainable and committed water source.since we are unwilling to expand water delivery systems and agriculture is such a significant component of our economy we are in a zero sum game. Business is essential to pay all the handouts a large swath of legal and illegal immigrants demand from the state as those who actually produce continue to leave the state. Go figure it out. It's not pretty and can will continue to be kicked down the road.take a drive down highway 99 sometime. Sent from my iPhone On Jun 4, 2015, at 2:14 PM, Kier Associates > wrote: What is it about the French? Turn to any natural disaster, civil war, genocide, drought, tragic situation in the world and there, right in the middle of it, will be Frenchmen with a business-engineering solution ready to cash in ? they should scrap the ?R? and simply call this one ?Via Mania?. From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Sari Sommarstrom Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2015 1:27 PM To: 'Env-trinity' Subject: [env-trinity] SDN: French company plans water pipeline from Klamath to Southern California http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc&p_docid=155C0C7940CABA70&p_docnum=1&p_theme=gatehouse&s_site=YCSB&p_product=YCSB French company plans water pipeline from Klamath to Southern California David Smith ?Siskiyou Daily News ? June 3, 2015 @sdndavidsmith PARIS, France - California's search for drought solutions has attained a global reach, with one French company proposing to extend the useful life of Klamath River water for the rain-starved fields to the south. Via Marina, a subsidiary of France's VINCI Construction, submitted a prefeasibility study to the state in February detailing the proposed use of its patented water delivery system. Dubbed a "submarine river," the system utilizes an underwater pipeline to deliver water from the mouth of a river to a separate location. Via Marina's vision for California is the establishment of a submarine river taking water from the mouth of the Klamath and Eel rivers and delivering it to parched areas in Central and Southern California. Still in its infancy, the proposal is considered a first step in what Via Marina founding partner and Managing Committee Chairman F?lix Bogliolo hopes will be a serious look at a unique solution to the ongoing drought problem. Speaking with the Siskiyou Daily News by email and Skype, Bogliolo shared insights about his company's vision and how it interacts with California's complex water politics. He explained that the system is installed at a river's "salt wedge limit," where the transition from fresh to salt water is just beginning. "At that point, all users upstream have been fully served with all the water they need for their uses, and downstream, there can't be any more human users," he said. Bogliolo added that there is still one important user within the river's influence - the ecosystem - and its needs would require consideration when determining how much water could be diverted through the submarine river. That determination would be made in what Via Marina hopes is the next step for the state: a full feasibility study that would examine potential impacts on the environment, the costs of construction and other aspects of what would be a large scale project along California's coast. In the 1970s, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation studied the concept of an undersea aqueduct that would pull from the Klamath and Eel rivers, at the time finding that such a system could deliver approximately 4 million acrefeet of water annually. The cost, using April 1973 prices, was estimated to be $20 billion, plus an annual investment and operations costs of about $1.8 billion. Thanks to advances in engineering and construction - united in Via Marina's system - the company believes that those costs would be significantly less today, according to Bogliolo. He said that the company is currently working with the Chilean government and its citizens to explore a proposal to take water from a southern river and bring it north, where climate changes are hindering an already dry region. He added that such a water delivery is expected to help boost the ability to expand agriculture to areas where land is plentiful but where water is needed to put it into production. The fallowed fields of California's Central Valley could benefit in much the same way, according to Bogliolo, who called attention to the burgeoning human population and its continuing need for more food as space to produce it becomes scarce. He said that the company envisions the proposal as one that can benefit not just agriculture but possibly municipal, industrial and environmental needs as well. He does not see it as a cure all, however; he said that he believes there would still be a need for continued conservation and preservation in water use. "Obviously, this is a last resort measure. All measures of good governance, preservation, reasonable use and savings should be, immediately and in any case, put in place and strictly observed and enforced," he said, "and not only to cope with the current drought but over the long run so that they deeply form part of the normal California way of life or culture." Asked how he would sell the project politically - beyond the scientific considerations - Bogliolo said that he sees the issue as one requiring solidarity with fellow citizens in need. "Northern folks are happy to eat good southern vegetables or fruits and drink excellent southern wine. Southerns could use northern water to grow them, and it wouldn't hurt Northern California," he said. Whether the state agrees is still in question, both regarding the likelihood of a feasibility study being conducted and whether it is under serious consideration. The Siskiyou Daily News contacted the Department of Water Resources, North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board and California Office of Emergency Services, all of which either failed to respond by press time or pointed to one of the other agencies for answers. Bogliolo sees it as the state's prerogative to figure out whether it wants to explore the issue and expressed it in simple terms. "It's a matter of conducting a rational decision-making process, taking into account all facets of the issue at stake: scientific, technical, commercial, environmental, political, financial and human, weighing all of the pros and cons," he said. He also offered to come to the Klamath region to discuss the issue with citizens, scientists and government officials free of charge. With the ongoing need to fill the gap between water needs and water available, Bogliolo said that the ball is in California's court when it comes to figuring out whether his company has the best solution. "Because of that gap, California has a problem, a permanent and long-standing one, one that comes from long ago, that will only get worse with climate change and that the next few rain drops won't solve," he said. "It just happens that Via Marina has a solution, a solution that is at the same time efficient, permanent, environmentally sustainable and cost effective, contrary to many others." This conceptual drawing from Via Marina shows a proposed pipeline that would run from the mouth of the Klamath River to Southern California underneath the Pacific Ocean. ________________________________ Copyright 2015 Siskiyou Daily News. All Rights Reserved. ________________________________ Copyright 2015 Siskiyou Daily News. 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: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 168 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 168 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 168 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jun 5 07:55:42 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 14:55:42 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Editorial: Salmon are worth the effort Message-ID: <1929491140.5737759.1433516142307.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-salmon-are-worth-the-effort_34192166 ? Editorial: Salmon are worth the effort 6:00 PM, Jun 4, 2015editorials Last month we learned that 22 years of planning and projects meant to restore salmon and steelhead populations decimated by the Central Valley Project are flopping like fish out of water.Not only is that a big blow to the fish themselves ? some of which are teetering on the verge of extinction ? it?s just about a $1 billion hit on taxpayers? money.But this week it looks as if the folks at the state Water Resources Control Board and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation are trying to right at least one component of the failed plan ? something they?ve handled inconsistently over the years. This year early June releases of water from Keswick Dam into the Sacramento River are being cut back as much as 22 percent, from 9,000 cubic-feet per second to no more than 7,500 cfs.It?s an effort to avoid repeating last year?s debacle when too much warm water was released late in the season, wiping out thousands of salmon eggs and recent hatches ? almost the entire fall salmon run. Those eggs and small fry need cold water to survive ? and one might expect, after 22 years of studies and planning, all those state and federal bureaucrats might have known that.There are many agencies involved in the multifaceted efforts ? critics say too many. The results of their combined efforts are dismal.Except for good progress made on Battle and Clear creeks, the Central Valley Project Improvement Act of 1992 failed to accomplish even 50 percent of its goals, as reporter Damon Arthur recently documented. By 2012, for example, plans called for spring-run chinook salmon spawning numbers to hit 68,000. There were only 30,522. The federal and state agencies hit only 30.6 percent of their goal for fall-run chinook.The whole idea of the Act was to restore the habitat ? and the fish ? devastated by the 400-mile Central Valley Project with its 20 dams and reservoirs and 11 power plants.That entailed installing fish screens, planting along stream banks, replacing gravel (good for spawning) and improving channel conditions, but after all this time not even a quarter of those projects have been completed.Those responsible have offered excuses, not explanations.It?s just a bigger system,? said Bob Clarke, fisheries program supervisor for the federal fish and wildlife service?s Pacific Southwest Region. It?s hard to believe nobody was aware of the size and complexity of the system when the law was approved.David Mooney, administrator of the project improvement act, said the projects have cost more than expected at a time when money is short. But maybe what the project needs are fewer administrators and more field work.It?s true that the situation in the last few years is greatly complicated by the ongoing drought. That means those thirsty farmers down in the lower reaches of the valley are clamoring for all they can get ? and at times that doesn?t do the salmon any favors. Higher lake levels with larger pools of cooler water are good for the salmon, but not necessarily for crops.Salmon are crucial to the state?s $1.5 billion commercial and recreational fishing industry, and so play a vital role in the North State?s economy.We?re hoping the steps bureaucrats are taking now will be enough to save this year?s salmon run. Water temperature is already higher than last year by about a degree. Those salmon need all the cold water they can get. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Jun 6 18:53:34 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2015 01:53:34 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] A Tribute to Jerry Cadagan Message-ID: <324882443.6455298.1433642014367.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> A Tribute to Jerry Cadagan | California Water Impact Network | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | A Tribute to Jerry Cadagan | California Water Impact Net...A Tribute to Jerry Cadagan Submitted by the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN, online at?www.c-win.org) ? Photo: Friends of the River | | | | View on www.c-win.org | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | A Tribute to Jerry Cadagan Submitted by the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN,online at www.c-win.org) Commercial fishermen, river runners, water wonks andenvironmentalists were all deeply saddened to learn of the recent death ofJerry Cadagan, a tireless advocate for wild rivers and water policy reform, asage, a wit, a mentor, a sophisticated media pundit, and an astute commentatoron the human condition. Cadagan, a Sonora resident, lost his beloved wife of 38years, Kris Cadagan, in a 2014 automobile accident that also left him seriouslyinjured. He passed on May 18. He was 76. At one time a corporate lawyer for Crown-Zellerbach, Cadagandiscovered river-running in the 1970s. His passion for wild rivers compelledhim to assume a leadership role in water and fisheries activism, a commitmenthe honored for almost four decades. ?I was initially wary, indeed, skeptical of Jerry when Ifirst met him in 1982,? says John Amodio, who worked to expand Redwood NationalPark and later served as the Sierra Club?s organizer for the ?timber wars? ofthe late 1980s and early 1990s. ?His affiliation with a corporate owner oftimberlands and pulp mills (Crown Zellerbach) made him guilty by association. Butworking with and running rivers with Jerry changed all that. The depth of hisenvironmental commitment became evident by the time and resources he freelydevoted to the cause of preserving first the Stanislaus River, and then theTuolumne River from a billion dollar dam complex.? Friends and colleagues remember Cadagan as a man ofconsummate professionalism who leavened his dedication to environmentaladvocacy with humor and a worldly point of view. Though his op-eds, letters tothe editor and testimonies before legislative bodies were often barbed, theywere all meant to enlighten rather than wound.? ?He brought the rare combination of a keen strategic mindthat could dissect both policy and political ramifications, and then devisestrategies that were not only effective, but fun to pursue,? says Amodio. Mark Dubois, founder of Friends of the River, says Cadaganbrought a much-needed level of media expertise to the fight to save America?srivers. This was made clear to Dubois when he emerged from the StanislausCanyon after chaining himself to a boulder to delay the filling of New Melonesreservoir. ?He convinced us that we needed a media event, so hearranged one at Fort Mason in San Francisco,? says Dubois. ?I didn?t reallyexpect much interest, but I was flabbergasted by how many reporters showedup.? Thanks to Jerry, the fight to savethe Stanislaus became an international story.? And that was just one example of Cadagan?s highly effectivemedia strategies, continues Dubois. ?Once, to highlight threats to the Bay/Delta estuary, he put a grand piano on araft, floated it out on the Delta, and a pianist gave a concert out on thewater. That got a lot of attention as well.? Long-time water policy reform activist and whitewater boaterPatty Schifferle says Cadagan?s passing has left a vacancy in the environmentalcommunity that will not be filled easily. ?Jerry was a very special guy,? Schifferle says. ?He hadgood values. He was someone who gave back, (who) was part of a family ofgivers, not takers. My heart is broken and tears are coming uncontrollably.? Fisheries consultant Bill Kier says Cadagan was a man whodevoted as much energy to local issues as campaigns of regional or national significance. ?Until the (Brown administration?s proposed) Twin Tunnelsstarted to suck up all our time and energy, Jerry would often as not start outa phone call to me with some report or other about his latest Lake Mercedslam,? says Kier. ?I think his one-man crusade to restore Lake Merced (in SanFrancisco) to a trout fishing water was just as significant to him as all therest of the high-profile campaigning he did to restore Hetch Hetchy, save theTuolumne and Stanislaus Rivers, and sue to stop more well-drilling for almondexpansion in Stanislaus County.? But while mourning the passing of an esteemed colleague isnecessary, says Carolee Krieger, it?s also incumbent on Cadagan?s admirers to rememberand celebrate his essential nature. ?More than anything else, Jerry was a fighter,? saysKrieger, the executive director of the California Water Impact Network. ?He wasa gentlemen and an intellectual, but first and foremost, he was a warrior.? The battle for sound and equitable water policygoes on, and we must stay engaged. Jerry would want it that way. More thanthat, he would demand it.? # ?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 njharris30 at gmail.com Mon Jun 8 17:04:46 2015 From: njharris30 at gmail.com (Nathan Harris) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2015 17:04:46 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Willow Creek trap in-season update - June 8th Message-ID: Please see the attached documents for weekly catch data from the Willow Creek traps. Nathan Harris Biologist Yurok Tribal Fisheries Program Trinity River Division 3723 N. Hwy 96 Willow Creek, CA 95573 Office: (530) 629-3333 x1703 Cell: (707) 616-8742 njharris30 at gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: trapping update summary 6.8.15.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 14375 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Willow Creek RST raw catch update 2015.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 31099 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jun 10 08:33:28 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 15:33:28 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Appeals_Court_Decides_Crucial_Case_On_Sta?= =?utf-8?q?te_Fish_And_Wildlife_CDFW=E2=80=99S_Extension_Of_Streambed_Alte?= =?utf-8?q?ration_Limits_To_Existing_Water_Diversions=3A?= Message-ID: <875790981.328613.1433950408870.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> News Worth Noting: Appeals Court Decides Case On CDFW?S Extension Of Streambed Alteration Limits To Existing Water Diversions; Draft plans for Central Valley Wildlife Mgt Areas; San Joaquin River Restoration Program Reach 2B enviro docs, and more ... | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | News Worth Noting: Appeals Court Decides Case On CD...Appeals Court Decides Crucial Case On State Fish And Wildlife CDFW?S Extension Of Streambed Alteration Limits To Existing Water Diversions: "On June 4th, 2015... | | | | View on mavensnotebook.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | Appeals Court Decides Crucial Case On State Fish And Wildlife CDFW?S Extension Of Streambed Alteration Limits To Existing Water Diversions:??On June 4th, 2015, the Third District Court of Appeal reversed the Siskiyou County Superior Court?s injunction against the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (?CDFW?), holding for the first time that the State?s streambed alteration program extends to existing water right diversions even if they do not physically alter streambeds. The Superior Court last year had stopped CDFW from bringing enforcement actions against longtime agricultural water users for continuing to divert surface waters from within the County without first obtaining a streambed alteration agreement pursuant to Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. Siskiyou County Farm Bureau v. California CDFW of Fish and Game, Case No. SCSCCV11-00418. In a setback for water rights holders, the Court concluded that Section 1602?ostensibly enacted to counteract mining-related streambed alterations?unambiguously embraces ordinary and long-time water diversions held under existing rights.?? ??Read more by clicking here. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jun 10 12:28:26 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 19:28:26 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Westlands Urges Reclamation to Comply With ESA Regarding Releases to the Trinity River Message-ID: <1966631762.487946.1433964506415.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://mavensnotebook.com/2015/06/10/this-just-in-westlands-urges-reclamation-to-comply-with-esa-regarding-releases-to-the-trinity-river-that-harm-threaten-and-endangered-salmon-in-the-sacramento-river/? ? This just in ? Westlands Urges Reclamation to Comply With ESA Regarding Releases to the Trinity River That Harm Threatened and Endangered Salmon in the Sacramento River ?June 10, 2015 ?Maven ?News Worth Noting,?Other newsFrom Westlands Water District: Today, Westlands Water District, along with the San Luis Delta-Mendota Water Authority, sent to the Department of the Interior a Notice of Violation of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), which asserts that the Bureau of Reclamation's action to release additional water from Trinity Reservoir to the Trinity River in August and September of 2014, violated the ESA. Specifically, Reclamation's failure to consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), an agency within the Department of Commerce, regarding the potential effects on winter-run Chinook salmon of reoperating Trinity Reservoir violated section 7 of the ESA.In December 2000, former Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt signed a record of decision that prescribed flow criteria for the Trinity River. These criteria were established to meet federal trust responsibilities to Native Americans and to meet the fishery restoration goals of federal law, and according to Interior the flow criteria were based on ?extensive scientific effort to determine appropriate flows and other measures necessary to restore and maintain the Trinity River's?anadromous?fishery.? These criteria were meant to be ?permanent? and the record of decision signed by Secretary Babbitt provided that the annual flow volumes ?may not be changed.? Moreover, in adopting theses flow criteria, Interior rejected alternatives that would have resulted in higher flow volumes because those higher flows would ?exclude or excessively limit [Reclamation's] ability to address the other recognized purposes of the [Trinity River Division],? including providing cold water for salmon in the Sacramento River and supplying water to farmers.Despite language in the record of decision that annual flow volumes ?may not be changed,? in 2012, 2013, and 2014, Reclamation did change the annual flow volumes? without regard for the effects those changes would have on the winter-run Chinook salmon and other species listed under the ESA. Under intense political pressure, Reclamation increased releases down the Trinity River in 2012, 2013, and 2014, by an additional 120,000 acre-feet. But the release of that additional water down the Trinity River impaired Reclamation's ability to maintain cool water temperatures for the benefit of endangered winter-run Chinook salmon and threatened spring-run Chinook salmon in the Sacramento River. Indeed, in the fall of 2014, excessive water temperatures in the Sacramento River significantly increased the mortality of salmon eggs and fry. Presently, the State Water Resources Control Board is considering additional restrictions on the operations of Shasta Reservoir to protect cold water temperatures, which could further diminish Central Valley Project water supplies for farms and cities. The need for these potential restrictions would have been ameliorated, at least in part, had Reclamation not released the additional 120,000 acre-feet of water from Trinity Reservoir over the past three years.Notwithstanding these adverse consequences on listed species, Reclamation has already been asked to make additional releases from Trinity Reservoir again in 2015. In each of the past years, Westlands has warned of the potential adverse consequences for endangered fish in the Sacramento River, and has urged Reclamation to avoid any further additional releases for salmon in the lower Klamath River until it has first completed consultation under the ESA.In the Notice issued today, Westlands and the Authority again urge Reclamation to fulfill its duty to consult regarding the impacts of these releases on listed fish species.?In a year where homeowners, farmers, and communities are being asked to make responsible decisions relative to their water use, we ask the government to do the same. ????????????????? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jun 10 12:42:59 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 19:42:59 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] CEQA fast track for Silicon Valley water recycling could include Delta tunnels Message-ID: <746006713.511160.1433965379426.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_28282861/oakland-tribune-editorial-ceqa-fast-track-silicon-valley ? Oakland Tribune editorial: CEQA fast track for Silicon Valley water recycling could include Delta tunnels Oakland Tribune editorial ? 2015 Bay Area News GroupPOSTED: ? 06/09/2015 01:38:04 PM PDT0 COMMENTSThe governor's obsession with building massive tunnels under the Delta could muck up what should be a simple issue: granting CEQA exemption requests for emergency drought projects.The request in the form of Trailer Bill 831 is part of the budget process for dealing with the drought. Specific projects to deal with water shortages should get a fast track. But the vague language of this bill could allow the governor to build his massive, controversial Delta twin tunnels without completing extensive environmental studies. That cannot happen.?Many Californians, including us, would like to see the California Environmental Quality Act reformed to minimize abuses that hold worthy projects hostage. Given the failure of reform attempts, the occasional CEQA exemption for unusually important projects has been reasonable.?But an $18 billion plan for two 40-foot wide, 35-mile long tunnels to pump water away from the Delta to Central and Southern California, potentially ruining the Delta ecosystem? Good grief. If we didn't have CEQA, we'd need to invent it for this thing.Environmental studies for the tunnels have being done, but the plan has changed and could change again. It demands a complete evaluation.This paper's reporter Paul Rogers asked Gov. Jerry Brown last week whether the bill could be used to skirt CEQA for the tunnels.?"I doubt that," Brown said.He doubts it?"I don't think the Legislature would do that," Brown added. "We don't slip things in. We flagrantly and openly and transparently conduct our business in Sacramento."Really/. Secret, last-minute deals are a hallmark of trailer bills, which tend to be slipped in with no real public debate.?A CEQA exemption is needed for the Santa Clara Valley Water District and the cities of San Jose and Santa Clara to speed construction of an $800 million purification system so recycled water can be percolated back into the ground for general use. It would cut two years and $3 million in costs from the 10-year project, which ultimately could supply 20 percent of Santa Clara County's water needs.Environmentalists oppose CEQA exemptions on principle, but the overall goal of this water project is so environmentally sound, it is appropriate for the Legislature to fast track it. But Trailer Bill 831 -- which even lacks a sunset provision -- would unleash a free-for-all. No wonder the Sierra Club is incensed.The Legislature needs to clean up this trailer bill to be certain it does not eliminate public review of the tunnels, whether by specific reference or general guidelines. Perhaps a cost cap? We don't know what that price should be, but it surely somewhere far, far south of $18 billion.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From t.schlosser at msaj.com Wed Jun 10 08:58:43 2015 From: t.schlosser at msaj.com (Thomas P. Schlosser) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 08:58:43 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Appeals_Court_Decides_Crucial_Case?= =?windows-1252?q?_On_State_Fish_And_Wildlife_CDFW=92S_Extension_Of_Stream?= =?windows-1252?q?bed_Alteration_Limits_To_Existing_Water_Diversions=3A?= In-Reply-To: <875790981.328613.1433950408870.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <875790981.328613.1433950408870.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <55785EB3.8040602@msaj.com> Here's a copy of the court's opinion. Tom On 6/10/2015 8:33 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: > News Worth Noting: Appeals Court Decides Case On CDFW?S Extension Of > Streambed Alteration Limits To Existing Water Diversions; Draft plans > for Central Valley Wildlife Mgt Areas; San Joaquin River Restoration > Program Reach 2B enviro docs, and more ... > > > image > > > > > > > News Worth Noting: Appeals Court Decides Case On CD... > > > Appeals Court Decides Crucial Case On State Fish And Wildlife CDFW?S > Extension Of Streambed Alteration Limits To Existing Water Diversions: > "On June 4th, 2015... > > View on mavensnotebook.com > > > Preview by Yahoo > > *Appeals Court Decides Crucial Case On State Fish And Wildlife CDFW?S > Extension Of Streambed Alteration Limits To Existing Water > Diversions:* ?/On June 4th, 2015, the Third District Court of Appeal > reversed the Siskiyou County Superior Court?s injunction against the > California Department of Fish and Wildlife (?CDFW?), holding for the > first time that the State?s streambed alteration program extends to > existing water right diversions even if they do not physically alter > streambeds. The Superior Court last year had stopped CDFW from > bringing enforcement actions against longtime agricultural water users > for continuing to divert surface waters from within the County without > first obtaining a streambed alteration agreement pursuant to Section > 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. Siskiyou County Farm Bureau v. > California CDFW of Fish and Game, Case No. SCSCCV11-00418. In a > setback for water rights holders, the Court concluded that Section > 1602?ostensibly enacted to counteract mining-related streambed > alterations?unambiguously embraces ordinary and long-time water > diversions held under existing rights./ ? ? Read more by clicking > here. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: Siskiyou County Farm Bureau v. Department of Fish and Wildlife (2015) [ Cal.App.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 606089 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Thu Jun 11 10:44:59 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 10:44:59 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?FW=3A_UCD_CalifWaterBlog=3A_California_dr?= =?utf-8?q?ought_killing_farm_jobs_=E2=80=94_even_as_they_grow?= Message-ID: <0d1701d0a46e$56f79b90$04e6d2b0$@sisqtel.net> Drought killing farm jobs ? even as they grow Posted on June 8, 2015 by UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences Despite the drought, jobs and revenue in 2014 continued to grow in some parts of California agriculture. Workers shown here in 2013 are harvesting cauliflower on the Central Coast, which was less affected by the drought. Photo by John Chacon/California Department of Water Resources. Despite the drought, jobs and revenue in 2014 continued to grow in some parts of California agriculture. Workers shown here in 2013 are harvesting cauliflower on the Central Coast, which was less affected by the drought. Photo by John Chacon/California Department of Water Resources. By Josu? Medell?n-Azuara, Richard Howitt, Duncan MacEwan, Daniel Sumner and Jay Lund With all the news about the drought drying up farm jobs, it seems paradoxical that California agriculture actually came out a bit ahead on employment growth last year. The industry gained a monthly average of more than 4,000 jobs in 2014, up 1 percent from 2013, according to the latest state Employment Development Department statistics. How could this be? The drought has caused growers to fallow hundreds of thousands of acres and forced ranchers to sell off livestock. But some parts of agriculture have continued to grow in revenue and jobs (albeit at a slower rate because of the drought). Workers harvesting Workers harvesting swiss chard on Central Coast, winter 2013. Photo by John Chacon/California Department of Water Resources The growth in labor is largely from farmers shifting to more profitable, permanent crops that usually take more hands to produce, a trend that has been going on for many years. Global markets are favoring tree fruits and nuts, vine crops and vegetables with high prices, such as almonds pistachios and grapes. This is feeding conversion of farmland from annual crops and pasture to orchards and vineyards that are too valuable to fallow. Despite the drought, growth in these more labor-intensive crops increased overall agricultural employment last year to a monthly average of 412,300 jobs, the state labor data show. Last summer we estimated the 2014 drought would result in the loss of 17,100 jobs across California?s economy, with 7,500 of these jobs directly related to agriculture. The fallout has been harsh on many farm communities already suffering from high unemployment, particularly in the San Joaquin Valley. But it is not inconsistent with the longer-term increase in total farm employment. Blossoms appear on the trees in the many orchards of the San Joaquin Valley. A San Joaquin Valley almond orchard in bloom, winter 2013. California growers are shifting to more profitable permanent crops such as almonds, which usually are more labor-intensive than the lower-value annual crops such as alfalfa. Consider the stock market and suppose you own stock only in Google. If Google goes down, but the market as a whole goes up, no one will question that you have lost money. The same idea applies to the 2014 California drought: Total statewide farm employment (stock market) increased because of strong specialty crop prices and other factors unrelated to the drought. The drought (Google) nevertheless led to significant fallowing and farm job losses in many parts of the state. Aggregate employment statistics can be misleading, especially in agriculture, with its high proportion of undocumented, seasonal, part-time and contract jobs. Drought impacts on farm employment are estimated by going directly to the cause, namely water shortages. These shortages are then expressed in lost jobs using economic models that link water to farm production to farm jobs. This gives an estimate of the incremental effect of drought on agricultural employment. The drought-related job loss estimates from our models do not account for the compensating effects of regional shifting of jobs or water trades. But they do give a good indication of areas most vulnerable to drought. Richard Howitt, Josu? Medell?n-Azuara and Jay Lund are with the UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences; Duncan MacEwan is with ERA Economics in Davis, Calif.; and Daniel Sumner is director of the University of California Agricultural Issues Center. California's agricultural workforce grew slightly in 2014, largely because growers are shifting to more labor-intensive, permanent crops with higher prices, such as almonds and grapes. However, the drought sharply decreased employment in contract farm labor and other support jobs during the irrigation season. Source: California Employment Development Department California?s agricultural workforce grew slightly in 2014, largely because growers are shifting to more labor-intensive, permanent crops with higher prices, such as almonds and grapes. However, the drought sharply decreased employment in contract farm labor and other support jobs during the irrigation season. Source: California Employment Development Department From: California WaterBlog [mailto:comment-reply at wordpress.com] Sent: Monday, June 08, 2015 6:23 PM To: sari at sisqtel.net Subject: [New post] California drought killing farm jobs ? even as they grow UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences posted: " By Josu? Medell?n-Azuara, Richard Howitt, Duncan MacEwan, Daniel Sumner and Jay Lund With all the news about the drought drying up farm jobs, it seems paradoxical that California agriculture actually came out a bit ahead on employment growth last y" Respond to this post by replying above this line New post on California WaterBlog California drought killing farm jobs ? even as they grow by UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences By Josu? Medell?n-Azuara, Richard Howitt, Duncan MacEwan, Daniel Sumner and Jay Lund With all the news about the drought drying up farm jobs, it seems paradoxical that California agriculture actually came out a bit ahead on employment growth last year. The industry gained a monthly average of more than 4,000 jobs in 2014, up 1 [?] Read more of this post UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences | June 8, 2015 at 6:22 pm | Categories: Uncategorized | URL: http://wp.me/p17k4l-1eX Comment See all comments Unsubscribe to no longer receive posts from California WaterBlog. Change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions. Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://californiawaterblog.com/2015/06/08/california-drought-killing-farm-jobs-even-as-they-grow/ Thanks for flying with WordPress.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 263852 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 120163 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 147564 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 92406 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jun 11 12:42:09 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 19:42:09 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] C-WIN, CSPA, AquAlliance and Restore the Delta Sue Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, State Water Board and DWR to Prevent Fishery Extinctions Message-ID: <95846356.1262614.1434051729030.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> C-WIN, CSPA, AquAlliance and Restore the Delta Sue Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, State Water Board and DWR to Prevent Fishery Extinctions http://calsport.org/news/cspa-sues-department-of-interior-bureau-of-reclamation-state-water-board-and-dwr-to-prevent-fishery-extinctions/ ? C-WIN, CSPA, AquAlliance and Restore the Delta Sue Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, State Water Board and DWR to Prevent Fishery Extinctions Posted on?June 4, 2015?The California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, California Water Impact Network, AquAlliance and Restore the Delta have filed a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief, under the Administrative Procedures Act, and a Petition for Writ of Mandate, under California Code of Civil Procedure, in federal District Court for the Eastern District of California.The lawsuit alleges that the U. S. Department of Interior, U. S. Bureau of Reclamation the State Water Resources Control Board and the Department of Water Resources violated the federal Clean Water Act, the Bay-Delta Plan, Central Valley Project Improvement Act, the Delta Protection Act and other state and federal statutes in weakening and/or failing to comply with water quality standards established to protect the Bay-Delta estuary. ?As a result of their failure to comply with the law, water quality in the Delta is severely degraded and fisheries have been pushed to the brink of extinction.?We bring this lawsuit in an effort to prevent the impending extinction of fisheries that thrived for millennia. Delta smelt, once the most abundant species in the estuary, are on the precipice of extinction and longfin smelt and winter-run and spring-run Chinook salmon are close behind,? said CSPA Executive Director Bill Jennings adding ?we cannot stand aside and watch species go extinct simply because special interests have captured our regulatory agencies and they refuse to comply with laws enacted to protect fish and water quality. The situation is critical and we?re left with no alternative but the courts. And we?re prepared to sue them again and again and again. We don?t know if we can save these species, perhaps we can, but by god we will try!?Press Release? ?Lawsuit? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Thu Jun 11 12:49:37 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2015 12:49:37 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Appeals Court Decides Crucial Case On State Fish And Wildlife CDFW'S Extension Of Streambed Alteration Limits To Existing Water Diversions: In-Reply-To: <55785EB3.8040602@msaj.com> References: <875790981.328613.1433950408870.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <55785EB3.8040602@msaj.com> Message-ID: <11eb01d0a47f$c06dd650$414982f0$@sisqtel.net> . It is still unknown if the case will move on to the California Supreme Court. . Effect goes beyond Siskiyou County, if case ends with this decision. 3rd District Court of Appeals jurisdiction: Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, El Dorado, Glenn, Lassen, Modoc, Mono, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Sutter, Tehama, Trinity, Yolo and Yuba. From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Thomas P. Schlosser Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2015 8:59 AM To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: Re: [env-trinity] Appeals Court Decides Crucial Case On State Fish And Wildlife CDFW'S Extension Of Streambed Alteration Limits To Existing Water Diversions: Here's a copy of the court's opinion. Tom On 6/10/2015 8:33 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: News Worth Noting: Appeals Court Decides Case On CDFW 'S Extension Of Streambed Alteration Limits To Existing Water Diversions; Draft plans for Central Valley Wildlife Mgt Areas; San Joaquin River Restoration Program Reach 2B enviro docs, and more ... image News Worth Noting: Appeals Court Decides Case On CD... Appeals Court Decides Crucial Case On State Fish And Wildlife CDFW'S Extension Of Streambed Alteration Limits To Existing Water Diversions: "On June 4th, 2015... View on mavensnotebook.com Preview by Yahoo Appeals Court Decides Crucial Case On State Fish And Wildlife CDFW'S Extension Of Streambed Alteration Limits To Existing Water Diversions: "On June 4th, 2015, the Third District Court of Appeal reversed the Siskiyou County Superior Court's injunction against the California Department of Fish and Wildlife ("CDFW"), holding for the first time that the State's streambed alteration program extends to existing water right diversions even if they do not physically alter streambeds. The Superior Court last year had stopped CDFW from bringing enforcement actions against longtime agricultural water users for continuing to divert surface waters from within the County without first obtaining a streambed alteration agreement pursuant to Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code. Siskiyou County Farm Bureau v. California CDFW of Fish and Game, Case No. SCSCCV11-00418. In a setback for water rights holders, the Court concluded that Section 1602-ostensibly enacted to counteract mining-related streambed alterations-unambiguously embraces ordinary and long-time water diversions held under existing rights. . " Read more by clicking here. _______________________________________________ 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 Jun 12 08:01:18 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 15:01:18 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Western Farm Press: California water agencies say USBR violated ESA Message-ID: <1502191100.1753033.1434121278851.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://westernfarmpress.com/government/california-water-agencies-say-usbr-violated-esa ? California water agencies say USBR violated ESA Jun 11, 2015Todd Fitchette? |?Western Farm Press? - - EMAIL - INSHARE - - - COMMENTS?0 - USBR manages water releases from numerous California reservoirs - Agency increasingly under fire for how those releases are managed - Some say they blatantly violated the ESA in how they managed water from two reservoirs A temperature-regulating structure on the back of Shasta Dam is supposed to help control the temperature of water released into the Sacramento River. The cropped-tower in the water is a remnant of the dam's construction during World War II and signifies that the lake is at least 100 feet below the spillway.Two California water agencies want the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to comply with provisions of the Endangered Species Act and stop releasing water from Trinity Reservoir in northern California until consultations with other regulatory agencies can be made.Westlands Water District and San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority are challenging three years? worth of increased flows to the Trinity River that the USBR made in alleged violation of the ESA.The water districts filed a ?notice of violation? with U.S. Interior Secretary Sally Jewell on June 10, alleging the USBR violated federal law by unilaterally releasing 120,000 acre feet of water from Trinity Lake in northern California over a three-year period.The letter states that the releases were made without consultation with other federal agencies, which is stipulated in the ESA.POPULAR NOWBuilding an effective employee review system2015 California dried plum crop 4 percent lower?Experts fear critical phosphorus shortageAccording to Westlands Water District, the net effect of the USBR?s decision to unilaterally release water from Trinity Reservoir in northern California has been reduced water allocations to farmers and possible lethal impacts to migrating salmon.Trinity Reservoir is located between Redding and Eureka and at capacity holds over 2.4 million acre feet of water. Some of the water from Trinity is piped east and ends up in the Sacramento River. The lake also provides water to the Klamath River via the Trinity River. The Klamath River starts at Klamath Lake in Oregon and empties into the Pacific Ocean along California?s North Coast.Based on the complaint, the Bureau is required to consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) prior to making releases that could impact protected species. The USBR did not do this. Moreover, the Bureau failed in its charge to strike a balance between water stored at Trinity and at Shasta Lake to achieve water temperature requirements for salmon runs in the Sacramento River.By primarily using Trinity Reservoir to achieve these temperature-controlled flows, the USBR drew down Trinity Reservoir over three successive seasons where the lake was unable to fill because of drought. It also negatively affected irrigation allocations to CVP water contractors, a group to which Delta-Mendota and Westlands belong.Now the balancing act shifts to Shasta Lake and the 2.3 million acre feet currently held behind the dam. Though Shasta is arguably in a better position than Trinity Reservoir because of its larger storage, the State Water Resources Control Board has stepped in and has severely limited exports from Shasta for later in the season when salmon runs will need the cooler water.Some of those exports could have gone for agricultural uses.On May 29, State Water Board Executive Director Thomas Howard limited releases from Shasta on an interim basis and could limit them further as the season continues until they are needed for the salmon migration.This decision continues to ripple throughout the CVP as curtailment orders by the state board now extend beyond post-1914 (junior) water rights holders to pre-1914 (senior) water rights holders. More water curtailment orders could be issued in the coming weeks.According to Westlands spokesperson Gayle Holman, USBR has been asked to make additional releases from Trinity Reservoir in 2015, a move Westlands continues to warn could have more adverse consequences for endangered fish in the Sacramento River and even worse water conditions for those who rely on CVP water deliveries.Westlands accuses Reclamation of failing to maintain cool water temperatures in the Sacramento River at the detriment of winter-run Chinook salmon. Excessive water temperatures in 2014 are blamed for increased fish mortality, though Holman points out that there are other potential causes of reduced salmon populations, including the dumping of treated waste water by cities in the Delta and the proliferation of predatory fish that feed on small salmon and other small fish in the Delta region.The latest agricultural news each day to your Inbox. Click here for the free Western Farm Press Daily e-mail newsletter. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jun 12 13:25:57 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 20:25:57 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: Spring Chinook Mega-Table Update In-Reply-To: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C54743B@057-SN2MPN1-042.057d.mgd.msft.net> References: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C54743B@057-SN2MPN1-042.057d.mgd.msft.net> Message-ID: <189908392.1961529.1434140757237.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Friday, June 12, 2015 1:02 PM, "Cannata, Steve at Wildlife" wrote: Hi Everyone, Here (attached) is the updated spring Chinook mega-table 1980-2014. Thanks to all who collected and provided the information. Steve ? Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA? 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: MEGA-TABLE_Spring-Chinook_2014 .pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 131527 bytes Desc: not available URL: From victoria7 at snowcrest.net Mon Jun 15 23:21:17 2015 From: victoria7 at snowcrest.net (Vicki Gold) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2015 23:21:17 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Change.org petition regarding Crystal Geyser Mt. Shasta Message-ID: <440ED64C-6A39-4128-BF2C-A397B789767E@snowcrest.net> https://www.change.org/p/save-our-water-crystal-geyser-must-do-an-environmental-impact-report Hello All, Most of you have seen the recent coverage in the LA Times, Maven's Notebook, the Desert Sun and the editorial in the San Francisco Chronicle last month regarding Otsuka Pharmaceutical Crystal Geyser Water Company's plans to extract unlimited water from the foothills of Mount Shasta just 2000 feet from the Headwaters of the Sacramento River. I will link the articles below. The above link is to a Change.org petition to support our demand of proper hydrogeology studies as part of a comprehensive Environmental Impact Report before the plant is allowed to begin operations. In emergency drought when California residents are being asked to conserve and cut back, the concept of unlimited water bottling is a concept whose time has passed. If you would like to be on our email list for future notifications and events, please let me know. In gratitude for your support and good work, Vicki Gold Water Runs Free 530.926.4206 http://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Parched-state-rethinks-water-rights-6282227.php http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-shasta-bottled-water-20150510-story.html#page=1 http://www.desertsun.com/story/news/2015/03/05/bottling-water-california-drought/24389417/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From victoria7 at snowcrest.net Tue Jun 16 06:47:56 2015 From: victoria7 at snowcrest.net (Vicki Gold) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 06:47:56 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Fwd=3A_Let=92s_get_the_word_out!_?= =?windows-1252?q?=96_Update_on_=22SAVE_OUR_WATER=2E_Crystal_Geyser_must_d?= =?windows-1252?q?o_an_Environmental_Impact_Report=2E=22?= References: <557fd9112c55_41f170808c640ae@production-change-main-resque-16.mail> Message-ID: <39F17C76-5356-42E8-A342-1E18229D030E@snowcrest.net> Begin forwarded message: > From: We Advocate Thorough Environmental Review > Subject: Let?s get the word out! ? Update on "SAVE OUR WATER. Crystal Geyser must do an Environmental Impact Report." > Date: June 16, 2015 1:06:41 AM PDT > To: victoria7 at snowcrest.net > Reply-To: "Change.org" > > > > > Petition update > > > We Advocate Thorough Environmental Review just posted an update on the petition you signed, SAVE OUR WATER. Crystal Geyser must do an Environmental Impact Report.. > > Let?s get the word out! > > Jun 15, 2015 ? More than 39,000 people have signed our petition demanding Crystal Geyser be required to say how much water they plan to take from Siskiyou County. And we?re just getting started... Read more > > > Read more > > > The person (or organization) who started this petition is not affiliated withChange.org. Change.org did not create this petition and is not responsible for the petition content. > > This email was sent by Change.org to victoria7 at snowcrest.net. To stop news updates from this petition, you may unsubscribe here. > > Contact us ? ? ? Privacy policy > > ? 2015 Change?.org ? 548 Market St #29993 ? San Francisco, CA 94104-5401 ? USA > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Tue Jun 16 09:43:32 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 09:43:32 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] SWRCB: Notice of Unavailability of Water Sacramento-San Joaquin and Delta pre-1914 claims after 1903 Message-ID: <00fe01d0a853$954874d0$bfd95e70$@sisqtel.net> State Water Resources Control Board This is a message from the State Water Resources Control Board. June 12, 2015 NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY OF WATER AND NEED FOR IMMEDIATE CURTAILMENT FOR THOSE DIVERTING WATER IN THE SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN WATERSHEDS AND DELTA WITH A PRE-1914 APPROPRIATIVE CLAIM COMMENCING DURING OR AFTER 1903 The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) is issuing curtailment notices to pre-1914 appropriative claims commencing during or after 1903 within the Sacramento-San Joaquin River watershed and Delta until further notice. The State Water Board has been monitoring diversion records and flow conditions within the Sacramento-San Joaquin River watershed and Delta. Due to limited precipitation and snowpack runoff, the current flows are insufficient to satisfy all diversion demands under senior rights. The pre-1914 curtailment notice can be viewed at: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/wate r_availability.shtml If you are subject to another curtailment for the same water right, the most restrictive curtailment applies. Should a curtailment be lifted in the future under a notice or order, the other curtailment condition remains in effect until notified otherwise. If you have any questions, please contact our Curtailment Hotline at (916) 341-5342. Compliance Certification Required: Curtailed water rights are required to document receipt of this notice by completing an online Curtailment Certification Form (Form) within seven days. The Form confirms cessation of your diversion under the specific water right identified and, if applicable, identifies the alternate water supply to be used in lieu of the curtailed water right. You are required to complete the Form for each of your water rights identified through this curtailment at: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/ewrims/curta ilment/2015curt_form.php The State Water Board will continue to monitor diversion demands, weather forecasts and stream gages. Please monitor your email and State Water Board Drought Year Water Actions website for further updates on when diversions may be authorized. If an email list notice is issued on the weekend, the website will not be updated until the following Monday due to service limitations. ________________________________________________ You are currently subscribed to drought_updates as: sari at sisqtel.net. To unsubscribe click here: leave-4576864-968263.2a4de63637aceb6933f7283515759e1a at swrcb18.waterboards.ca .gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From levitanf at gmail.com Wed Jun 17 15:33:54 2015 From: levitanf at gmail.com (Fred Levitan) Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 15:33:54 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] env-trinity Digest, Vol 137, Issue 9 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This message came out all in Chinese. which I don't read and my computer can't translate. 2015-06-16 12:00 GMT-07:00 : > ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? > ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? > ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jun 18 08:06:07 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 15:06:07 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/agencies-further-restrict-water-from-lake-shasta_08923386 Message-ID: <1604228246.1160438.1434639967351.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/agencies-further-restrict-water-from-lake-shasta_08923386 ? http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/agencies-further-restrict-water-from-lake-shasta_08923386 ADDRESS: Damon Arthur? 7:46 PM, Jun 16, 20157:36 AM, Jun 17, 2015 REDDING, California - Citing worsening drought conditions that threaten to drive some salmon species extinct, state and federal officials plan to further restrict water coming out of Lake Shasta to ensure there is enough cold water later this year for spawning fish.Since the end of May, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation had been under orders to limit releases from Keswick Lake to 7,500 cubic-feet per second.But on Tuesday, citing dire drought conditions, officials said they plan to reduce that amount further, to 7,250 cfs. The average releases from Keswick for June over the past 15 years is 11,000 cfs.Chuck Bonham, state Department of Fish and Wildlife Department director, said the cutbacks are necessary to ensure the survival of Chinook salmon spawning in the Sacramento River.?On the species front, this is a legitimate existential threat to survival,? he said, referring to winter-run Chinook salmon, which last year suffered a massive die-off in the river when water coming from Lake Shasta through Keswick Dam became too warm in the fall, killing off salmon eggs and recent hatches.?It?s grim, any way you slice it,? Bonham said.Last year the bureau said that because of the drought the cold water pool in Lake Shasta was depleted by October and water sent downstream into the river reached temperatures in the high 50s and low 60s, killing off 95 percent of the naturally spawned salmon eggs and recent hatches in the river.Fisheries officials try to keep the river temperature at a maximum of 56 degrees between Keswick Dam and the confluence of Clear Creek in south Redding.Lake Shasta dropped to its second-lowest level on record in November last year. As of Tuesday, the lake was at 51 percent of capacity.With water and atmosphere temperatures already running higher, officials have changed their target temperature to 57 degrees this year. Officials hope reducing flows out of Shasta and Keswick dams earlier in the season will help ensure the cold water pool in Lake Shasta lasts through the fall.But the plans officials make now may need to be thrown out later, depending on weather, water supplies and other factors, said Will Stelle, regional administrator for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.?We are operating this year with a set of circumstances that we haven?t seen before,? Stelle said. ?All of the fancy modeling and predictions can only go so far.?While officials reduce water to save fish, there could be less water for cities and irrigation districts later this year, said Ron Milligan, an operations manager for the bureau. He did not know how much water supplies could be cut or when.A piping system that transports water from Trinity Lake in Trinity County to Whiskeytown Lake will enable the bureau to use water from Whiskeytown Lake to augment cold water supplies in the Sacramento River, Milligan said.Water from Whisketytown flows through pipes into Keswick Lake. Whiskeytown, though, will likely not be drawn down significantly as the bureau refills the lake with water from Trinity Lake, Milligan said.The plan proposed by state and federal officials will go before the State Water Resources Control Board for approval next week.Reducing water from Shasta and Keswick lakes is just the latest action officials have taken this year to address the effects of the drought as it drags into a fourth summer.Again out of concern for the survival of spawning winter-run salmon, in April the Department of Fish and Wildlife closed off the Sacramento River to fishing from the Highway 44 bridge to Keswick Dam. That section of the river will remain closed until August.And last week the State Water Resources Control Board issued notices to 86 senior water rights holders that they must stop diverting water from the Sacramento River and its tributaries because of low water levels in the streams.Included among those issued curtailment orders are the Anderson-Cottonwood Irrigation District and Sierra Pacific Industries of Anderson. The city of Redding, which has senior water rights on the river, was not on the list of those receiving curtailment orders.Stan Wangberg, general manager of the irrigation district, said he believes the state allows the district an exception to the curtailment order because it has a contract with the bureau to receive water.?For now, we?re working on the fact that our assumption is correct and we?re continuing to deliver water to our customers,? Wangberg said.The district has a contract to receive 125,000 acre-feet of water annually, but because of the drought it is receiving only 75 percent of its allotment, he said.Sierra Pacific?s Mark Pawlicki said the timber company was ordered to stop taking water from Deer and Antelope Creeks, both Sacramento River tributaries in Tehama County.But Sierra Pacific sent the water board a letter that says it is required under its timber harvest plans to have water on hand to spray down logging roads to keep dust down, Pawlicki said. The company uses about four truckloads of water a day, less than an acre-foot of water a year, he said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bgutermuth at usbr.gov Thu Jun 18 17:52:56 2015 From: bgutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F.) Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 17:52:56 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Lower Dutch Creek project scoping notice - Message-ID: Dear Trinity River enthusiasts - The U.S. Forest Service, in partnership with Reclamation and the Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP), has re-scoped a smaller river restoration project at the Dutch Creek location. This re-scoping is in response to public comments on scoping of a larger Dutch Creek project in November 2014 and to internal review by TRRP designers. The new US Forest Service scoping notice (as well as the November 2014 notice) are available for review at: : http://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=45449 The US Forest Service announcement email for the Lower Dutch Creek project is in italics below: *Dear Interested Parties:* *The Dutch Creek Channel Rehabilitation Project was originally scoped in November of 2014. That project has been divided into two smaller projects, the Lower Dutch Creek Channel Rehabilitation Project and the Upper Dutch Creek Channel Rehabilitation Project.* *The attached scoping letter (Now located at: http://www.fs.usda.gov/project/?project=45449 ) addresses the Lower Dutch Creek Channel Rehabilitation Project. The Upper Dutch Creek Channel Rehabilitation Project will be scoped separately at a later date.* *We appreciate your interest in the management of public lands. To ensure your comments can be fully considered by the interdisciplinary team and Responsible Official, please respond by close of business on July 1, 2015. Please contact Christopher Losi, at (530) 226-2425, if you would like any additional information about this project.* *If you previously commented on the Dutch Creek Channel Rehabilitation Project, there is no need to resubmit your comments. Comments received during the scoping period for that project will be applied to the revised Lower Dutch Creek Channel Rehabilitation Project.* Best Regards- Brandt Gutermuth Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Scientist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S. Main ST. Weaverville CA 96093 530.623.1806 Voice http://www.trrp.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Jun 22 07:52:55 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 14:52:55 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Chronicle Editorial: Beyond water wars Message-ID: <1479319423.3187514.1434984775785.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://tablet.olivesoftware.com/Olive/Tablet/SanFranciscoChronicle/SharedArticle.aspx?href=HSFC%2F2015%2F06%2F22&id=Ar00901 EDITORIAL On Congressional Legislation Beyond water wars Rep. Jared Huffman?s ?crowdsourced? water bill is a radical departure from the water wars, backroom deals and water grabs of the past and reframes thinking about water. He hasn?t even introduced the bill, yet we already can tell it will be significant legislation because it recognizes this: We can no longer fight over untapped water supplies. There?s nothing left.Instead, the 120-page ?discussion draft? seeks everyone?s input to find ways to stretch the water supplies we have in almost any way imaginable. (There?s even a proposal for an XPrize to develop new desalination technology.)His decision to reveal the bill before it is introduced is unusual (and refreshing), and certainly in contrast to the secret talks that Sen. Dianne Feinstein and House Republicans from the San Joaquin Valley have engaged in since last year to benefit a small group of agribusinesses. To her credit, Feinstein now is changing her tune and looking for a more comprehensive approach to water.The bill by Huffman, D-San Rafael, abandons the divisive fish versus farms rhetoric. There are no proposals to roll back environmental protections to pump more water to farms. Instead of taking water from the salmon and delta smelt, species in a state of collapse, the bill talks about finding ways to reduce loss to evaporation of about 150,000 acre feet of water a year by covering irrigation canals with solar collectors.Huffman would tap the 113-year-old federal Reclamation Fund, flush with $10 billion, to help pay for projects that seek to use recycled wastewater, capture storm water, increase water-use efficiency, upgrade crumbling water infrastructure, and help out drought-stricken farming communities. His bill calls for a federal tally of crops? like almonds ? grown with federal water.It has a chapter devoted to dams that calls for quickly completing the feasibility studies on the five California storage projects routinely touted by farmers and fought by environmental groups. If one or more project pencils out, build it. If they don?t, stop talking about it. (And none of these projects would help but a tiny fraction of Californians cope with drought.)Finally, it calls for adding federal disaster planning for drought to the playbook for fires and floods.Heavy-hitter water organizations have already offered conceptual support. Finally, a realistic approach to our scarce and most precious resource.To read the draft bill, go to?http://1.usa.gov/1Ip9zM0. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Fri Jun 19 15:05:41 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:05:41 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] KFallsHeraldNews: Bureau makes a call for water Message-ID: <005301d0aadc$15c5dc80$41519580$@sisqtel.net> http://www.heraldandnews.com/klamath/bureau-makes-a-call-for-water/article_0 8c14e77-d110-550f-8d2b-45aa55005e3d.html Bureau makes a call for water . By LACEY JARRELL H&N Staff Reporter Contact Lacey Jarrell by email or follow her on Twitter @LMJatHandN. . Jun 17, 2015 Upper Klamath Lake . H&N file photo The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) Klamath Basin Area Office (KBAO) on Tuesday made a call to exercise a 1905 water right on behalf of the Klamath Project. KBAO Manager Therese O'Rourke Bradford, said only 56 percent of water supply needed by Project irrigators is available from Upper Klamath Lake. More water shutoffs are anticipated in the Klamath Basin. The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) Klamath Basin Area Office (KBAO) on Tuesday made a call to exercise a 1905 water right on behalf of the Klamath Project. "The call for administration, made by both Reclamation and Project water users, will assist in managing the limited water supply to ensure water will be available as long as possible through the 2015 spring-summer irrigation season," said KBAO Area Manager Therese O'Rourke Bradford. Measuring flows Before regulating water users, OWRD water managers must measure instream flows to validate the BOR's call for water. If the call is validated, water shutoffs for users with rights junior to 1905 could begin as early as Friday, Scott White, Oregon Water Resources Department watermaster for the Klamath Falls office, said. The Klamath Tribes called on their time-immemorial water rights in late April. Fewer than 10 creeks are currently being regulated for the call, according to the OWRD website. According to Greg Addington, executive director of the Klamath Water Users Association, the Tribes' call on upper Basin creeks is not being fully regulated based on priority date. Instead, instream flows are being regulated to levels the Tribes agreed upon in the Klamath water settlements. This means upper Basin junior water users not affected by the Tribes' call could still be impacted by the BOR's call for water. City, Jeld-Wen wells White said if the Project call is validated, city wells and wells owned Jeld-Wen, the county's second largest employer, could also be impacted. He explained that how many water users are shut off or regulated, and to what priority date, will be determined by the volume of the shortage. "If we're talking hundreds of cfs (cubic feet per second), then it'll go all the way to 1905. It's really hard to say," he said. KBAO Manager O'Rourke Bradford, said only 56 percent of water supply needed by Project irrigators is available from Upper Klamath Lake. As of Tuesday, Upper Klamath Lake was 77 percent full, according to the BOR Hydromet Data website. Usage, weather "We are working with the water users to determine current usage and project future use through the season. At this point, we are confident that at least 175,000 acre-feet will be available. Depending on water usage and weather conditions in the next month, this estimate may increase up to 220,000 acre-feet," O'Rourke Bradford said. She said since March 1, about 65,000 acre-feet has been diverted to the Project from Upper Klamath Lake. "The water users have taken to heart the need to conserve water and have done a great job in efficiently using the water they have received," O'Rourke Bradford said. Addington, executive director of the Klamath Water Users Association couldn't guess how much, if any, water the call will create for Project irrigators. "We are hopeful that us making a call creates more water that will help get us through the season," he said. Future access concerns White stressed that ranchers should also be thinking about options for maintaining future access to stock water. "We want to make sure people are set up to get water to their cows," he said. "It's super important. I'm very much concerned about it in the future." This year, the OWRD commission was able to create rules allowing exceptions to shutoffs for stock watering and human consumption because Gov. Kate Brown declared the county in a drought; however, White said, in years when a drought is not governor-declared, the commission cannot create the exemption rules. White noted that water availability could improve next year, but wetter conditions don't guarantee water calls won't be made. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 221699 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Jun 22 10:44:41 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 17:44:41 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Draft Trinity Management Council Agenda June 24-25, Eureka Message-ID: <251031913.3316779.1434995081682.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> DRAFT ?TRINITY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL?Humboldt Bay Aquatic Center?921 Waterfront Dr., Eureka, CA 95501 Tel: (707) 443-4222?Final Draft Agenda for June 24-25, 2015?Wednesday, June24, 2015?Time Discussion Leader?Regular Business:?9:30 Introductions: Seth Naman, Chair?? Welcome?? Approval of Agenda? 9:45 Open Forum: Comments from the public Seth Naman?10:00 Report from TMC Chair Seth Naman?? TMC action items?o Trinity River Temperature Management ? draft letter?o Joint Meeting August 13?o Humboldt County TMC membership?? By-laws approval? 11:00 Current Conditions Robert Stewart?? Water Year 2015? 11:30 Federal/Regional updates Federico Barajas, Co-chair?? Water Management Update?? Long Term Plan?? Process for fall flow implementation?? Federal Budget Update? 12:15 Lunch?Information / Decision Items:?1:30 Report from TAMWG Elizabeth Hadley?2:00 Report from Executive Director Robin Schrock?? Organizational Updates?? Work Group updates?o Quarterly summery (handout)?? Top Down Management Model?? Watershed FOA?? New GIS tool? 2:45 2016 Proposed Budget Robin Schrock?3:45 Science Advisory Board Nominations Robin Schrock?? SAB criteria?? Current roster?? Next steps? 4:15 Compliance Update Brandt Gutermuth?4:45 Public forum?5:00 Adjourn?Join WebEx meeting https://trrp.webex.com/trrp/?June TMC Meeting - Day 1?Wednesday, June 24, 2015?9:00 am | Pacific Daylight Time (San Francisco, GMT-07:00) | 8 hrs?Join WebEx meeting?Meeting number: 576 928 837?Meeting password: Abc at 123?Join by phone?1-408-792-6300 Call-in toll number (US/Canada)?Access code: 576 928 837?Thursday, June 25, 2015?Time Discussion Leader?9:00 Open Forum Seth Naman?Information / Decision Items:?9:15 Implementation Update Conor Shea/Logan Negherbon?? 2015 Rehabilitation project monitoring?? 2016 Rehabilitation project status?? Outyear project designs? 10:15 Science Update Clarke/Polos?11:00 Break?11:15 2014 Lower Klamath Flow Augmentation Outcomes Mike Belchik?11:45 Open Forum?12:15 Adjourn?Join WebEx https://trrp.webex.com/trrp/?June TMC Meeting - Day 2?Thursday, June 25, 2015?9:00 am | Pacific Daylight Time (San Francisco, GMT-07:00) | 8 hrs?Join WebEx meeting?Meeting number:571 305 855?Meeting password: Abc at 123?Join by phone?1-408-792-6300 Call-in toll number (US/Canada)?Access code: 571 305 855?TRAVELING SOUTH ON HIGHWAY 101 ? Turn right onto L Street ? Continue until Waterfront Drive ? Turn left on Waterfront Drive?TRAVELING NORTH ON HIGHWAY 101 ? Turn left onto I Street ? I Street becomes Waterfront Drive?REDWOOD TRANSIT SYSTEM FROM HSU TO HBAC ?14th St. & B St. Arcata - take the Mainline South (to Fortuna) ? Exit at 4th & K in Eureka, walk 5 minute? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Mon Jun 22 11:04:52 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 11:04:52 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Thirsty Billionaires File Complaint Alleging Illegal Diversions of "Their" Water In-Reply-To: <251031913.3316779.1434995081682.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <251031913.3316779.1434995081682.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9F2DC881-8276-481F-A5EC-9F5550B96D50@fishsniffer.com> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/06/21/1395294/-Thirsty-Billionaires-File-Complaint-to-Raid-Delta-Farmers-Water https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/06/22/18773827.php meet_the_resnicks_1.jpg Thirsty Billionaires File Complaint Alleging Illegal Diversions of "Their" Water by Dan Bacher The phrase ?No good deed goes unpunished,? originally attributed to playwright Clare Boothe Luce, could accurately the current situation of farmers on the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. Three weeks after the State Water Resources Control Board approved a voluntary proposal by Delta farmers to voluntarily reduce their water use by 25%, the State Water Contractors (SWC), including powerful billionaire and millionaire corporate growers in the San Joaquin Valley, filed a complaint with the same board on June 16. The group requested the board to take action to ?protect? State Water Project (SWP) releases from what it claimed were ?unlawful diversions? in the Delta. The group accused diverters south of the San Joaquin River - Delta farmers - of ?substantial, unlawful diversions? that would ?increase the burden on limited stored water supplies, affecting both the environment and other water users.? ?These landowners in the Delta have long-standing water rights that entitle them to water when nature provides it?but those rights do not entitle them to stored water paid for by others and intended for the environment. If nature ran its course, the Delta would not be suitable for drinking or farming this summer,? said Stefanie Morris, acting general manager of the State Water Contractors, in a press release. She further alleged that landowners that continue to divert water from within the Delta are "taking" the stored state and federal water project supplies needed to meet water quality requirements. ?We?re depending on stored water to meet environmental needs, but without action from the state, keeping the Delta water fresh this summer will be like trying to fill a bucket with a hole in the bottom. We?ll be depleting reservoirs to make up for what diverters south of the San Joaquin River are taking out,? concluded Morris. The California Sportfishing Alliance (CSPA) responded to the complaint by pointing out the irony of the water contractors claiming that Delta farmers, senior water rights holders, are ?stealing? water that ?belongs? to the contractors. ?State and Federal contractors, who have been illegally storing water that belongs to others for years, should not accuse Delta farmers of stealing some of their stolen water, on the basis of a seriously flawed study, with a long list of unsupported assumptions,? said Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance. Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta (RTD), noted that ?the pumps for the State Water Project have yet to be turned off one day during the drought while water quality standards are being violated in the Delta each and every day this year, impacting Delta urban water users and family farms.? ?We are perilously close to losing Delta smelt, and our iconic salmon fisheries, and despite Delta family farms already taking a voluntary 25 percent reduction in water use, the State Water Contractors believe the Delta should be made into a complete sacrifice zone for their water exports,? she said. At the same time that the water contractors are demanding that Delta farmers stop raiding ?their water," water-intensiver almond acreage in the San Joaquin Valley has increased dramatically in recent years, in spite of water contractor claims that protections for Delta smelt and salmon have made the Valley into some sort of modern-day ?Dust Bowl.? In fact, growers statewide expanded their almond acreage by 150,000 acres during the current drought. (http://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/archives/2015/05/15/californias-thirsty-almond-acreage-grows-by-150000-acres-during-record-drought Stewart Resnick, the Beverly Hills billionaire agribusiness tycoon, owner of Paramount Farms, and one of the biggest California contributors to both Democratic and Republican Party candidates, revealed his current plan to expand pistachio, almond, and walnut acreage during the drought at this March's annual pistachio conference that Paramount Farms hosted. Resnick is the co-owner with his wife, Lynda, of "The Wonderful Company," formerly Roll Global. During the conference, Resnick gloated about the industry's 118 percent increase in pistachio acreage, 47 percent increase in almonds and 30 percent increase in walnuts over the past ten years, according to the Western Farm Press. Resnick also told the publication that their 2020 goal is ?150,000 partner acres ? and ?33,000 Paramount acres.? (http://westernfarmpress.com/tree-nuts/paramount-farms-touts-record-pistachio-return-future? ) Under pressure by the Metropolitan Water District and the Kern County Water Agency that serves Resnick and other wealthy growers, the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) mismanaged the Bay Delta Estuary and California?s reservoirs during the drought so that these agencies could continue to export as much water as possible, despite the devastating impacts on the Bay- Delta Estuary, according to Barrigan-Parrilla. Barrigan-Parrilla said the Department and Bureau failed to hold back enough water for continued drought conditions despite warnings to do so by fishery and environmental water groups throughout the state. ?As the weeks go by, it becomes clearer and clearer that the only way to stop the over pumping of the SF Bay-Delta estuary, and Governor Brown?s planned tunnels project, is for an adjudication of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta watershed,? she said. ?The problem is that we do not have the water to meet the insatiable demand of special interest growers in California, like those in the Kern County Water Agency, or the Metropolitan Water District, which used up the majority of its three-year stored water supply in 2014, and only began to get serious about conservation this year." During 2013 and 2014, the state and federal water agencies systematically emptied Trinity Reservoir on the Trinity River, Lake Shasta on the Sacramento River, Lake Oroville on the Feather River and Folsom Lake on the American River, in spite of it being a record drought. The agencies delivered massive amounts of subsidized Delta water to corporate mega-growers, Southern California water agencies and Big Oil companies conducting steam injection and fracking operations in Kern County. (http://www.elkgrovenews.net/2014/02/state-and-feds-drained-northern.html ) Salmon, steelhead and a host of other fish species are being driven closer to extinction by low, warm water conditions on the Sacramento and Trinity River systems spurred by the draining of reservoirs during a historic drought. But as the Brown administration mandates that northern California urban water users slash their water use by 25 percent and as Delta farmers voluntarily agree to a 25 percent in their water consumption, thirsty billionaire growers like Stewart Resnick brag about how they have expanded their almond, pistachio and walnut acreage during the drought. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: meet_the_resnicks_1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 45364 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Mon Jun 22 17:13:08 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 00:13:08 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW23-24.xlsx Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C548CC4@057-SN2MPN1-042.057d.mgd.msft.net> Season's Greetings All, Please see attached for the first Trinity River trapping summary of the 2015 season. The summary includes results from the Junction City weir for one day in Jweek 23 - Jweek 24. Steve -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW23-24.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 60476 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW23-24.xlsx URL: From njharris30 at gmail.com Tue Jun 23 13:02:55 2015 From: njharris30 at gmail.com (Nathan Harris) Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 13:02:55 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Willow Creek trap in-season update - June 22nd Message-ID: Please see the attached documents for weekly catch data from the Willow Creek traps. Nathan Harris Biologist Yurok Tribal Fisheries Program Trinity River Division 3723 N. Hwy 96 Willow Creek, CA 95573 Office: (530) 629-3333 x1703 Cell: (707) 616-8742 njharris30 at gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Willow Creek RST raw catch update 2015.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 32544 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: trapping update summary 6.22.15.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 14328 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Tue Jun 30 13:15:23 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 20:15:23 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Update Jweek 25 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C54C640@057-SN2MPN1-042.057d.mgd.msft.net> Greetings, Please see attached for the Jweek 25 Trinity River trapping summary update. The update summarizes operations at the Junction City Weir. We plan to install the Willow Creek wier around August 20th if Trinity River water temperatures are suitable for trapping. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW25.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 60652 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW25.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jun 30 15:36:55 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 22:36:55 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Klamath Scandal, Allegations of Slush Fund, Investigation Underway In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1492760510.2754895.1435703815468.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Whistleblower allegations that the Bureau of Reclamation sent at least $48 million tagged for helping the Klamath River Basin's fish populations to agricultural irrigators instead likely point to a violation of the law, according to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel.The Office of Special Counsel, an independent investigative agency, is ordering the Interior Department to respond to the allegations within 60 days. E&E Daily RECLAMATION: Whistleblowers say Klamath water bank became irrigators' slush fund Annie Snider, E&E reporterPublished: Tuesday, June 30, 2015 Whistleblower allegations that the Bureau of Reclamation sent at least $48 million tagged for helping the Klamath River Basin's fish populations to agricultural irrigators instead likely point to a violation of the law, according to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel.The Office of Special Counsel, an independent investigative agency, is ordering the Interior Department to respond to the allegations within 60 days.At issue is a contract awarded by Reclamation for management of a water banking program aimed at supplementing water supplies in the Klamath Project in southern Oregon and Northern California.A pair of biological opinions relating to endangered coho salmon and suckers have limited the amount of water available for irrigators from the Klamath project in recent years. The water banking program, called the Water User Mitigation Project, is aimed at making more water available by paying for land idling, substitution of groundwater for surface water, direct pumping and offstream storage.In 2008, Reclamation awarded a contract for managing the water banking program to the Klamath Water and Power Agency (KWAPA), a newly formed intergovernmental agency made up of representatives from California and Oregon irrigation districts, according to a statement from two Reclamation biologists who are crying foul. Those biologists are Todd Pederson and Keith Schultz.According to their statement, made through the watchdog group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, that contract's objective was to complete a feasibility study of whether stakeholders could take over the water banking program. They also say the contract claims the water will be used "to meet Project requirements for the direct benefit of fish and wildlife habitat."But they say that there is no evidence that any of the water from the program has been used to benefit natural resources, and that there is never likely to be a feasibility report."There is no evidence that any of the funds under the Contract, or any of the water provided by means of the Contract, has been used to benefit National Wildlife Refuges or fish and wildlife habitat in any way," they state. "In fact, the unsustainable groundwater pumping that has occurred under the Contract reduced the total amount of water in the Klamath Basin, to the detriment of fish and wildlife, including endangered species."When KWAPA sought a three-year extension to the contract in 2012, after $30 million had been spent on the program, the feasibility study had not even been started, the biologists say. They said KWAPA maintained it had been hindered in doing the study by the fact that there had been only one year of water shortage since it received the contract.The scientists argue, though, that a study into whether nonfederal stakeholders could take over a water banking program should not require a water shortage in order to be completed."The failure to complete a feasibility study was not merely due to hydrologic patterns, but to the terms of the Contract itself," they say. "Although the contract calls for a study, it reveals that the real function of the Contract is to identify and purchase contracts for options to deliver water to the Klamath Project ... and thereby provide tens of thousands of acre-feet of water to the Project for each year of the initial contract."Most of the money awarded under the contract, the scientists say, was used to buy water, pay for land idling, compensate irrigators who did not receive irrigation water, and pay well owners whose wells were depleted by groundwater pumping under the contract, they say.The contract also covered overhead expenses for KWAPA, which they say had existed for only a few months before the contract was awarded and at that time had no office space, staff or other infrastructure -- expenses that they say were covered by the Reclamation contract.They argue that the contract was a slush fund for irrigators, with no benefit to the public, and that Reclamation had no legal authority to enter into it in the first place."Federal funds have been wasted on stop-gap, unsustainable measures that only worsened the long-term problem, and served only to put money in the pockets of irrigators for the short term," they state. "The expenditure of these funds has diverted large amounts of time and money from the work needed to find long-term solutions to water scarcity in the Klamath Basin."Paula Dinerstein, PEER senior counsel, said federal assistance agreements like the KWAPA contract, where money is given to a nonfederal entity to carry out a public purpose, are different from procurement contracts where the government purchases a good or service. Assistance agreements require that there be a public purpose, and require that the contract cite the laws that authorize it.Here, she said, none of the statutes cited in the contract authorizes the kind of work that was done under it."If Congress chose to, they could certainly say, 'We want to give money to all these poor farmers who are in a drought' -- but they didn't," Dinerstein said in an interview."Coming up with this way to first of all create this organization, and then give it all the money for all its salaries, all its fringe benefits, all its equipment ... and then give all this money -- money translated into water -- just to certain irrigators was something [Reclamation] wanted to do," she said.KWAPA's director was unavailable for comment this afternoon.In a statement to E&ENews PM, Therese O'Rourke Bradford, area manager for the Bureau of Reclamation's Klamath Basin Area, said: "The Klamath Basin Area Office has just been made aware of the referral made through the news release by EE News. To our knowledge the Office of Special Counsel has not yet contacted the Department of the Interior or Bureau of Reclamation regarding the referral. Reclamation takes these complaints seriously, and will cooperate fully with the Department's investigation."Click here for the scientists' statement.Click here for the Office of Special Counsel letter.Twitter: @AnnElizabeth18 | Email: asnider at eenews.net ?For Immediate Release: Jun 30, 2015 Contact: Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337 FEDERAL PROBE INTO KLAMATH IRRIGATOR CONTRACTS ORDERED U.S. Special Counsel Directs Interior to Justify Legality and Purpose of Payments Posted on Jun 30, 2015 Washington, DC ?Backing charges by whistleblowers, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel is ordering the Secretary of Interior to explain how funds earmarked to help drought-stressed Klamath Basin fish populations instead ended up in the hands of irrigators, according to a letter released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). The Secretary is charged with responding to the Special Counsel within 60 days.The issue arises from at least $48 million dollars in contracts the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has with the Klamath Water and Power Agency (KWAPA). Two Bureau biologists became increasingly concerned about the legality of these payments and filed a whistleblower disclosure with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) through PEER. In a letter to the biologists dated June 26, an OSC attorney wrote:?We have concluded that there is a substantial likelihood that the information that you provided to OSC discloses a violation of law, rule or regulation; gross mismanagement; and a gross waste of funds.? The thrust of their disclosure is that Bureau funds provided to KWAPA intended ?for the direct benefit of fish and wildlife habitat? were diverted to defray expenses of this association of Klamath Project irrigators, including their salaries, fringe benefits, office space, equipment and travel. Further, funds were also used in ways detrimental to Klamath Basin fish, such as pumping large amounts of groundwater to supply select irrigators during drought years until private wells went dry, thus spurring new and deeper wells to tap shrinking groundwater supplies. All of these expenditures were made without any apparent legal authority to do so. ?The Bureau of Reclamation allowed millions of taxpayer dollars to be used as a slush fund for favored irrigators,? stated PEER Senior Counsel Paula Dinerstein who filed the scientists? disclosure. ?It appears no one asked what the legal justification was for paying public funds to benefit a private association.?These payments began with a 2008 Reclamation contract for a feasibility study on whether water marketing could increase Klamath water supplies for the benefit of fish and wildlife. That initial five-year contract was amended 17 times and ultimately extended through 2023, at a cost several times the original estimate. The feasibility study was never completed.The Office of Special Counsel is a whistleblower protection agency charged with, among other things, reviewing federal employee reports of wrongdoing and determining whether they evidence a ?substantial likelihood of validity.? It has made such a finding in this case. Now, by law the Special Counsel has the power to direct the Secretary of Interior to conduct a formal investigation into these violations of law as well as gross waste and mismanagement. The Secretary?s report is due back in 60 days.The whistleblowers may review and comment on the final official response. At that point, the Special Counsel makes an independent decision as to whether the agency response is complete and reasonable, transmitting those findings to the President and Congress. If the violations are confirmed it could result in reimbursement of unauthorized payments as well as discipline of responsible Reclamation officials.The Klamath Project, which the Bureau operates, constitutes the principal water works in Northern California and southern Oregon providing water from Upper Klamath Lake and Klamath River to more than 200,000 acres of cropland. In recent years, this watershed has been crippled by a series of droughts.###Read the Special Counsel letter Look at the scientists? disclosure ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 8990 bytes Desc: not available URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Sat Jul 4 13:58:10 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2015 13:58:10 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?windows-1252?q?Winnemen_Wintu_and_Allies_Protest_?= =?windows-1252?q?Governor=92s_California_Water_Summit_-_Story_and_Photos?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <205AF6BC-736D-4B25-9829-46AC3E5F3E4A@fishsniffer.com> https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/07/04/18774455.php http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/03/1398994/-Winnemen-Wintu-and-Allies-Protest-Governor-s-California-Water-Summit-in-Sacramento Photo of protest against the California Water Summit in front of the Westin Hotel in Sacramento on June 30 by Dan Bacher. 800_water_defenders_.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Winnemen Wintu and Allies Protest Governor?s California Water Summit by Dan Bacher The Winnemem Wintu Tribe, other tribal representatives and their allies rallied, chanted, sang and waved signs on the sidewalk in front of Westin Hotel on June 29 and 30 outside the Second California Water Summit in Sacramento. They were there to protest Governor Jerry Brown?s efforts to exclude California Tribes, environmentalists, fishermen and other key stakeholders in this public meeting about massive state water infrastructure projects proposed under Proposition 1, the $7.5 billion water bond. Members of the Concow Maidu, Miwok, Hoopa Valley, Pomo, Wailaki and other tribes and Native Hawaiian groups joined with local activists as they shouted, ?Water is sacred, water is life, protect the salmon, protect water rights.? Representatives of the Klamath Riverkeeper, Restore the Delta, United Native Americans and Occupy Sacramento also participated in the event. Around 40 people were there at the protest at any given time; over 100 people showed up at the event between the two days. Protesters also chanted, ?Fight, Fight, Water Rights!? and ?Corporate Graft, Corporate Greed, this is something we don?t need!,? as cars drove by on Riverside Boulevard in front of the hotel. The Brown administration advertised the event as a conference to discuss the latest developments including project selection for the $7.5 billion water bond money that is now available after the passage of the Water Quality, Supply and Infrastructure Act of 2014, Brown?s controversial Proposition 1. The website for the event proclaimed, "With 7.5 billion bond funds available, come and learn about funding and financing opportunities for water infrastructure projects at the must attend event for California water.? The keynote speaker was Debbie Davis-Franco, the Local Government Drought Liason for the Governor?s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), She was originally scheduled to speak on Monday, but then was rescheduled to speak on Tuesday, apparently due to the protest outside the hotel on Monday. The website also proclaimed, ?Key Decision-Makers and Stakeholders Gather ? To discuss the latest developments including project selection for the $7.5 billion water bond. ? Provide updates on the new regulations governing groundwater management in California. ? Hear private investment perspectives on financing and investment opportunities in California water through Public Private Partnerships(P3).? Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, emphasized that registration for the three-day summit was nearly an astounding $1,500 per person ? and that been no efforts to ?include tribal representatives, environmentalists or anyone who is advocating for sound water policy that will benefit future generations, local ecosystems and salmon and other fisheries.? ?Most of the California Indians who are working on tribal water rights and for healthier rivers can?t afford a $1,500 registration fee,? said Chief Sisk. ?This is clearly an effort by Governor Brown to exclude the tribal voice, shove out anyone who disagrees with his destructive water plans and provide an opportunity for government and the big water power brokers to collude behind closed doors.? A review of the agenda and website reveals that the conference was designed for water districts? staff, government scientists, corporate representatives and other advocates to advance Governor Brown?s pet water projects like the Shasta Dam raise and the twin Delta Tunnels. Both of these would be devastating for salmon and tribal cultural resources and sacred sites, including many of the Tribe?s sacred sites on the McCloud River that weren?t inundated by Shasta Dam, according to Sisk. (http://www.infocastinc.com/events/california-water) Gerald Thomas, an Elem Pomo member who was holding a sign proclaiming, "Warrior Up For Water," outside the Hotel, agreed with Sisk. ?This exclusion of Tribes from a major water conference affects all of us. Without water we can?t live; without water we can?t breathe. I am here standing here in defense of the people and the earth,? he said. The corporate and water agency domination of the event was no surprise, when you consider that Big Money interests dumped $21,820,691 into the Prop. 1 campaign. There is no doubt that these wealthy corporate interests are expecting a big return for their "investment" in California?s play-to-pay politics system, including the construction of the twin tunnels and new dams. The contributors were a who?s who of Big Money interests in California, including corporate agribusiness groups, billionaires, timber barons, Big Oil, the tobacco industry, corporate ?environmental? NGOs including the Nature Conservancy, and the California Chamber of Commerce (http://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/archives/2015/04/29/why-governor-brown-broke-his-prop-1-promise-big-money-interests-dumped-218-million-into-the-prop-1-campaign ) Rosa Rivera Furamoto, Nanea Young and Mikilani Young, Native Hawaiains, came from Los Angeles to emphasize the connections between the current direct action blockades to stop the construction of the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) on the sacred mountain of Mauna Kea in Hawaii and water struggles in California. ?From one mountain to another, we are trying to protect the sacred land,? said Mikilani Young. "We are taking a stand to say enough is enough. We came up from Los Angeles to stand with the native people of California.? ?As the sacred sites and salmon are threatened by the Shasta Dam raise, the proposed Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) on Mauna Kea will sit upon a protected aquifer. Once they start digging into the ground to build the telescope, they will use hazardous chemicals that will impact the entire island," said Young. Ryan Camero, representing Restore the Delta and the Beehive Collective, also participated in the protest Tuesday to express solidarity with Tribes fighting their exclusion from California water discussions. ?The tunnels and the Shasta Dam raise are part of the corporate takeover of our water by Big Oil and agribusiness,? said Camero. Though California is suffering through five years of drastically low rainfall, Chief Sisk said the water problems are all man-made, due to poor management and greed. As the low rainfall puts a stress on California?s boondoggle of a water system, it has never been more important for the indigenous perspective to be heard and for tribal water rights to be acknowledged and upheld, according to Sisk. She said the Winnemem Wintu have an especially important stake in the bond funds, as many think they could be used to support the Shasta Dam raise to enlarge Shasta Lake?s capacity, which in turn would flood or damage about 40 sacred sites vital to the Winnemem?s religion and cultural practices. ?This is a summit that is meant to help these people peddle Brown?s projects that will benefit his buddies: agribusiness and water sellers in Southern California,? Sisk said. ?They are not interested in what?s best for the people of California and their children.? Michael Preston of the Winnemem Wintu said he tried to get into the meeting, but was told by the organizers that it would cost $1500 for just one day! ?I didn?t think it was worth it to spend $1500 for one day,? he said. On Tuesday, protesters also marched up to the hotel and back to the sidewalk to challenge the destructive water infrastructure projects being planned at the California Water Summit. After the protest on Tuesday, people gathered in front of the hotel to pray, sing songs and talk about the opposing the corporate water grab by Big Ag, Big Oil and other corporate interests. ?I think we accomplished our major goal to let people know that we want to be involved in water discussions, but are being excluded by the Governor?s staff at the California Water Summit now. We need water for salmon - and Tribes are first in time and first in rights for water,? concluded Sisk. Governor Jerry Brown's exclusion of Tribes, along with his exclusion of fishermen, Delta residents, grassroots environmentalists and public trust advocates from water discussions, is part of a larger pattern of the administration's environmentally unjust policies that the mainstream media and most "alternative" media refuse to report about. While the media and corporate "environmental" NGOs gush about Brown's cynical grandstanding about "green energy" and pollution trading at carefully staged photo opportunities, Brown has in fact continued and expanded the worst policies of the Schwarzenegger administration. Brown has fast-tracked the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the twin tunnels; has implemented questionable "marine protected areas" under the privately-funded Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative; has presided over record water exports and fish kills at the Delta pumps; has put Delta smelt, winter run Chinook and other imperiled species on the scaffold of extinction; and has presided over the expansion of fracking, an extreme oil extraction technique, in California. Brown is without a doubt the worst Governor for fish, water and the environment in recent California history, as I have documented in article after article. For more information, read my investigative piece about Brown's war on the environment at: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/04/15/18771135.php ?Water Summit for the Rich by Dan Bacher Saturday Jul 4th, 2015 10:55 AM 800_water_summit_for_rich... original image ( 5184x3456) Jessica Lopez, Vice Chair of the Concow Maidu Tribe, lets Governor Brown know how she feels about the California Water Summit. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Protesters in front of hotel by Dan Bacher Saturday Jul 4th, 2015 10:55 AM 800_protest_outside_the_w... original image ( 5184x3456) Protesters line the street in front of the Westin Hotel in Sacramento to blast Governor Brown's exclusion of Tribes and their allies from the summit. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Water Warriors by Dan Bacher Saturday Jul 4th, 2015 10:55 AM 800_water_warriors.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Native Hawaiian activists drew the connection between the federal plan to raise Shasta Dam and the plan build the Thirty Meter Telescope on sacred Mauna Kea in Hawaii. Photo by Dan Bacher ?Caleen Sisk Interviewed by Dan Bacher Saturday Jul 4th, 2015 10:55 AM 800_caleen_interviewed.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, is interviewed by FOX 40 TV News. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Ryan Camero by Dan Bacher Saturday Jul 4th, 2015 10:55 AM 800_ryan_camero.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Ryan Camero of Restore the Delta and the Beehive Collective sings a song. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Protest at the Westin by Dan Bacher Saturday Jul 4th, 2015 10:55 AM 800_7._protest_at_entranc... original image ( 5184x3456) Protesters gather in front of the Westin Hotel to protest Governor Brown's Water Summit for the Rich. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Michael and Mashalle by Dan Bacher Saturday Jul 4th, 2015 10:55 AM 800_michael_and_mashalle.... original image ( 5184x3456) Michael Tuiimyali, Winnemum Wintu, and Mashalle Zarlasht Olomi on the sidewalk protesting. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Four legged friend by Dan Bacher Saturday Jul 4th, 2015 10:55 AM 800_four_legged_friend_jo... original image ( 3456x5184) A four-legged friend joins the protest of the California Water Summit. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Native Voice Matters! by Dan Bacher Saturday Jul 4th, 2015 10:55 AM 800_native_voice_matters.... original image ( 5184x3456) "Native Voice Metters!" - did you hear that Jerry Brown? Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Warrior Up for Water by Dan Bacher Saturday Jul 4th, 2015 10:55 AM 800_warrior_up_for_water.... original image ( 5184x3456) Gerald Thomas, Elem Pomo, holds up a sign proclaiming, "Warrior Up For Water." Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Raise Consciousness by Dan Bacher Saturday Jul 4th, 2015 10:55 AM 800_raise_consciousness.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Raise Consciousness, Not The Dam! Photo by Dan Bacher. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_water_defenders_.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 408785 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_water_summit_for_rich.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 347235 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_protest_outside_the_westin.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 404786 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_water_warriors.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 373545 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_caleen_interviewed.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 376116 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_ryan_camero.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 422987 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_7._protest_at_entrance_to_westin_.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 437142 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_michael_and_mashalle.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 367168 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_four_legged_friend_joins_protest.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 323737 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_native_voice_matters.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 331794 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_warrior_up_for_water.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 395482 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_raise_consciousness.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 445827 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Jul 6 08:28:09 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2015 15:28:09 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Proposed reservoirs are no panacea for drought Message-ID: <885071993.2883190.1436196489538.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> JULY 4, 2015 Proposed reservoirs are no panacea for droughtNew surface storage would have added only modestly to the state?s water supplyReal benefits of new storage are likely to come from the increased flexibility for state?s water systemBuilding drought resilience requires increased conservation, wastewater recycling, stormwater captureBY JEFFREY MOUNTAND ELLEN HANAKSpecial to The Bee The acute water shortages now hitting California have prompted many in Congress and the state Legislature to call for new surface reservoirs to reduce the impacts of future droughts.Some have even blamed the lack of reservoir development as a primary cause of water scarcity during the current drought.GALLERY SLIDES The reality is that new surface storage would have added only modestly to the state?s water supply. We?d still be in the midst of a severe drought. Building drought resilience requires a much broader set of actions, including conservation, water trading, managing groundwater and expanding nontraditional supplies like recycled wastewater and stormwater.Following the 1987-92 drought, urban water agencies invested heavily in surface and groundwater storage. These investments have paid dividends during this drought, greatly reducing water shortages in the state?s major cities. But few investments were made to increase water reliability for agriculture and the environment, and these two sectors have been hit particularly hard.Last November voters approved Proposition 1, which allocated $2.7 billion in bonds for water storage. The bond requires that its funds provide public benefits, including improved environmental conditions. The California Water Commission can allocate those funds to surface or groundwater storage projects.Although planners are examining a wide range of options, most attention has been focused on two proposed surface reservoirs: Sites, on the west side of the Sacramento Valley, and Temperance Flat, upstream on the San Joaquin River.In total, these two projects would create about 2.6 million acre-feet of new storage capacity ? nearly a 7 percent increase in statewide capacity ? at an estimated cost of roughly $6.5 billion.However, increases in storage capacity do not translate to equivalent increases in supply, because reservoirs can?t always be kept full. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the California Department of Water Resources estimate that these projects would increase dry-year supply for agricultural and urban uses by up to 380,000 acre-feet per year, and less as droughts wear on. Sites, the larger reservoir, would be refilled with Sacramento River water only during wet periods, so it will not yield much water during prolonged droughts.Recent studies from UC Davis help put this in context. This year and last, Central Valley farmers will have received 15 million acre-feet less surface water than in average years. They are pumping extra groundwater to make up for the loss ? a source of great concern given falling water tables and sinking lands.What if Sites and Temperance Flat reservoirs had been built before this drought? On the optimistic assumption that they made an additional 380,000 acre-feet of water available in 2014 and 2015, surface water deliveries would have increased by 5 percent ? in the grand scheme of things, a drop in the bucket.The bottom line? New surface storage would have been helpful during this drought, but not nearly to the extent people imagine.Rather, the real benefits of new storage are likely to come from the increased flexibility it provides to our overall water system ? by increasing our ability to store water from wet years in groundwater basins, strengthening our capacity to manage floods and improving environmental conditions in our troubled watersheds. To qualify for state matching funds, the California water commissioners have said they expect storage proposals to take this system-level, multibenefit approach.Officials are understandably attracted to big infrastructure approaches to solving water supply problems. And in some cases, big projects are necessary. But to improve our ability to weather droughts, California needs to take actions along a number of fronts. Storage should be part of that portfolio, but it?s not a panacea.Jeffrey Mount is a senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California. Ellen Hanak is director of PPIC?s Water Policy Center.reprints Read more here: Proposed reservoirs are no panacea for drought | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | Proposed reservoirs are no panacea for droughtThe acute water shortages now hitting California have prompted many in Congress and the state Legislature to call for new surface reservoirs to reduce the impacts o... | | | | View on www.sacbee.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Tue Jul 7 15:08:59 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2015 22:08:59 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Jweek26 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C54CFAE@057-SN2MPN1-042.057d.mgd.msft.net> Please see attached for the JWeek26 (Jun 25-Jul 1) Trinity River trapping summary update. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW26.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 60740 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW26.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jul 7 17:42:06 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 00:42:06 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] CVP Sacramento River Temperature Management Plan Message-ID: <621061752.828392.1436316126555.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> At the recent TAMWG meeting, the group requested a copy of the most recent Trinity River operations forecast that is usually posted on the Bureau of Reclamation's Central Valley Operations website. ?However, that has not been updated since March. The most recent 90% exceedance forecast can be found on page 10 of the Temperature Management Plan at:?http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/docs/tucp/2015/junetempplan.pdf Despite using over 400,000 AF of Trinity River water through the Clear Creek Tunnel, the word "Trinity" appears nowhere in the document (other than page 10) and it says nothing about how the Trinity River's temperatures?might fare. ? Does anybody have information on temperature predictions for the Trinity River? ?The presentation on this was cancelled at the last TAMWG meeting.??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 Thu Jul 9 08:32:11 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 15:32:11 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal: Marijuana concerns boil over Message-ID: <1016542148.1933815.1436455931713.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Very sad.http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/marijuana/article_36639f52-250e-11e5-9920-fbfe9ea85c71.html Marijuana concerns boil over By Sally Morris The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, July 8, 2015 6:15 am Marijuana grow Trinity County supervisors were slammed by marijuana complaints at Tuesday?s board meeting in Weaverville from a large and angry crowd fed up with the rampant cultivation they said is destroying their neighborhoods and communities while little to no enforcement of adopted county code is occurring.Most came from Hayfork, but some came from other parts of the county as well. With so many lined up, speakers were given two minutes each to voice their concerns during the public comment time on the board?s agenda for items not otherwise on the agenda.A resident of Hayfork for the past 49 years, Dick Murray said he?s watched ?the marijuana plague slowly take over? his quiet, peaceful neighborhood to the point that many longtime residents are leaving and he may be next.?The lot next to mine in the Shady Acre subdivision was purchased by agents a month ago and they immediately put up seven-foot fences, cut the trees, put in 99 plants, brought in a tent and small shed, piles of fertilizer and pesticides and dug a hole next to the creek for sanitary purposes. There?s no residential structure, the county ordinance is clear they aren?t supposed to be a nuisance or have more than eight plants, but nothing?s been done in spite of all the complaints,? he said.From the northern end of the county, Howard Covington of Covington Mill spoke of out-of-control criminal behavior by an individual in that community who shoots at people and blocks public access to a county road there with his excavations that recently broke the community water system.?I?m filing a grand jury complaint if nothing else is done,? he said.Joseph Bower of Hayfork said he lives downstream from the Trinity Pines subdivision where the environmental destruction caused by immense marijuana grow sites there are killing the fish and wildlife, and stealing water.?Since 2009, we?ve been trying to get somebody to pay attention to it? all the way up the U.S. Forest Service chain of command and other enforcement agencies, he said, ?but the problem?s gotten worse, not better. You have the ordinances, so hire more code enforcement officers. The creek I live on had fish for 40 years, but not a one this year. We?ve got to do something.?Stan Ehler of Hayfork spoke of the impact of illegal activities surrounding the marijuana grows, saying ?it?s uncontrolled, unregulated and running amok. Regulations are not being enforced and the result of no enforcement is that people no longer respect law and order and have lost respect for this county. What do you want this county to be known for??Others spoke of visitors who no longer come and families leaving.Saying she had a personal check refused at a business on the coast because her address said Hayfork, Jo Ehler asked, ?How does this board wish the county to be perceived? Do we want to be ?Cannabis County? or Trinity County??Executive Director of Safe Alternatives for our Forest Environment and long-time South Fork Mountain resident, Larry Glass said a coalition of environmental groups ?within the Emerald Triangle? has been working for years to address the issues of cannabis and it?s a myth to think environmentalists are not concerned about the harm being caused.?There?s no regulation here and we?re recreating the Gold Rush of the 1800s in Trinity County right now. The environmental degradation is obscene and I stand ready and willing to work with you on behalf of the environmental community to try and get a handle on this,? he said.Retired Hayfork Fire Chief Dave Loeffler told the board that county staff ?does nothing except throw up their hands and say there?s no money. You are subjecting every volunteer in this county to undue hazards by not dealing with the marijuana issue.?A Hayfork teacher, Ken Cox described what he said was once a rare occurrence, but now a daily situation of children coming to school with marijuana, sharing recipes for its use, falling asleep in class, drawing pictures that celebrate the plant and writing in their journals about how much money they will make producing it.?One 13-year-old told me education is bunk and that he makes more money trimming bud than I will in a year,? he said, adding few parents even show up anymore for parent/teacher conferences ?because they are tending their grows and if they do come, they are stoned and incoherent. That is our new reality and it begs to be dealt with.?Several blamed the Board of Supervisors for the situation, saying they have participated for the last six years or longer in efforts to develop the county regulations that do exist, but the board has not prioritized enforcement.Becky Stetson of Hayfork described properties there going up for sale on a daily basis and said within days the sign comes down, fences go up, property is mowed, the plants go in, RVs and tents show up and then the water trucks come.?I love my property, but I will never be able to sell it for what it?s worth driving through a town I don?t want to go to, missing my friends and family that have moved away,? she said.Susan Weiss, a former Hayfork resident, said that for seven years ?I did everything a citizen could possible do, filing complaints, writing letters, providing maps and presentations to you. I have problem-solved and problem-solved. I?ve been telling you it was an emergency for six years. We don?t need more talking. We need action and shame on you for what you?ve done. I?ve moved to Redding now. I don?t want to live in this county anymore.?A resident since 1956, Jim Jungwirth of Hayfork said he is also leaving and blames the Board of Supervisors for failure to act on the issue of marijuana.?I know you have to represent all the people, but I would hope you?d represent me a little differently than someone who came in May, bared the hillside and left with $2 million. That?s not me,? he said, adding he has had difficulty getting people to come to Hayfork for employment.?They didn?t even make it into town. They turn around and leave. They won?t bring their children. Time for talk is over. Pull the frigging plants. If you want them to go away, pull the plants,? he said.Board chair Judy Morris said the board is aware of the enforcement issue and working on several fronts to focus on the problems.?We do hear you. We?re sorry some very bad actors have moved in and made your lives miserable. It?s happening throughout the county and we will agendize a discussion as soon as possible,? she said, offering to plan a board session with the sheriff, county counsel and administration, federal land and wildlife managers and water quality experts to discuss all facets of the marijuana impacts.Sup. John Fenley asked for a special, evening session of the board that is only focused on enforcement of the county?s marijuana codes and his proposal to reduce the abatement time for cited offenses from 30 days to five or 10. He pressed for such a meeting next week, but there was debate about how soon a meeting could or would be scheduled.Supervisors Bill Burton and Morris as well as County Administrative Officer Wendy Tyler favored more time allowing for staff to prepare, obtain information and advertise it. The evening of July 22 was suggested, but a firm date not yet set. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jul 9 10:15:12 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 17:15:12 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Fw=3A_This_just_in_=E2=80=A6_Notice_of_Av?= =?utf-8?q?ailability_for_Recirculated_Draft_EIR/EIS_Bay_Delta_Conservatio?= =?utf-8?q?n_Plan/California_Water_Fix_Documents?= In-Reply-To: <88af2b23c65f1c863838dd9a5ee51fcf060.20150709171356@mail93.suw11.mcdlv.net> References: <88af2b23c65f1c863838dd9a5ee51fcf060.20150709171356@mail93.suw11.mcdlv.net> Message-ID: <1230287733.2038311.1436462112216.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> The fix is in...TS On Thursday, July 9, 2015 10:14 AM, Maven wrote: This just in ??Notice of Availability for Recirculated Draft EIR/EIS Bay Delta Conservation Plan/California Water Fix Documents#yiv7082342433 #yiv7082342433outlook a{padding:0;}#yiv7082342433 body{width:100% !important;}#yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433ReadMsgBody{width:100%;}#yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433ExternalClass{width:100%;}#yiv7082342433 body{}#yiv7082342433 body{margin:0;padding:0;}#yiv7082342433 img{border:0;height:auto;line-height:100%;outline:none;text-decoration:none;}#yiv7082342433 table td{border-collapse:collapse;}#yiv7082342433 #yiv7082342433backgroundTable{height:100% !important;margin:0;padding:0;width:100% !important;}#yiv7082342433 body, #yiv7082342433 #yiv7082342433backgroundTable{background-color:#FAFAFA;}#yiv7082342433 #yiv7082342433templateContainer{border:1px solid #DDDDDD;}#yiv7082342433 h1, #yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433h1{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:34px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv7082342433 h2, #yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433h2{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:30px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv7082342433 h3, #yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433h3{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:26px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv7082342433 h4, #yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433h4{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:22px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv7082342433 #yiv7082342433templatePreheader{background-color:#FAFAFA;}#yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433preheaderContent div{color:#505050;font-family:Arial;font-size:10px;line-height:100%;text-align:left;}#yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433preheaderContent div a:link, #yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433preheaderContent div a:visited, #yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433preheaderContent div a .yiv7082342433yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv7082342433 #yiv7082342433templateHeader{background-color:#FFFFFF;border-bottom:0;}#yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433headerContent{color:#202020;font-family:Arial;font-size:34px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;padding:0;text-align:center;vertical-align:middle;}#yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433headerContent a:link, #yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433headerContent a:visited, #yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433headerContent a .yiv7082342433yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv7082342433 #yiv7082342433headerImage{height:auto;max-width:600px !important;}#yiv7082342433 #yiv7082342433templateContainer, #yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433bodyContent{background-color:#FFFFFF;}#yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433bodyContent div{color:#505050;font-family:Arial;font-size:14px;line-height:150%;text-align:left;}#yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433bodyContent div a:link, #yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433bodyContent div a:visited, #yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433bodyContent div a .yiv7082342433yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433bodyContent img{display:inline;height:auto;}#yiv7082342433 #yiv7082342433templateFooter{background-color:#FFFFFF;border-top:0;}#yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433footerContent div{color:#707070;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;line-height:125%;text-align:left;}#yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433footerContent div a:link, #yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433footerContent div a:visited, #yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433footerContent div a .yiv7082342433yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv7082342433 .yiv7082342433footerContent img{display:inline;}#yiv7082342433 #yiv7082342433social{background-color:#FAFAFA;border:0;}#yiv7082342433 #yiv7082342433social div{text-align:center;}#yiv7082342433 #yiv7082342433utility{background-color:#FFFFFF;border:0;}#yiv7082342433 #yiv7082342433utility div{text-align:center;}#yiv7082342433 #yiv7082342433monkeyRewards img{max-width:190px;} | | | Breaking News from Maven's Notebook | Is this email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. | | | | | | | | | Just posted at Maven's Notebook: BDCP documents !!!! This just in ? Notice of Availability for Recirculated Draft EIR/EIS Bay Delta Conservation Plan/California Water Fix Documents ? | | | | | | ?follow on Twitter | friend on Facebook | forward to a friend? | | Copyright ? 2015 Maven's Notebook, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you opted in at Maven's Notebook. Our mailing address is: Maven's NotebookP. O. Box 2342Canyon Country,, CA 91386 Add us to your address book | | | | | | | | | This email was sent to tstokely at att.net why did I get this?????unsubscribe from this list????update subscription preferences Maven's Notebook ? P. O. Box 2342 ? Canyon Country,, CA 91386 ? USA | | @media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv7082342433 table[id="yiv7082342433canspamBar"] td{font-size:14px !important;}#yiv7082342433 table[id="yiv7082342433canspamBar"] td a{display:block;margin-top:10px !important;}} -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From njharris30 at gmail.com Thu Jul 9 13:54:12 2015 From: njharris30 at gmail.com (Nathan Harris) Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 13:54:12 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Willow Creek trap in-season update - July 7th Message-ID: Please see the attached documents for weekly catch data from the Willow Creek traps. Nathan Harris Biologist Yurok Tribal Fisheries Program Trinity River Division 3723 N. Hwy 96 Willow Creek, CA 95573 Office: (530) 629-3333 x1703 Cell: (707) 616-8742 njharris30 at gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Willow Creek RST raw catch update 2015.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 32899 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: trapping update summary 7.7.15.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 14363 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jul 10 17:40:32 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2015 00:40:32 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Fw=3A_This_just_in_=E2=80=A6_Judge_blocks?= =?utf-8?q?_water_right_curtailment_enforcement?= In-Reply-To: <88af2b23c65f1c863838dd9a5ee51fcf060.20150710215953@mail99.atl51.rsgsv.net> References: <88af2b23c65f1c863838dd9a5ee51fcf060.20150710215953@mail99.atl51.rsgsv.net> Message-ID: <1509740162.163971.1436575232902.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Big News! On Friday, July 10, 2015 3:00 PM, Maven wrote: This just in ??Judge blocks water right curtailment enforcement#yiv0539266401 #yiv0539266401outlook a{padding:0;}#yiv0539266401 body{width:100% !important;}#yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401ReadMsgBody{width:100%;}#yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401ExternalClass{width:100%;}#yiv0539266401 body{}#yiv0539266401 body{margin:0;padding:0;}#yiv0539266401 img{border:0;height:auto;line-height:100%;outline:none;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0539266401 table td{border-collapse:collapse;}#yiv0539266401 #yiv0539266401backgroundTable{height:100% !important;margin:0;padding:0;width:100% !important;}#yiv0539266401 body, #yiv0539266401 #yiv0539266401backgroundTable{background-color:#FAFAFA;}#yiv0539266401 #yiv0539266401templateContainer{border:1px solid #DDDDDD;}#yiv0539266401 h1, #yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401h1{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:34px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv0539266401 h2, #yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401h2{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:30px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv0539266401 h3, #yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401h3{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:26px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv0539266401 h4, #yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401h4{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:22px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv0539266401 #yiv0539266401templatePreheader{background-color:#FAFAFA;}#yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401preheaderContent div{color:#505050;font-family:Arial;font-size:10px;line-height:100%;text-align:left;}#yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401preheaderContent div a:link, #yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401preheaderContent div a:visited, #yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401preheaderContent div a .yiv0539266401yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv0539266401 #yiv0539266401templateHeader{background-color:#FFFFFF;border-bottom:0;}#yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401headerContent{color:#202020;font-family:Arial;font-size:34px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;padding:0;text-align:center;vertical-align:middle;}#yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401headerContent a:link, #yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401headerContent a:visited, #yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401headerContent a .yiv0539266401yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv0539266401 #yiv0539266401headerImage{height:auto;max-width:600px !important;}#yiv0539266401 #yiv0539266401templateContainer, #yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401bodyContent{background-color:#FFFFFF;}#yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401bodyContent div{color:#505050;font-family:Arial;font-size:14px;line-height:150%;text-align:left;}#yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401bodyContent div a:link, #yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401bodyContent div a:visited, #yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401bodyContent div a .yiv0539266401yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401bodyContent img{display:inline;height:auto;}#yiv0539266401 #yiv0539266401templateFooter{background-color:#FFFFFF;border-top:0;}#yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401footerContent div{color:#707070;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;line-height:125%;text-align:left;}#yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401footerContent div a:link, #yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401footerContent div a:visited, #yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401footerContent div a .yiv0539266401yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv0539266401 .yiv0539266401footerContent img{display:inline;}#yiv0539266401 #yiv0539266401social{background-color:#FAFAFA;border:0;}#yiv0539266401 #yiv0539266401social div{text-align:center;}#yiv0539266401 #yiv0539266401utility{background-color:#FFFFFF;border:0;}#yiv0539266401 #yiv0539266401utility div{text-align:center;}#yiv0539266401 #yiv0539266401monkeyRewards img{max-width:190px;} | | | Breaking News from Maven's Notebook | Is this email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. | | | | | | | | | Just posted at Maven's Notebook: This just in ? Judge blocks water right curtailment enforcement ? | | | | | | ?follow on Twitter | friend on Facebook | forward to a friend? | | Copyright ? 2015 Maven's Notebook, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you opted in at Maven's Notebook. Our mailing address is: Maven's NotebookP. O. Box 2342Canyon Country,, CA 91386 Add us to your address book | | | | | | | | | This email was sent to tstokely at att.net why did I get this?????unsubscribe from this list????update subscription preferences Maven's Notebook ? P. O. Box 2342 ? Canyon Country,, CA 91386 ? USA | | @media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv0539266401 table[id="yiv0539266401canspamBar"] td{font-size:14px !important;}#yiv0539266401 table[id="yiv0539266401canspamBar"] td a{display:block;margin-top:10px !important;}} -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jul 10 17:50:34 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2015 00:50:34 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Jason Peltier to succeed Dan Nelson as Authority Executive Director of San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority Message-ID: <1063165408.142819.1436575834720.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Congratulations Jason! | | | ? | | | | | | | ? | San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water AuthorityPO Box 2157 - Los Banos, CA 93635 - 209.826.9696 The San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority serves 29 member agencies reliant upon waterconveyed through the California Bay-Delta by the United States Bureau of Reclamation'sCentral Valley Project. These agencies deliver water to approximately1.2 million acres of farmland, 2 million California residents, and millions ofwaterfowl dependent upon the nearly 200,000 acres of managed wetlandswithin the Pacific Flyway. | ? | | Contact:? ?Dan Nelson, Executive Director?San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority?Office:??209.826.9696??????? | | Release ImmediateJuly 9, 2015 | | ? | ?Peltier to succeed Nelson as Authority Executive Director??Mike Stearns, Chairman of the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority, announced that Jason Peltier will take over as Executive Director of the organization, replacing Dan Nelson who will retire at the end of 2015. Stearns indicated that Peltier was named the successor to Nelson as part of a Succession Plan that was developed after Nelson announced his intention to retire earlier this year. The Plan calls for Peltier to begin his employment with the Authority in mid-August as a Deputy to Nelson, then taking over the reins on Jan. 1, 2016.?Nelson will leave after 24 years as the Executive Director of the Authority and has been the only Executive Director for the Authority since its formation in 1992.?"Dan was a major part of the formation and development of an agency that we are all proud of. He has led us through some pretty tough times, has held us together and has positioned us well for the challenges ahead. We are very grateful for his leadership and wish him the very best," noted Stearns.?Nelson added, "It has been an absolute honor working for the Authority, its member agencies and the water users in the region. The Authority is blessed with a great Board of Directors and an incredibly talented staff. Given the diversity of interests represented by the Authority, I've been amazed by their professionalism and ability to focus and to work together on common interests. Jason is a great fit for the organization and is the right person at the right time; the organization is in great hands."?"We have some major challenges in front of us and Jason brings a tremendous amount of experience in western water issues and more specifically all facets of the Central Valley Project. We expect that he will hit the ground running. Jason is well known and well regarded within California and Western water circles. He will be a great leader for the future of the organization," said Stearns.?Peltier's experience includes a diversity of positions focusing on water issues. He served as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Water and Science at the United States Department of the Interior. Prior to that he was the manager of the Central Valley Project Water Association and is currently the Chief Deputy General Manager of the Westlands Water District.???Peltier commented, "The confidence of the Board of Directors in my ability to lead this tremendously accomplished organization means everything to me. I salute Dan's 24 years of leadership in building a first rate outfit and creating a true family among its member agencies. I also must salute every one of the Authority employees as they have repeatedly demonstrated their resourcefulness and commitment to the mission of this organization."?###?Banta-Carbona ID, Broadview WD, Byron Bethany ID, Central Calif. ID, City of Tracy, Columbia Canal Co., ?Del Puerto WD, Eagle Field WD, Firebaugh Canal WD, Fresno Slough WD, Grassland WD, Henry Miller RD #2131, James ID, Laguna WD, Mercy Springs WD, Oro Loma WD, Pacheco WD, Panoche WD, Patterson ID, ?Pleasant Valley WD, Reclamation District 1606, San Benito County WD, San Luis WD, Santa Clara Valley WD, Tranquillity ID, Turner Island WD, West Side ID, West Stanislaus ID, Westlands WD?? ?? | | | | | | ? | | | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Jul 12 09:31:52 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 16:31:52 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Ballot measure threatens California water tunnels plan Message-ID: <955383160.668780.1436718712806.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> WATER & DROUGHTJULY 11, 2015Ballot measure threatens California water tunnels planWealthy Stockton-area farmer?s initiative expected to qualify for 2016 ballotMeasure would force vote on some projects costing more than $2 billionInitiative backers have poured $2 million into effort, alarming tunnels proponentsGALLERY SLIDES An aerial photo from 2013 shows the region to be affected by the Delta water tunnels and intakes near Walnut Grove. | Randall Benton Sacramento Bee file/.cBY DAVID SIDERS AND RYAN SABALOWdsiders at sacbee.com Amid long-standing controversy surrounding Gov. Jerry Brown?s plan to build two tunnels to divert water around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to the south, one advantage the project appeared to hold was that Brown could forge ahead without a public vote.As envisioned by the fourth-term governor, state and federal officials would permit the $15 billion conveyance, and water users would pay for it.To his detractors, Brown could simply say, as he playfully did in May, ?shut up.?But in recent months, signature gatherers paid by Dean Cortopassi, a wealthy Stockton-area farmer and food processor, have started circulating an initiative to force large public works projects ? Brown?s tunnels included ? to go before voters for approval.The measure is expected to quality for the November 2016 ballot, and proponents of the tunnels project are reacting with alarm.?He has money,? said Robin Swanson, a consultant working with Californians for Water Security, which supports the tunnels project. ?And he has his own political agenda.?Californians for Water Security, a group of labor, business and agricultural interests with its own money and political agenda, holds a significant stake in the outcome of the ballot initiative.Cortopassi?s measure could make it harder to secure lucrative public works contracts and, in the case of the tunnels project, water deliveries. The group began airing pro-tunnels advertisements in April and started attacking Cortopassi online. The state building trades and other tunnel proponents are preparing for a campaign opposing the measure.?HE HAS MONEY ... AND HE HAS HIS OWN POLITICAL AGENDA?Robin Swanson, a consultant working with Californians for Water SecurityThe Cortopassi initiative stands to complicate Brown?s tunnels plan just as Brown works to revive it. After federal agencies balked at a 50-year permit for the project ? a length of time attractive to water users because it assured them water deliveries could not easily be changed ? Brown announced in April that he would seek a shorter permit and dramatically reduce the amount of habitat restoration originally proposed.The project has labored under heavy criticism from Delta landowners and Northern Californians resentful of the water demands of Southern California?s population centers. The Brown administration on Thursday released hundreds of pages of environmental impact review documents on the latest revisions to the plan.Downstream water agencies that have spent about $235 million to get the tunnels proposals this far ? and who for years have championed some sort of Delta water conveyance to supply a reliable stream of water to crops and cities ? have reacted cautiously to the design change.Jason Peltier, deputy general manager for Westlands Water District, a major water buyer, said ?there?s a lot of profound disappointment? that water agencies? spending ?did not result in a viable project.??Getting more money to do more work that may or may not lead to a viable project is going to be very difficult,? he said. ?So that?s on one hand. On the other hand, there?s a very simple reality that people know that these problems are not going to fix themselves.?Brown has said the project is needed to stabilize water deliveries relied upon by millions of Californians and to restore the Delta?s fragile ecosystem.Cortopassi, who calls his measure the ?No Blank Checks Initiative,? was a major donor to Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger before splitting with the Republican Party over Schwarzenegger?s advocacy for a Delta conveyance in 2008.That year, he registered as an independent, bought full-page advertisements in The Sacramento Bee and The Record of Stockton criticizing the conveyance, and he ran ads on KCRA-TV in Sacramento.?I have served as a catalyst to get this thing where it should be in the public eye,? Cortopassi said in 2008. ?I will fight to the death to protect the Delta, because I love it.?Last year, Cortopassi once again bought space in major newspapers around the state, this time with a broader complaint about government spending. Beneath bold type reading, ?Liar, liar,? Cortopassi accused Brown and lawmakers of ?profligate spending? while failing to address long-term debt.Cortopassi?s ballot measure would require voter approval before the state could issue revenue bonds for any project costing more than $2 billion. Cortopassi and his wife, Joan, have poured $3 million into the effort so far.His advisers declined to make him available for comment. Tom Ross, a consultant working on the initiative, said Cortopassi is focused on controlling state debt, not on any specific public works proposal.?It really is, ?Hey, if we?re going to do major, major things in the state, and incur debt for the state, there ought to be a public discussion around it,? Ross said.While the ballot measure does not explicitly mention Brown?s tunnels project, Cortopassi is acutely interested in the matter. In addition to his ad campaign in 2008, Cortopassi has helped raise money for Restore the Delta, an anti-tunnels group. He sat on the organization?s board of directors before leaving the group at the end of 2013, said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, the group?s executive director.Now, she said, ?We aren?t always in regular contact with him, so we really don?t know a lot about (the initiative), surprisingly.?California currently requires voter approval before issuing general obligation bonds, as voters did in 2008 for Brown?s other major infrastructure project, high-speed rail. Cortopassi?s measure would require approval for large revenue bonds, a different kind of financing mechanism in which bonds are typically repaid using revenue from projects they finance.According to an analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst?s Office, the number of projects the Cortopassi measure might affect is uncertain, depending on how broadly or narrowly the term ?project? is construed by government agencies or courts.Allan Zaremberg, president and CEO of the California Chamber of Commerce, said the measure could apply to a range of projects, including reservoirs and university campuses. He accused Cortopassi of ?trying to hide the ball from the public? by leaving out of his ballot measure any mention of the tunnels project.?I just think there are so many faults with it,? he said. ?I don?t think there?s any question that it?s worded this way because I think somebody did some research to show the public likes to vote on debt.?In addition to the tunnels plan, California?s $68 billion high-speed rail project could be affected. Though the rail project has secured initial funding, the Brown administration is considering leveraging revenue from California?s cap-and-trade program, money industries pay to offset carbon emissions, to secure private investment in the project. If those investments take the form of revenue bonds, Ross said, the initiative would apply.Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, said he has spoken with Cortopassi about the measure and that it is ?consistent with our philosophy.? He said his organization has not yet thoroughly reviewed the proposal, however.Brown was governor before when his first Delta conveyance plan, a peripheral canal, was defeated in a referendum in 1982.Jerry Meral, who served as the chief steward of the tunnels project while deputy secretary of the state?s Natural Resources Agency, said that if Cortopassi?s initiative passes and requires a vote on the current conveyance plan, the project would be ?very much in danger of failing.?But proponents of the project, in addition to criticizing Cortopassi, are considering possible ways to arrange financing so that they can argue it does not fall under provisions of Cortopassi?s measure.Meral, who retired from the state in 2013 and now works for an environmental group supporting the tunnels plan, said it is possible a joint powers authority of water contractors could fund and operate the project separate from the state.?In the end, you know, while the initiative may pass, I think there is a way around it,? Meral said. ?I don?t know whether the contractors have really sat down with their lawyers and figured out all the details, but I think they understand what has to be done to avoid a public vote.?David Siders: 916-321-1215, @davidsiders Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article27052015.html#storylink=cpy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Jul 12 10:22:38 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 17:22:38 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Longtime federal court judge Lawrence K. Karlton dies Message-ID: <1345410955.677231.1436721758211.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> | | | | | Breaking News Alerts | | Longtime federal court judge Lawrence K. Karlton dies | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Mon Jul 13 13:40:57 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 20:40:57 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Update JWeek27 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C54D808@057-SN2MPN1-042.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hi folks, Please see attached for the JWeek27 Trinity River trapping summary update. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ewiseman at fs.fed.us Mon Jul 13 14:46:23 2015 From: ewiseman at fs.fed.us (Wiseman, Eric R -FS) Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2015 21:46:23 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Update JWeek27 In-Reply-To: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C54D808@057-SN2MPN1-042.057d.mgd.msft.net> References: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C54D808@057-SN2MPN1-042.057d.mgd.msft.net> Message-ID: <012E1DFD116B0941BC2875462D4CE1E51128BB4B@001FSN2MPN2-093.001f.mgd2.msft.net> Steve - It looks like the attachment with the JC weir data did not make it. Also, I heard that the weir was not going to fish if the water temp got over 70 or 72 F. Is that true, and if so, is it instantaneous temps or some or metric? The Trinity River above the North Fork Trinity near Helena (NFH) temp readings showed that 10 of the last 15 days exceeded 70 F and that 9 of those 15 days exceeded 72 F. Where is CaDFW monitoring temp and what interval are they monitoring at? The Trinity River at Douglas City (DGC) temp gauge is non-operational at this time. When we log stream temps we collect data at 30 minute intervals on the hour. Also, I heard a rumor that sport fishing in the Trinity would be suspended based on some temperature criteria but never saw a formal notification. Is CaDFW still implementing that? [Forest Service Shield] Eric Wiseman Fisheries Biologist Forest Service Shasta-Trinity National Forest p: 530-623-1754 ewiseman at fs.fed.us 360 West Main Street Weaverville, CA 96093 www.fs.fed.us [http://wwwstatic.fs.usda.gov/images/email/usda-logo.png][Twitter Logo][Facebook Logo] Caring for the land and serving people From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Cannata, Steve at Wildlife Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 1:41 PM To: Sinnen, Wade at Wildlife Cc: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Update JWeek27 Hi folks, Please see attached for the JWeek27 Trinity River trapping summary update. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 7801 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 1701 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.png Type: image/png Size: 1594 bytes Desc: image003.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.png Type: image/png Size: 1453 bytes Desc: image004.png URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jul 14 09:57:42 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 16:57:42 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Media Release: SPECIAL REPORT: Retiring Toxic Farmland in Western San Joaquin Valley Would Save Water, Environment and Taxpayer Money Message-ID: <1978426399.1282991.1436893062562.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> C-WIN SPECIAL REPORT: Retiring Toxic Farmland in Western San Joaquin Valley Would Save Water, Environment and Taxpayer Money | California Water Impact Network SPECIAL REPORT: Retiring Toxic Farmland in Western San Joaquin Valley Would Save Water, Environment and Taxpayer Money ?For Immediate ReleaseJuly 14, 2015?Contacts:Sandra Lupien, Food & Water Watch, 510-681-3171,?slupien at fwwatch.orgBarbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Restore the Delta, 209-479-2053,?barbara at restorethedelta.orgTom Stokely, California Water Impact Network, 530-926-9727,?tstokely at att.net?SPECIAL REPORT:Retiring Toxic Farmland in Western San Joaquin Valley Would Save Water, Environment and Taxpayer Money?Land retirement 25x cheaper than Tunnel plan and could save 455,000 acre-feet of water?Sacramento, CA - A?new report by EcoNorthwest, an independent economic analysis firm, estimates that 300,000 acres of toxic land in the Westlands Water District and three adjacent water districts could be retired at a cost of $580 million to $1 billion.?Retiring this land and curbing the water rights associated with it would result in a savings to California of up to 455,000 acre-feet of water ? for reference, the?City of Los Angeles uses 587,000 acre-feet in a typical year. This course of action also is significantly less expensive than Governor Jerry Brown?s plan to build a massive tunnel system to divert water from the Sacramento River for the benefit of corporate agribusiness.?Food & Water Watch, the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) and Restore the Delta are calling on the Obama administration to retire up to 300,000 acres of selenium-tainted land and reduce the annual supply of water in the San Luis Unit, which includes parts of Westlands, San Luis, Panoche and Pacheco water districts, by 455,000 acre-feet. (This water is typically pumped from the San Francisco Bay Delta via the federal controlled Central Valley Project.) The Delta is suffering from poor water quality because of the removal of fresh water to irrigate water-intensive crops such as almonds and pistachios in the Westlands Water District, located on the hot and dry western side of the San Joaquin Valley.??California needs to balance water demands with the realities of its supply, which means retiring inappropriate farmland,? said Adam Scow, California Director at Food & Water Watch. ?Retiring toxic farmland in Westlands is a commonsense step toward protecting our overstretched and dwindling water supply.??The report comes as the Obama administration and Westlands engage in secret negotiations over the fate of this toxic land; central to the discussions is millions of dollars in debt owed by Westlands to U.S. taxpayers for the faulty and incomplete construction of the Central Valley Project, which supplies water to the district.?The disastrous consequences of industrial-scale cultivation of seleniferous lands became obvious in 1983, when thousands of migratory waterfowl were deformed or killed outright at Kesterson Wildlife Refuge due to deliveries of toxic drain water from Westlands Water District megafarms.?A recent draft settlement revealed that the Obama administration has proposed guaranteeing Westlands nearly 900,000 acre-feet of water per year for fifty years, while letting the district off the hook for $365 million of its debt. The proposed deal would provide for the continued irrigation of more than 250,000 acres of selenium-tainted lands, allowing toxic runoff to continue plaguing the San Joaquin River and the Bay-Delta/Estuary. A final settlement proposal is expected soon. The Environmental Working Group estimated that annual?subsidies to Westlands range from $24 million to $110?million a year.? ??Discharge into the San Joaquin River harms Bay-Delta drinking water supplies, family farms, fish and wildlife,? said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla of Restore the Delta. ?Everyone knows land retirement will need to happen eventually because there will come a point where the drainage-impaired lands will become unfarmable.??The three groups noted that the retirement of these poisoned lands and the ?paper water? that goes with them would greatly reduce the toxic drainage currently poisoning the San Joaquin River and the San Francisco Bay/Delta Estuary.??Along with retiring the land, the groups are calling on Governor Brown and the State Water Board to stop the ?paper water? claims that run with the land ? the disparity that exists between water rights claims and water that actually exists. Currently, the State Water Resources Control Board has allocated water rights claims that exceed available water from the Delta watershed by a factor of five.??The retirement must be accompanied by a proportional reduction in water contract amounts,? said Tom Stokely of C-WIN. ?UC Davis has demonstrated that California water demands are vastly out of balance with the realities of our supply: it?s no more than ?paper water.? To guarantee Westlands a fifty-year water supply, as the current settlement does, would be an unfair and irresponsible giveaway to heavily-subsidized, corporate farms in Westlands.??In a previous land retirement deal, Westlands? water supply allocation was not reduced. A concern shared by the three groups is that under the deal, corporate farms might sell their taxpayer-subsidized water for private profit at the expense of the environment.??We cannot permit Westlands to transform itself from heavily subsidized corporate farms into a water broker at the expense of taxpayers and the San Francisco Bay/Delta Estuary,? said Barrigan-Parrilla.?In addition, given the likelihood that land retirement would eliminate farm jobs tied to that land, the three groups recommend that those farmworkers be compensated fairly for their losses and that public funds be made available for that purpose.?As leading opponents to Governor Jerry Brown?s proposal to build massive tunnels to divert the Sacramento River, the groups emphasized the cost savings to Californians represented by retiring these toxic lands.??Spending one billion dollars to take these selenium-laced, unsustainable lands out of production and cutting the water rights that go with them saves Californians water money,? said Scow of Food & Water Watch. ?Retiring these west side lands makes a lot more sense than spending $67 billion to build Governor Brown?s outdated tunnels to support corporate agribusiness.? ??Read the EcoNorthwest Report####?The?California Water Impact Network?(C-WIN, online at?www.c-win.org) promotes the just and environmentally sustainable use of California's water, including instream flows and groundwater reserves, through research, planning, media outreach, and litigation.?www.c-win.org?Restore the Delta?is a 20,000-member grassroots organization committed to making the?Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta fishable, swimmable, drinkable, and farmable to?benefit all of California. Restore the Delta's mission is to save and restore the?San Francisco Bay-Delta estuary for our children and future generations.?www.restorethedelta.org?Food & Water Watch?works to ensure the food and water we consume is safe, accessible and sustainable. So we can all enjoy and trust in what we eat and drink, we help people take charge of where their food comes from, keep clean, affordable, public tap water flowing freely to our homes, protect the environmental quality of oceans, force government to do its job protecting citizens, and educate about the importance of keeping shared resources under public control.?www.foodandwaterwatch.org? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jul 15 06:59:34 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 13:59:34 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Administration Issues Veto Threat on Valadao/Nunes Bill (Greenwire: "Obama Threatens Veto of House Water Bill, " AND Statement of Policy (SAP) from the Administration In-Reply-To: <087f01d0be9d$66192050$324b60f0$@erols.com> References: <087f01d0be9d$66192050$324b60f0$@erols.com> Message-ID: <1851834082.2607108.1436968774796.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> The House Rules Committee met today at 3:00 pm to consider the Valadao/Nunes bill.? In advance of the Committee meeting, the Administration issued a critical Statement of Policy (SAP) on the bill in which a veto is threatened.? According to the SAP: *????????? ??it fails to address critical elements of California's complex water challenges and will, if enacted, impede an effective and timely response to the continuing drought while providing no additional water to hard hit communities.? ?*????????? ?Like similar legislation in the last Congress, H.R. 2898 was developed with little input from the public, the Administration, or key stakeholders affected by the drought.?*????????? ??H.R. 2898 dictates operational decisions and imposes a new legal standard which could actually limit water supplies by creating new and confusing conflicts with existing laws, adding an unnecessary layer of complexity to Federal and State cooperation.?*????????? ??contrary to current and past Federal reclamation law that defers to State water law, the bill would preempt California water law.?*????????? ?Much of the bill contains provisions that have little connection to the ongoing drought.? E&E Daily (Greenwire) DROUGHT: Obama threatens veto of House water bill Debra Kahn, E&E reporterPublished: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 President Obama today threatened to veto a Republican bill dealing with California's historic drought, saying it would undermine other federal and state efforts.The bill, H.R. 2898, by Rep. David Valadao (R-Calif.), is before the House Rules Committee today to set the terms for floor debate. The measure would loosen environmental restrictions on how much water can be pumped from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Valley Delta to parched agricultural communities in the Central Valley and municipalities farther south.It would also ease the way for new water storage projects across the West, requiring the federal government to finish studies on certain projects that have been discussed for years, and streamlining review and permitting processes for future projects.It would also repeal the San Joaquin River Restoration Settlement Act, which aims to restore a stretch of the state's second-largest river and its salmon runs. Republican lawmakers argue it's a poor use of limited funds during a drought emergency and times of tightening federal budgets.The House Natural Resources Committee approved the measure on a near-party-line vote last week, with Rep. Jim Costa, who represents a hard-hit swath of the Central Valley, the lone Democrat supporting the measure (E&E Daily, July 13). House passage is all but certain; the question is how many of its provisions will make it into a Senate version being developed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.).The administration objected to the bill's potential effects on water deliveries, endangered species, river restoration projects, commercial and tribal fisheries, and plans to build new water storage projects. Obama opposed a similar House bill last year, as well (Greenwire, Feb. 5, 2014)."Like similar legislation in the last Congress, H.R. 2898 was developed with little input from the public, the Administration, or key stakeholders affected by the drought," the White House said. "The urgency and seriousness of the California drought requires a balanced and flexible approach that promotes water reliability and ecosystem restoration."The administration cited its work with state agencies to improve coordination of water operations, as well as more than $300 million in spending on farmers, rural communities and wildfire management. "Unfortunately, H.R. 2898 would undermine these efforts and the progress that has been made," the White House said.Twitter: @debra_kahn Email: dkahn at eenews.net ??EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENTOFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGETWASHINGTON, D.C. 20503 ?July 14, 2015 (House Rules) STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICYH.R. 2898 Western Water and American Food Security Act of 2015(Rep. Valadao, R-CA, and 26 cosponsors) ?The Administration strongly opposes H.R. 2898, the Western Water and American Food Security Act of 2015, because it fails to address critical elements of California's complex water challenges and will, if enacted, impede an effective and timely response to the continuing drought while providing no additional water to hard hit communities. Like similar legislation in the last Congress, H.R. 2898 was developed with little input from the public, the Administration, or key stakeholders affected by the drought. The urgency and seriousness of the California drought requires a balanced and flexible approach that promotes water reliability and ecosystem restoration. ?Specifically, H.R. 2898 dictates operational decisions and imposes a new legal standard which could actually limit water supplies by creating new and confusing conflicts with existing laws, adding an unnecessary layer of complexity to Federal and State cooperation. This additional standard could slow decision-making, generate significant litigation, and limit real-time operational flexibility critical to maximizing water delivery. And, contrary to current and past Federal reclamation law that defers to State water law, the bill would preempt California water law. ?In addition, H.R. 2898 directs specific operations inconsistent with the Endangered Species Act (ESA), thereby resulting in conditions that could be detrimental to the Delta fish and other species listed under Federal and State endangered species laws. ?The Administration strongly supports efforts to help alleviate the effects of drought in the West; however, the Administration is concerned with section 401, which establishes deadlines for completing feasibility studies for certain water storage projects. The provision is unnecessary and the dates provided in the bill could prevent the participation of non-Federal partners in certain studies and may inhibit the Administration's ability to consider a full range of options for addressing these issues. In addition, financial penalties levied upon the Bureau of Reclamation under section 403 for not meeting these deadlines would only undermine the Department of the Interior's ability to help address the effects of drought in the West. ?Much of the bill contains provisions that have little connection to the ongoing drought. The bill includes language constraining the Administration's ability to protect the commercial and tribal fishery on the Trinity and Klamath Rivers, which will have impacts not just in California, but throughout the west coast. The bill would also repeal the San Joaquin River Settlement Agreement, which the Congress enacted to resolve 18 years of contentious litigation. Full repeal of the settlement agreement would likely result in the resumption of costly litigation, creating an uncertain future for river restoration and water delivery operations for water users on the San Joaquin River. Californians are facing significant drought-related challenges. This is why the Administration has directed Federal agencies to work with state and local officials in real-time to maximize limited water supplies, prioritize public health and safety, meet state water quality requirements, and ensure a balanced approach to providing for the water needs of people, agriculture, businesses, power, imperiled species and the environment. ?Consistent with the 2015 Interagency Drought Strategy, the Administration and Federal agencies have partnered with state agencies in California to improve coordination of water operations in the state. In June, the Administration announced new actions and investments of more than $110 million to support workers, farmers, and rural communities suffering from drought and to combat wildfires. This builds on the more than $190 million that agencies across the Federal government have invested to support drought-stricken communities so far this year. Unfortunately, H.R. 2898 would undermine these efforts and the progress that has been made. ?For these reasons, if the President were presented with H.R. 2898, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill. ?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jul 15 15:09:00 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 22:09:00 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Open House/Scoping Meetings Scheduled on Long-Term Plan for Protecting Adult Salmon in the Lower In-Reply-To: <8beb13e2ede84c9d85828166e7c77305@usbr.gov> References: <8beb13e2ede84c9d85828166e7c77305@usbr.gov> Message-ID: <515368365.2911407.1436998140493.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Tuesday, July 14, 2015 3:25 PM, Fernando Ponce wrote: Open House/Scoping Meetings Scheduled on Long-Term Plan for Protecting Adult Salmon in the LowerMid-Pacific Region Sacramento, Calif.MP-15-111Media Contact: Erin Curtis, 916-978-5100, eccurtis at usbr.govFor Release On: July 14, 2015Open House/Scoping Meetings Scheduled on Long-Term Plan for Protecting Adult Salmon in the Lower Klamath RiverSHASTA LAKE, Calif. - The Bureau of Reclamation has scheduled four open house/public scoping meetings to begin preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement to evaluate the effects of the Long-Term Plan for the Protection of Adult Salmon in the Lower Klamath River. The lower Klamath River is located in Humboldt and Del Norte counties, Calif.The purpose of the scoping meetings is to solicit early input from the public regarding the development of alternatives to be evaluated and their potential environmental impacts. The scoping meetings will be held in:Arcata, Calif.: Wednesday, Aug. 5, 5:30 to 7 p.m., Red Roof Inn, 4975 Valley West Blvd.Weaverville, Calif.: Thursday, Aug. 6, 5:30 to 7 p.m., Trinity County Library, 351 Main StreetKlamath Falls, Ore.: Tuesday, Aug. 11, 5:30 to 7 p.m., Shilo Inn, 2500 Almond StreetSacramento, Calif.: Wednesday, Aug. 12, 5:30 to 7 p.m., Cafeteria Conf. Rooms C-1001&1002, 2800 Cottage WayThe open house will start at 5:30 p.m. At 6 p.m., there will be a brief presentation. The open house will resume after the presentation and continue until 7 p.m.Written comments will be accepted at the scoping meetings or may be mailed to Paul Zedonis, Bureau of Reclamation, Northern California Area Office, 16349 Shasta Dam Blvd., Shasta Lake, CA 96019 or emailed to sha-slo-klamath-LTP at usbr.gov. Written comments must be received by close of business Thursday, Aug. 20, 2015. For more information, please contact Zedonis at 530-275-1554 (TTY 800-877-8339).To request special assistance to attend an open house/scoping meeting, please contact Zedonis at the number listed above at least five days prior to the open house/scoping meeting.Information regarding the draft Long-Term Plan is available at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/ncao/docs/long-term_plan_protect_lower_klamath_04-2015.pdf.# # #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 Wed Jul 15 15:14:37 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 22:14:37 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Open House/Scoping Meetings Scheduled on Long-Term Plan for Protecting Adult Salmon in the Lower In-Reply-To: <515368365.2911407.1436998140493.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <515368365.2911407.1436998140493.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1928378317.2914642.1436998477069.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> The link in the press release didn't work, but this one takes you to an April draft. ?http://www.usbr.gov/mp/kbao/docs/long-term_plan_protect_lower_klamath_04-2015.pdf A Notice of?Intent was filed in the federal register at ?Federal Register, Volume 80 Issue 134 (Tuesday, July 14, 2015) | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | Federal Register, Volume 80 Issue 134 (Tuesday, July 14, 2015)[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 134 (Tuesday, July 14, 2015)][Notices][Pages 41061-41062]From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov][FR Doc No: 2015-17208]-----------------------------------------------------------------------DE... | | | | View on www.gpo.gov | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | ?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 Wednesday, July 15, 2015 3:09 PM, Tom Stokely wrote: On Tuesday, July 14, 2015 3:25 PM, Fernando Ponce wrote: Open House/Scoping Meetings Scheduled on Long-Term Plan for Protecting Adult Salmon in the LowerMid-Pacific Region Sacramento, Calif.MP-15-111Media Contact: Erin Curtis, 916-978-5100, eccurtis at usbr.govFor Release On: July 14, 2015Open House/Scoping Meetings Scheduled on Long-Term Plan for Protecting Adult Salmon in the Lower Klamath RiverSHASTA LAKE, Calif. - The Bureau of Reclamation has scheduled four open house/public scoping meetings to begin preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement to evaluate the effects of the Long-Term Plan for the Protection of Adult Salmon in the Lower Klamath River. The lower Klamath River is located in Humboldt and Del Norte counties, Calif.The purpose of the scoping meetings is to solicit early input from the public regarding the development of alternatives to be evaluated and their potential environmental impacts. The scoping meetings will be held in:Arcata, Calif.: Wednesday, Aug. 5, 5:30 to 7 p.m., Red Roof Inn, 4975 Valley West Blvd.Weaverville, Calif.: Thursday, Aug. 6, 5:30 to 7 p.m., Trinity County Library, 351 Main StreetKlamath Falls, Ore.: Tuesday, Aug. 11, 5:30 to 7 p.m., Shilo Inn, 2500 Almond StreetSacramento, Calif.: Wednesday, Aug. 12, 5:30 to 7 p.m., Cafeteria Conf. Rooms C-1001&1002, 2800 Cottage WayThe open house will start at 5:30 p.m. At 6 p.m., there will be a brief presentation. The open house will resume after the presentation and continue until 7 p.m.Written comments will be accepted at the scoping meetings or may be mailed to Paul Zedonis, Bureau of Reclamation, Northern California Area Office, 16349 Shasta Dam Blvd., Shasta Lake, CA 96019 or emailed to sha-slo-klamath-LTP at usbr.gov. Written comments must be received by close of business Thursday, Aug. 20, 2015. For more information, please contact Zedonis at 530-275-1554 (TTY 800-877-8339).To request special assistance to attend an open house/scoping meeting, please contact Zedonis at the number listed above at least five days prior to the open house/scoping meeting.Information regarding the draft Long-Term Plan is available at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/ncao/docs/long-term_plan_protect_lower_klamath_04-2015.pdf.# # #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 _______________________________________________ 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 Jul 17 14:39:08 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 21:39:08 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity County Property Owner Issued Draft Cease and Desist Order for Unauthorized Water Diversion, Bulk Water Delivery Message-ID: <1922210116.1130199.1437169148045.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://mavensnotebook.com/2015/07/17/this-just-in-trinity-county-property-owner-issued-draft-cease-and-desist-order-for-unauthorized-water-diversion-bulk-water-delivery/ This just in ? Trinity County Property Owner Issued Draft Cease and Desist Order for Unauthorized Water Diversion, Bulk Water Delivery ?July 17, 2015 ?Maven ?Other newsFrom the State Water Resources Control Board: The State Water Resources Control Board today issued a draft Cease and Desist Order against a Trinity County property owner to halt illegal diversion and bulk delivery of water. This action follows a joint investigation with the Department of Fish and Wildlife.Since 2008, Mark Hodgetts has operated a water filling station on one of his two parcels next to Hayfork Creek. It?s alleged that Hodgetts constructed a pump house and overhead fill structure to fill trucks with water diverted from the creek in order to make bulk water deliveries to various locations throughout the area. Since the filling station has the ability to draw water from either Hayfork Creek or the municipal supply for Trinity County Waterworks District, there is an ongoing threat of unauthorized diversion and use of water from Hayfork Creek.Hodgetts has not filed a Statement of Water Diversion and Use with the Division of Water Rights for his riparian water use, nor does he possess a permit to divert and transport water for use off of the property. Water diverted under a riparian right can only be used on the parcel that is next to the source. It is alleged that Hodgetts has violated and/or threatens to violate the prohibitions of Water Code section 1052 by diverting water for the purpose of bulk water sales and use on property not riparian to the source.The draft Cease and Desist Order requires Hodgetts to immediately stop his illegal use of water from Hayfork Creek, as well as to immediately disconnect the overhead fill station. If Hodgetts does not comply with these and other provisions of the Cease and Desist Order, he will be subject to penalties of up to $10,000 for each day he is violating the order, and may be referred to the Office of the Attorney General for further action.For more on Hodgetts? draft Cease and Desist Order, see the documents on the Division of Water Rights?webpage. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From magallagher at usbr.gov Thu Jul 16 14:52:31 2015 From: magallagher at usbr.gov (Gallagher, Michele) Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 14:52:31 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Start Up of 2015 Trinity River Channel Rehabilitation Activities Message-ID: Dear Trinity River enthusiasts, Please find the notice below, submitted for publication, regarding the start of construction activities for Trinity River 2015 channel rehabilitation projects. Please contact Michele Gallagher, TRRP Project Coordination Specialist, for assistance with any questions you may have. Thank you, Michele Gallagher Project Coordination Specialist Trinity River Restoration Program Tel (530) 623-1804 Fax (530)623-5944 magallagher at usbr.gov [image: Inline image 1] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image.png Type: image/png Size: 126850 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Start Up_Public Notice_Limekiln and Upper Douglas City 2015.doc Type: application/msword Size: 52736 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Fri Jul 17 10:57:02 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 17:57:02 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary update JWeek 28 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C54E1AC@057-SN2MPN1-042.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hi All, Please see attachment for the Jweek 28 (July 9-15) Trinity River trapping summary update. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW28.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 60864 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW28.xlsx URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Fri Jul 17 11:09:41 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 11:09:41 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Groups Demand More Time for Review of Jerry Brown's Delta Tunnels Plan In-Reply-To: <07.02.55240.3AD29A55@twitter.com> References: <07.02.55240.3AD29A55@twitter.com> Message-ID: <02D5C692-0F8B-49DA-936C-F8D7633FE204@fishsniffer.com> http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/07/17/18775054.php http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/17/1403018/-Public-Demands-More-Time-for-Review-of-Jerry-Brown-s-Delta-Tunnels-Plan The letter concluded, "In sum, the current comment period is inadequate because it fails to provide members of the public with adequate time for review. The proposed project is the most controversial public works project in California history. It is extremely complicated and the subject of voluminous analysis in the form of project justification and advocacy." 7_16_15_comment_time_ext_req.pdf download PDF (395.2 KB) Groups Demand More Time for Review of Jerry Brown's Delta Tunnels Plan by Dan Bacher In their zeal to rush the controversial Delta tunnels plan through, the Brown and Obama administrations are doing everything they can to limit and suppress public comment on the revised EIS/EIS for the plan, one that is potentially the most environmentally destructive public works project in California history. The California Department of Water Resources and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation imposed a public comment period of only 45 business days last Thursday when they announced the release of the revised documents. Comments are due by close of business Monday, August 31, 2015. On July 16, a broad coalition of environmental and community organizations and California Indian Tribes demanded more time for the public to consider the controversial - and widely-criticized - public works project. In a letter sent to the Department of the Interior, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, California Natural Resources Agency, and the California Department of Water Resources, the groups and Tribes decried the accelerated 45-day public comment period and seeks an extension to a standard 120-day comment period that will close on November 14, 2015. The signees to the letter are Conner Everts, the Co-Facilitator for the Environmental Water Caucus (EWC); Robert Wright, Senior Counsel for Friends of the River (FOR); Carolee Krieger, Executive Director of the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN); Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA); and Barbara Barrigan-Parilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta (RTD). ?The short public comment period looks like a deliberate effort to make it virtually impossible for members of the public to be able to comprehend and respond with meaningful comments on the new NEPA and CEQP document," the groups said in the letter. "The BDCP agencies took almost one year to prepare the new documents and there is no public need for haste in providing too short a comment period.? The groups emphasized that despite more than 18,000 public comments on the original draft EIR/EIS, and despite repeated requests since December 2013, officials have refused to post any of the detailed comments by organizations or public agencies on the BDCP website. ?This deliberate concealment of independent and contrary views and information from the public also now makes it more difficult for the public to prepare meaningful comments on the new NEPA and CEQA documents. Moreover, comments such as those from the EPA and Army Corps constitute critical new information that would be the foundation for many informed comments at this time," the letter explained. The letter also noted that the Department of Water Resources has declared it will not produce technical documents requested by public interest groups until August 28, 2015, just three days before the 45- day comment period ends. The letter concluded, "In sum, the current comment period is inadequate because it fails to provide members of the public with adequate time for review. The proposed project is the most controversial public works project in California history. It is extremely complicated and the subject of voluminous analysis in the form of project justification and advocacy. The subject is critically important to every Californian. We therefore request the additional time necessary to attempt to carefully scrutinize the subject NEPA and CEQA documents and then provide meaningful input by way of public comment." You can read the letter here: http://www.friendsoftheriver.org/site/DocServer/7_16_15_comment_time_ext_req.pdf?docID=10261 The agencies recently divided the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) to build the twin tunnels into two new components - California Water Fix, the conveyance part of the project and California Eco Restore, the habitat "restoration" component. However, tunnels critics note that the "revised" project is essentially the same water grab for corporate agribusiness, developers and Southern California water agencies as the old one. The tunnels will hasten the extinction of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River Chinook salmon, Delta and longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other fish species, as well as imperil the salmon and steelhead populations of the Trinity and Klamath rivers, yet they will not provide any new water, according to Delta advocates. "Virtually every promulgated statute and regulatory standard protecting the Delta has been routinely ignored and violated over the last three decades and, consequently, any assurances and promises by Delta tunnel proponents are worthless," said Bill Jennings, CSPA Executive Director. "California has been in a drought cycle more than forty percent of the time over the last hundred years and the tunnels will not provide a single additional drop of water. They will, however, further degrade Delta water quality and exacerbate conditions that have brought fisheries to the brink of extinction.? The reason for the state and federal governments' continued cheerleading for the Delta tunnels plan, in spite of the project having no basis whatsoever in science, logic or economics, is due to the biggest issue we face in water and other environmental politics in California and the nation today - the capture of the regulatory apparatus by the regulated. Corporate agribusiness, developers, Southern California water agencies, and other corporate interests are working hand in hand with the agencies to build the tunnels. This capture of the regulatory apparatus by the regulated was highlighted in April when Delta advocates slammed Brown for breaking his campaign promise that bond money wouldn't be used to mitigate the environmental damage caused by the tunnels ? a $25 billion project designed to export Sacramento River water to agribusiness interests, Southern California water agencies, and oil companies conducting fracking and steam injection operations. The admission by the Brown administration that it could use money from Proposition 1, the water bond, to pay for "habitat mitigation" linked to the construction and operation of the massive delta tunnels is no surprise, especially when you consider the Big Money interests that dumped $21,820,691 into the campaign. (http://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/archives/2015/04/29/why-governor-brown-broke-his-prop-1-promise-big-money-interests-dumped-218-million-into-the-prop-1-campaign ) The contributors are a who?s who of Big Money interests in California, including corporate agribusiness groups, billionaires, timber barons, Big Oil, the tobacco industry, and the California Chamber of Commerce. There is no doubt that these wealthy corporate interests are expecting a big return for their "investment" in California?s play-to-pay politic system, including the construction of the twin tunnels and new dams. The Winnemem Wintu Tribe, other tribal representatives and their allies also challenged the capture of the regulatory apparatus by corporate interests on June 29 and 30 when they rallied, chanted, sang and waved signs on the sidewalk in front of Westin Hotel outside the Second California Water Summit in Sacramento. They convened to protest Governor Jerry Brown?s efforts to exclude California Tribes, environmentalists, fishermen and other key stakeholders in this public meeting about massive state water infrastructure projects proposed under Proposition 1, the $7.5 billion water bond. ?This is a summit that is meant to help these people peddle Brown?s projects that will benefit his buddies: agribusiness and water sellers in Southern California,? said Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe. ?They are not interested in what?s best for the people of California and their children.? Members of the Concow Maidu, Miwok, Hoopa Valley, Pomo, Wailaki and other tribes and Native Hawaiian groups joined with local activists as they shouted, ?Water is sacred, water is life, protect the salmon, protect water rights.? For more information, go to: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/07/04/18774455.php Add Your Comments -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 7_16_15_comment_time_ext_req.pdf_600_.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 153589 bytes Desc: not available URL: From twashburn at usbr.gov Mon Jul 20 09:39:35 2015 From: twashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy) Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2015 09:39:35 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Trinity Message-ID: Beginning on July 22, 2015, please operate Carr Power Plant at approximately 3,000 af daily. Maximize Trinity Power Plant and augment as needed with Trinity outlet valves 1 & 2. Use Spring Creek Power Plant to regulate Whiskeytown. Comment: Sacramento Temp Ops Issued by: Thuy Washburn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jul 21 07:43:56 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 14:43:56 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Editorial: Brown's Delta tunnel plan benefits plummet; give it up Message-ID: <1608325908.1602702.1437489836253.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Editorial: Brown's Delta tunnel plan benefits plummet; give it up | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | Editorial: Brown's Delta tunnel plan benefits plummet; g...It would be crazy for California to spend $15 billion for a plan that promises no additional water nor even a steady supply of water to the farmers and Southern Cal... | | | | View on www.redding.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | Editorial: Brown's Delta tunnel plan benefits plummet; give it up Gov. Jerry Brown?s Delta twin-tunnel water grab is back this month in a new iteration, adding another 8,000 pages of environmental impacts to the 40,000 previously released. But here?s all you really need to know: Although the previous cost estimate of $17 billion has dropped to $15 billion, the latest proposal seems even further from penciling out in a cost-benefit analysis.Now one of the tunnels? staunchest supporters, Big Ag, is getting antsy.The project was ill-conceived from the outset, and Brown needs to own up. If he wants a legacy of providing for California?s future water needs, he should focus on restoring the Delta levees, giving farmers incentives to install drip irrigation, encouraging more recycling and ? if he cares about improving the Delta?s health as an ecosystem, which appears more doubtful with each plan revision ? he should send more, not less, water through the estuary.It would be crazy for California to spend $15 billion ? and perhaps double or triple that, given the typical cost overruns for a major digging project ? for a plan that promises no additional water nor even a steady supply of water to the farmers and Southern California cities clamoring for it.Credible water experts say the only way the project makes financial sense is to get the two 35-mile tunnels built ? and then try to persuade the state to pump far more water out of the Sacramento River than is healthy for the Delta. After all, why build two huge tunnels if you?re not going to use them?In Congress, House Republicans last week passed legislation aimed at removing the lid on pumping. Democrats in the Senate are working to block it, but Central Valley and Southern California lawmakers are making it clear that they will happily trash federal and state environmental protections to get more water.Remember, the once-mighty San Joaquin River now runs dry for part of the year thanks to pumping, and Central Valley farmers have nearly pumped their groundwater supplies dry. From their perspective, why should the Sacramento River be any different?The biggest takeaway from the new environmental report is that the $7 billion earlier commitment to conservation is officially toast. At least proponents are up front about it, renaming Bay Delta Conservation Plan to the California Water Fix. All that?s left is a $300 million habitat restoration project.The story behind the story is that twin-tunnel supporters only included the bigger restoration project because they thought it would help win guarantees of more water. But federal regulators would not sign off on the guarantees because there were insufficient assurances that the restoration project would work.So much for the governor?s commitment to restore the health of the Delta, once promised as a coequal goal to reliable water supplies.Brown has wasted six years trying to sell California residents on his mega-tunnels. Meanwhile, too much water continues to be drained from the Delta to supply the south, and the health of the estuary continues to deteriorate. State biologists in April acknowledged that the Delta smelt, the canary in the coal mine for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, is all but extinct, and salmon runs are diminishing at alarming rates.Furthermore, there is no legal requirement for ratepayers to vote on raising rates to pay for the tunnels, and Brown has not committed to a statewide public vote.The state can?t afford this. Supposed beneficiaries such as agriculture are right to take a magnifying glass to this latest plan. Good luck finding the payback for the investment they will have to make.This editorial originally appeared in the San Jose Mercury News. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jul 21 10:05:19 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 17:05:19 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] C-WIN Responds to Mike Wade's Comment on ECONorthwest Report Message-ID: <1844892691.1717454.1437498319304.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> https://www.c-win.org/content/c-win-responds-mike-wades-comment-econorthwest-report-estimated-costs-retire-drainage-impair C-WIN Responds to Mike Wade's Comment on ECONorthwest Report: Estimated Costs to Retire Drainage Impaired Lands in the San Luis Unit Response to Mike Wade on Retirement of Drainage Impaired Lands San Luis Unit of the CVPBy Tom Stokely, California Water Impact NetworkMike Wade seriously mischaracterizes reality in his?comments?on the recent?ECONorthwest report?on the cost of retiring drainage impaired lands in the Westlands Water District. It is apparent that Mr. Wade is not well informed about the status of drainage impaired lands in the San Luis Unit of the Central Valley Project, including the Westlands, Panoche, Pacheco, and San Luis water districts.??The lands in question are indeed ?distressed.? The Bureau of Reclamation is under court order pursuant to the San Luis Act of 1960 to provide ?drainage service? to approximately 380,000 acres of ?Westside? land characterized by shallow groundwater and high levels of salts, boron, and selenium.? The salt and boron inhibit plant growth and the selenium harms fish and wildlife.??The Bureau of Reclamation published an extensive Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision evaluating options aimed at solving the drainage problem.? They selected an alternative that would attempt to use an untested Rube Goldberg process of evaporation ponds, digesters, reuse areas, and reverse osmosis to remove the contaminants in the drain water.? Unfortunately, the $2.7 billion plan is not cost-effective, even by Reclamation?s economic analysis. It would require a substantial increase in subsidies and a Congressional reauthorization to spend another $2+ billion.? In addition, two small pilot treatment plants have failed to work, with the most recent one shutting down in 2014 after only one month of operation.? This plan, in short, cannot be sanctioned in good faith; if sanctioned, it will be impossible to implement.?Even Reclamation?s economic analysis showed that retirement of all of the drainage impaired lands in Westlands was the most cost-effective solution, providing a net economic benefit of $3.64 million/year for 50 years.? The selected alternative retired less land and had a net loss of $10.15 million/year.? According to the US Geological Survey,??Land retirement is a key strategy to reduce drainage because it can effectively reduce drainage to zero if all drainage-impaired lands are retired.??Unfortunately, the Bureau of Reclamation has brokered a settlement to the long-standing litigation that would not retire any additional land, forgives hundreds of millions of dollars in interest-free debt, provides a permanent water contract, waives payments, eliminates acreage limitations, increase subsidies, and allows unbridled discharge of trillions of gallons of highly contaminated agricultural pollution, and allows drainage-impaired lands to accumulate salt to the point that nothing grows, with the barren soil becoming an air quality health hazard.? Ultimately, Westlands will be able to market the water bought by the taxpayers to cities at great profit while leaving behind a toxic legacy.??The ECONorthWest report shows that not only is land retirement of these ?distressed? agricultural lands at $750 million the most effective solution, but it points out that 455,000 acre-feet of Central Valley Project contract water could be eliminated by purchase of land and water rights, thereby reducing demand on an overallocated water supply.?Regarding Mr. Wade?s comment that the ECONorthwest report describes the cost to ?stop farming,? that?s not true. The report describes the cost of not irrigating the lands. The lands could still be used for dry land farming, grazing and solar energy development.?Regarding the cost of the land, there are unquestionably other agricultural lands in the San Joaquin Valley region that would obtain a better selling price than the estimates by ECONorthWest.? However, the San Luis Unit of the CVP has an unreliable water supply contract (they received zero CVP water in 2014 and 2015), and they are known to have drainage problems that inhibit crop growth and pose wildlife hazards.? Combined with dwindling groundwater and the possibility of expensive remediation to keep the land in production, these lands would clearly have a low value compared to other areas with more secure water supplies and without drainage problems.?Regarding the solutions that Mr. Wade says have been implemented in recent years, the Grasslands Bypass Project is being allowed to dump the pollution from the Grasslands area into Mud Slough and the San Joaquin River for 20 years, redirecting the impacts downstream, ultimately to the Bay-Delta estuary.? We always hear about salt problems at the Delta pumps, but what isn?t made clear is the fact that the Grasslands Bypass Project is the source of 36% of the salt load in the San Joaquin River and south Delta.? Yes, this large-scale pollution has been sanctioned and funded by various agencies, but that doesn?t mean it?s an appropriate policy.? In recent years, discharges have been reduced, but they closely correspond to land retirement and reduced water deliveries due to drought.? ?Giving Westlands more water from something like Governor Brown?s Twin Tunnels or the House of Representatives? drought water bill will once again increase toxic discharges.??We therefore ask that the Obama Administration reject the settlement brokered by the Bureau of Reclamation.?? Clearly, buying out these ?distressed? lands and associated water contracts is the best buy for the taxpayers and is unmistakably the best thing for the environment and other California water users. ??Mr. Wade has made a blatant, if unsuccessful, attempt to hide that truth.??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 njharris30 at gmail.com Tue Jul 21 11:38:14 2015 From: njharris30 at gmail.com (Nathan Harris) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 11:38:14 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Willow Creek trap in-season update - July 21st Message-ID: Please see the attached documents for weekly catch data from the Willow Creek traps. Nathan Harris Biologist Yurok Tribal Fisheries Program Trinity River Division 3723 N. Hwy 96 Willow Creek, CA 95573 Office: (530) 629-3333 x1703 Cell: (707) 616-8742 njharris30 at gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: trapping update summary 7.21.15.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 14480 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Willow Creek RST raw catch update 2015.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 32967 bytes Desc: not available URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Tue Jul 21 16:00:54 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 16:00:54 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Article submission: Jerry Brown gushes about "fighting climate change" at Vatican as he fracks California In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/21/1404267/-Jerry-Brown-s-Real-Environmental-Record-Exposed Jerry Brown gushes about "fighting climate change" at Vatican as he fracks California by Dan Bacher In yet another carefully choreographed photo opportunity to tout his "green" image, Governor Jerry Brown today urged the world's mayors to "light a fire" and "join California in the fight against climate change." Brown was speaking on the first day of the Vatican's symposium on climate change and modern slavery hosted by the Pontifical Academies of Sciences and Social Sciences. "We have fierce opposition and blind inertia," Brown claimed. "And that opposition is well-financed, hundreds of millions of dollars going into propaganda, into falsifying the scientific record, bamboozling people of every country. We have to fight that propaganda and overcome the inertia and the tremendous opposition." "Mayors, you are at the bottom of this power chain and you have got to light a fire. We have to join together. We have to make a change. It's up to us to make it happen," Brown said. The Vatican's symposium aims to drive awareness, dialogue and action at the local level on climate change and modern slavery ? two interconnected issues highlighted in the pope's recent encyclical, according to an announcement from the Governor's Office. Pope Francis will address the symposium later today and Governor Brown will address the symposium again during tomorrow's program. You can expect the mainstream media and some corporate "environmental" groups to gush over Brown's grandstanding at the Vatican without little critical analysis of the Governor's actual environmental record, a toxic legacy that I have documented in article after article. Fortunately, faith leaders from Brown?s home state and environmental experts introduced a critical note to the narrative about Brown's visit to the Vatican when they commended the Pope for his leadership and urged him to take this opportunity to call on Brown and other leaders to ban fracking and take every possible measure to protect our climate. ?We in the faith community applaud Pope Francis for highlighting the moral imperative of addressing climate change and protecting creation, and appreciate that he is bringing leaders like Jerry Brown to the Vatican to highlight the issue,? said Rev. Ambrose Carroll, a senior pastor at the Church by the Side of Road in Oakland, Calif., and a member of Faith Against Fracking. ?We hope he will be able to get Governor Brown to see the indisputable incompatibility of his attempts to fight climate change while enabling the worst climate polluters to continue fracking.? ?As Pope Francis meets with leaders from around the world on climate change, we applaud his efforts to make environmental stewardship a priority of the Catholic community and commend his willingness to speak up about our moral imperative to protect the planet,? said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch and Food & Water Europe. ?Among the Pope's guests this week is California Gov. Jerry Brown, an American politician who, despite having done much to further the global conversation on climate change, continues to put his own state's environmental and public health at risk by supporting the expansion of fracking and other extreme oil drilling. We urge Pope Francis to send a clear message to Brown and other elected officials that fracking?in California, in Europe, or elsewhere?has no place in his vision for a greener planet," emphasized Hauter. Latino communities in California, who disproportionately live near fracking and other extreme oil drilling sites in the state, in a classic case of environmental injustice, on Monday sent a letter to Pope Francis asking him to intercede on their behalf and protect residents from fracking, according to Californians Against Fracking. (http://californiansagainstfracking.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Pope-Francis-Latino-Letter.pdf ) "As the defender of all that is moral and good, we ask that you intercede on our behalf due to the suffering we are facing as a result of Governor Brown?s support of these practices," the letter stated. "In our communities, the oil and gas industry is using dangerous extraction methods like fracking next to our schools and in our backyards, and it is contaminating our air and our water, and making us sick. Because of fracking, our communities are suffering." The group said more than 60,000 children in California attend school within one mile of a stimulated oil well ? of which 60 percent are Latino. Statewide, Latino students are nearly 19 percent more likely than non-Latino students to attend a school within a mile and a half of a stimulated well. Last week, a Kern County family sued Governor Brown claiming that the new fracking regulations do not protect the health of Latino public school children. (http://www.crpe-ej.org/crpe/index.php/component/content/article/360-romo-v-brown ) In his recent encyclical on climate change Pope Francis said, ?Many of those who possess more resources and economic or political power seem mostly to be concerned with masking the problems or concealing their symptoms, simply making efforts to reduce some of the negative impacts of climate change. However, many of these symptoms indicate that such effects will continue to worsen if we continue with the current models of production and consumption?We know that technology based on the use of highly polluting fossil fuels ? especially coal, but also oil, and to a lesser degree, gas ? needs to be progressively replaced without delay.? )http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html) More than a dozen countries in Europe, including Italy, Germany and France. have banned or placed a moratorium on fracking. In the United States, a number of states including New York and Maryland have moved to halt the practice - but not Jerry Brown's California, supposedly a "green" state. Earlier this month, an independent study by the California Council on Science and Technology confirmed that fracking and other methods of oil development in the state are harmful to human health, air quality and the state?s vulnerable water supply. There is little doubt why Governor Brown is such a fervent backer of extreme oil extraction in California; the oil industry is one of the biggest and most faithful contributors to his campaigns. On September 20, 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill 4, an odious piece of legislation that creates the infrastructure for the expansion of fracking in California.'' Before Brown signed the bill, he had received millions in donations from Big Oil, according to Robert Gammon's East Bay Express article published on October 2, 2013. (http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/fracking-jerry-brown/Content?oid=3726533 ) "Before Jerry Brown signed legislation last month that promises to greatly expand fracking in California, the governor accepted at least $2.49 million in financial donations over the past several years from oil and natural gas interests, according to public records on file with the Secretary of State's Office and the California Fair Political Practices Commission. Of the total, $770,000 went to Brown's two Oakland charter schools ? the Oakland School for the Arts and the Oakland Military Institute. The other $1.72 million went to his statewide political campaigns for attorney general and governor, along with his Proposition 30 ballot-measure campaign last year," said Gammon. Jerry Brown's support of fracking is just one of the multitude of terrible environmental policies that he has embraced. Since I am the only reporter, that I am aware of, who has investigated the environmental record of Jerry Brown as a whole, I encourage other journalists also to investigate his real environmental record. His environmentally destructive policies include promoting carbon trading greenwashing; rushing the Bay Delta Conservation Plan to build the Delta tunnels; driving Delta smelt and salmon to the edge of extinction; campaigning for the Prop. 1 water grab; and forging ahead with the oil industry lobbyist-overseen Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative to create deeply-flawed "marine protected areas." For more information about Governor's real environmental record, go to: http://www.truth-out.org/speakout/item/30452-the-extinction-governor-rips-the-green-mask-off-his-tunnels-plan Governor Brown's Remarks The full text of the Governor's remarks is below: Thank you. I think I?ll take as my text ? if I may ? some words of Saint Paul to the Galatians, ?God is not mocked for whatsoever a man soweth that shall he also reap.? And what Saint Paul said in reference to God we can also say about God?s creation. We have heard what we?re doing to that creation, what a trillion tons of CO2 and other greenhouse gases will do. And that text that God is not mocked is not susceptible to compromise, to regrets. It?s inexorable, it?s absolutes. We have to respond and if we don?t, the world will suffer. We will all suffer. In fact, many people ? millions are suffering already. Now, to change the world from a fossil fuel based culture is not easy, but there are plenty of examples where it?s happening. So, I can bring you the example of California, which for many years has been taking on serious environmental challenges. California is now deriving 25 percent of its electricity from renewable sources and in that source we don?t count nuclear or hydro. Secondly, we have the most efficient buildings, because of our building regulations, in the entire country. As a result, California citizens have saved tens of billions of dollars in energy bills. The same is true for our appliance standards, the most efficient in the country. As far as automobile pollution, we have very strict tailpipe emissions standards. And as a result and because of some changes in Washington, those standards are now adopted as the national standard of America. And that source of pollution is going down, not fast enough but steadily. We also have 40 percent of the electric cars in the United States. But we?re not stopping there. We also have a commitment. And my commitment is to increase the renewable portfolio to 50 percent of the electricity consumed, 50 percent. And, at the same time, reduce petroleum in cars and trucks by 50 percent in the next 15 years. That?s quite a challenge, but it can be done. The California economy has steadily reduced its greenhouse gas emissions, particularly on a per capita basis, but its economy is growing over the last decade faster than the economy of the United States as a whole. So, there are ways that we can not mock creation or the laws of nature, but live within them. We have to get on the side of nature and not abuse it or go against it. Pope Francis spoke about the abuse of goods. And what our modern world has seen and has enjoyed is the good of petroleum. We are a petroleum culture. We got here by means of petroleum, on airplanes and cars. Our clothes, the food deliveries, it?s all based on petroleum. So, it?s not a bad, it?s a good. But it becomes a bad when used at the point that seven billion people now have over a billion cars with the coal plants, the oil and the gas. So, we have to make a transition because goods become bads when they are abused and go beyond a certain threshold. We know the problem. Yes, there are uncertainties, but we don?t even know how far we?ve gone or if we?ve gone over the edge. There are tipping points, feedback loops. This is not some linear set of problems that we can predict. It requires that we imagine down the road in the future and then react. But right in the middle of this problem we have fierce opposition and blind inertia. And that opposition is well-financed, hundreds of millions of dollars going into propaganda, into falsifying the scientific record, bamboozling people of every country. Television stations, political parties, think tanks, PhDs, university personnel, they form a group of people that is attempting to put a cloud of doubt and uncertainty over the clear science that you heard earlier this morning. So, we have to fight that propaganda and overcome the inertia and the tremendous opposition. Now, how are we going to do that? First of all, we are going to have to set a clear goal. And that goal is almost unimaginable. One-third of the oil that we know exists as reserves can never be taken out of the ground. Fifty percent of the gas can never be used and over 90 percent of the coal. Now, that is a revolution. That is going to take a call to arms. And if you look at our national leaders, we?re not going to get there. Mayors, you are at the bottom of this power chain and you?ve got to light a fire if I may use that metaphor ? in terms of climate change, it?s probably the wrong one. But we have to join together. It?s not going to happen. We?re not on the road to avoiding the catastrophes that climate change entails, so we have to make a change. This is a real conversion. Using the word transformation ? that?s a big word, I don?t like to use it. It?s very hard to transform. I once entered the Jesuit seminary and our goal was to become perfect, a life of perfection. I can tell you, it?s very hard. You don?t get perfect and at the end of the day you don?t feel very transformed. But in this case, we may not transform our being, but we are going to have to transform our use of the goods in the world, namely petroleum. And we can do it. I ask you to join with California and 19 other states and provinces to make a commitment to live within the no more than two degrees, to get us down to two tons per person. We can do that. By the way, the United States is over 20 tons per person. California, we?re at 12, so we?re a little better. But that?s because we have a lot of sun and we have a very benign climate. But we are suffering in the Southwest from drought and the ravages of climate change already. But keeping it under two is the goal. In Vietnam they only use one and a half tons per person. India is maybe two. So the developed world has put in most of the carbon and we?re going to have to take most of it out. It?s a big challenge. It?s not politics as usual. It?s not going to happen unless major changes happen. And for the Holy Father to issue that encyclical that?s a change. The role of nature, the interconnectedness of all beings, these are ideas that while implicit, have never been so clear as they have been made in this encyclical. So, let?s take some inspiration from the Holy Father. Let?s take inspiration from ourselves, but don?t be in any way confident or complacent. We have a big mountain to climb. We have very powerful opposition that, in at least my country, spends billions on trying to keep from office people such as yourselves and elect troglodytes and other deniers of the obvious science. So, that?s all I have to say. When I look at it ? I could quote an Italian, by the way, who said ? I shouldn?t quote him because he?s the founder of the Italian communist party. But he said, ?Pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will.? And if we really sense our collective power we can exercise the political will to reverse the trends we?re on and to turn a new chapter in human history and live in compatible ways with other beings, with ourselves, and protect the most vulnerable. And do the right thing. By the way, the church is not trying to become scientists. The pope isn?t a scientist, but he?s got scientists. And the Pontifical Academies have laid it out pretty clear, so it?s up to us to make it happen, the mayors and the governors. But I?m not counting on the presidents and I?m not counting on any Republican Congress in Washington. So, it?s up to you guys and you ladies. Thank you very much. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jul 22 11:54:08 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 18:54:08 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] East Bay Express: An Alternative to the Tunnels Message-ID: <1626462809.562364.1437591248091.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/an-alternative-to-the-tunnels/Content?oid=4422982 East Bay ExpressNEWS & OPINION???ECO WATCH An Alternative to the Tunnels? A new report shows that taking toxic cropland out of production in the San Joaquin Valley would be much cheaper than the governor's tunnels plan. By?Robert Gammon?@RobertGammonGovernor Jerry Brown is still pushing his plan to build two giant water tunnels underneath the fragile Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, despite the fact that his $15 billion proposal remains unpopular with California residents. Brown contends that the tunnels will provide a dependable water supply for farms in the San Joaquin Valley. But a new report released last week not only punches a hole in the governor's argument, it also offers an alternative solution that would be far cheaper than the tunnels plan.One of the main beneficiaries of the proposed tunnels would be the powerful Westlands Water District in the arid western San Joaquin Valley. The district represents almond and pistachio growers and other agribusinesses that cultivate thirsty crops in desert-like conditions. The district and the growers who control it have been a driving force behind the tunnels plan.However, one aspect of the proposal that doesn't get much press is the fact that a significant amount of cropland in the Westlands district has severe drainage problems and is contaminated with toxins, primarily selenium and boron. When growers irrigate the cropland, it results in toxic runoff that pollutes rivers, streams, and aquifers, and poisons wildlife. The tunnels, in other words, would likely deepen the ecological mess in the region by guaranteeing that more water from Northern California would be poured on hundreds of thousands of acres of toxic land.But a report published last week by an Oregon-based firm, ECONorthwest, offers a simple alternative: Take a total of 343,000 acres of this land (of which 298,000 is in Westlands Water District) out of crop production and return it to its natural state. The retirement of the land not only would solve a serious environmental problem, but also would save about 454,000 acre-feet of water a year. To put that in perspective, the city of Los Angeles uses about 587,000 acre-feet of water each year."[L]arge swaths of land, primarily in the San Joaquin Valley, are unsuitable for agriculture," the ECONorthwest report concludes. "The soils in these naturally dry areas have high levels of salts, selenium and boron, trace elements that ? when combined with irrigation water ? can poison crops if allowed to remain on lands without proper drainage. Related problems include contaminated waterways, increased toxic runoff into the Delta, and deformities in birds and fish."ECONorthwest is an independent economic analysis firm that was hired by three groups opposed to Governor Brown's tunnels plan (which is also known as the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, or BDCP): Food & Water Watch, California Water Impact Network, and Citizens Against Taxpayer Funding of the BDCP. ECONorthwest estimated that the total cost of buying and retiring the 343,000 acres would be about $750 million, although it could run as low as $540 million and as high as $1.03 billion.Saving 454,000 acre-feet of water a year would likely relieve the need to build the tunnels, which are projected to cost up to $67 billion, when counting interest payments on the bonds needed to pay for construction. "Spending one billion dollars to take these selenium-laced, unsustainable lands out of production and cutting the water rights that go with them saves Californians water and money," said Adam Scow, California director of Food & Water Watch, in a statement. "Retiring these west side lands makes a lot more sense than spending $67 billion to build Governor Brown's outdated tunnels to support corporate agribusiness."Taking the cropland out of production would require cooperation from the Obama administration, which has been in secret negotiations with Westlands over the district's debt to the federal government. Recent reports indicate that a proposed deal between the feds and Westlands would only retire about 100,000 acres, and in return, would forgive the district's $365 million debt to the federal government.Westlands is perhaps the most politically powerful water agency in the nation. And spending $750 million to $1 billion in taxpayer funds to take cropland out of production likely will not be popular, especially among Republicans. But retiring land is much cheaper than building two giant water tunnels.Although Westlands and other beneficiaries of the tunnels are supposed to pay for them, it's likely that they will not be able to afford to do so. As we noted in a 2014 cover story, some economic experts estimate that the costs to build the tunnels will be far higher than the financial benefits they will provide, and thus could force Westlands and the other beneficiaries into default (see "The Water Tunnel Boondoggle," 5/13/14). "The tunnels don't generate a water supply that's nearly as valuable as the costs," said Jeffrey Michael of the University of the Pacific, in an interview with the?Express?last year.Michael is one of the leading economic forecasters in the state. In 2012, he projected that the tunnels would result in $6 billion in total losses for Westlands and the other beneficiaries. Last week, he revised his projection to $8 billion in losses. And if Westlands and the other beneficiaries eventually default on paying for the tunnels, then taxpayers likely would have to pay the bill, which could reach $67 billion. With those numbers, spending $1 billion on retiring land not only makes financial sense, but it's also a win for the environment.?Contact?the author of this piece,?send?a letter to the editor,?like?us on Facebook, or?follow?us on Twitter.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at att.net Wed Jul 22 12:57:43 2015 From: kierassociates at att.net (Kier Associates) Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 12:57:43 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] East Bay Express: An Alternative to the Tunnels In-Reply-To: <1626462809.562364.1437591248091.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1626462809.562364.1437591248091.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003a01d0c4b8$ad681350$083839f0$@att.net> Just one little nit to pick, gently, lovingly : where, down there, Adam Scow is quoted as saying ?. "Spending one billion dollars to take these selenium-laced, unsustainable lands out of production and cutting the water rights that go with them saves Californians water and money," ? that would be better said ?the water demand ?? since, presumably, we?re talking largely about water provided Westlands by the Bureau of Reclamation from the Trinity and god only knows when, if ever, the Bureau of Reclamation will return (read Westlands will allow Bur Rec to return) to the SWRCB and have its Trinity River water rights amended to conform to the realities of the late 20th/21st century ? the Trinity River Record of Decision, etc. ?Best, Bill From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 11:54 AM To: Env-trinity Subject: [env-trinity] East Bay Express: An Alternative to the Tunnels http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/an-alternative-to-the-tunnels/Content?oid=4422982 East Bay Express NEWS & OPINION ? ECO WATCH An Alternative to the Tunnels A new report shows that taking toxic cropland out of production in the San Joaquin Valley would be much cheaper than the governor's tunnels plan. By Robert Gammon @RobertGammon Governor Jerry Brown is still pushing his plan to build two giant water tunnels underneath the fragile Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, despite the fact that his $15 billion proposal remains unpopular with California residents. Brown contends that the tunnels will provide a dependable water supply for farms in the San Joaquin Valley. But a new report released last week not only punches a hole in the governor's argument, it also offers an alternative solution that would be far cheaper than the tunnels plan. One of the main beneficiaries of the proposed tunnels would be the powerful Westlands Water District in the arid western San Joaquin Valley. The district represents almond and pistachio growers and other agribusinesses that cultivate thirsty crops in desert-like conditions. The district and the growers who control it have been a driving force behind the tunnels plan. However, one aspect of the proposal that doesn't get much press is the fact that a significant amount of cropland in the Westlands district has severe drainage problems and is contaminated with toxins, primarily selenium and boron. When growers irrigate the cropland, it results in toxic runoff that pollutes rivers, streams, and aquifers, and poisons wildlife. The tunnels, in other words, would likely deepen the ecological mess in the region by guaranteeing that more water from Northern California would be poured on hundreds of thousands of acres of toxic land. But a report published last week by an Oregon-based firm, ECONorthwest, offers a simple alternative: Take a total of 343,000 acres of this land (of which 298,000 is in Westlands Water District) out of crop production and return it to its natural state. The retirement of the land not only would solve a serious environmental problem, but also would save about 454,000 acre-feet of water a year. To put that in perspective, the city of Los Angeles uses about 587,000 acre-feet of water each year. "[L]arge swaths of land, primarily in the San Joaquin Valley, are unsuitable for agriculture," the ECONorthwest report concludes. "The soils in these naturally dry areas have high levels of salts, selenium and boron, trace elements that ? when combined with irrigation water ? can poison crops if allowed to remain on lands without proper drainage. Related problems include contaminated waterways, increased toxic runoff into the Delta, and deformities in birds and fish." ECONorthwest is an independent economic analysis firm that was hired by three groups opposed to Governor Brown's tunnels plan (which is also known as the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, or BDCP): Food & Water Watch, California Water Impact Network, and Citizens Against Taxpayer Funding of the BDCP. ECONorthwest estimated that the total cost of buying and retiring the 343,000 acres would be about $750 million, although it could run as low as $540 million and as high as $1.03 billion. Saving 454,000 acre-feet of water a year would likely relieve the need to build the tunnels, which are projected to cost up to $67 billion, when counting interest payments on the bonds needed to pay for construction. "Spending one billion dollars to take these selenium-laced, unsustainable lands out of production and cutting the water rights that go with them saves Californians water and money," said Adam Scow, California director of Food & Water Watch, in a statement. "Retiring these west side lands makes a lot more sense than spending $67 billion to build Governor Brown's outdated tunnels to support corporate agribusiness." Taking the cropland out of production would require cooperation from the Obama administration, which has been in secret negotiations with Westlands over the district's debt to the federal government. Recent reports indicate that a proposed deal between the feds and Westlands would only retire about 100,000 acres, and in return, would forgive the district's $365 million debt to the federal government. Westlands is perhaps the most politically powerful water agency in the nation. And spending $750 million to $1 billion in taxpayer funds to take cropland out of production likely will not be popular, especially among Republicans. But retiring land is much cheaper than building two giant water tunnels. Although Westlands and other beneficiaries of the tunnels are supposed to pay for them, it's likely that they will not be able to afford to do so. As we noted in a 2014 cover story, some economic experts estimate that the costs to build the tunnels will be far higher than the financial benefits they will provide, and thus could force Westlands and the other beneficiaries into default (see "The Water Tunnel Boondoggle," 5/13/14). "The tunnels don't generate a water supply that's nearly as valuable as the costs," said Jeffrey Michael of the University of the Pacific, in an interview with the Express last year. Michael is one of the leading economic forecasters in the state. In 2012, he projected that the tunnels would result in $6 billion in total losses for Westlands and the other beneficiaries. Last week, he revised his projection to $8 billion in losses. And if Westlands and the other beneficiaries eventually default on paying for the tunnels, then taxpayers likely would have to pay the bill, which could reach $67 billion. With those numbers, spending $1 billion on retiring land not only makes financial sense, but it's also a win for the environment. _____ Contact the author of this piece, send a letter to the editor, like us on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jul 22 17:26:58 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 00:26:58 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: Public Comment Period on Revised Delta Conveyance Document Extended 60 Days In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <840803284.750769.1437611218805.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Wednesday, July 22, 2015 4:53 PM, Louis Moore wrote: Public Comment Period on Revised Delta Conveyance Document Extended 60 DaysMedia Contacts: Bureau of Reclamation: Erin Curtis, 916-978-5100, eccurtis at usbr.gov California Natural Resources Agency:? Nancy Vogel, 916-653-9402, nancy.vogel at resources.ca.govFor Release: July 22, 2015Public Comment Period on Revised Delta Conveyance Document Extended 60 Days Public Meetings in Sacramento and Walnut Grove Next WeekSACRAMENTO, Calif. ? The California Department of Water Resources and the Federal Bureau of Reclamation announced today a 60-day extension of the public comment period for the joint Partially Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report (RDEIR)/Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) on the Bay Delta Conservation Plan/California WaterFix.The public comment period began July 10.? Originally scheduled to end on August 31, 2015, it is being extended to Friday, October 30, 2015.The two-month extension gives the public, government agencies, and independent scientists more time to consider refinements and changes made since last summer to the plan that seeks to secure California?s water supplies and improve ecosystem conditions in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.? The Delta is the West Coast?s largest estuary and is the hub of the state?s water distribution system.? It provides water to 25 million of California?s 38 million residents and three million of roughly nine million irrigated acres of farmland.? The Delta also harbors several threatened and endangered fish species.To view or download the RDEIR/SDEIS, or for a list of locations to access a DVD of the document, please go to www.baydeltaconservationplan.com.? If you encounter problems accessing the documents, please call 916-978-5100 or email mppublicaffairs at usbr.gov.Upcoming MeetingsTwo public meetings are scheduled for next week in Sacramento and Walnut Grove.? The open house-style meetings will allow those with questions about the revised documents to speak individually to technical experts.? A court reporter will be available for those who would prefer to submit comments verbally rather than in writing.Meeting information: - Tuesday, July 28, from 3 p.m. to 7 p.m. at the Sheraton Grand Sacramento Hotel, Magnolia Room, 1230 J Street, Sacramento. Wednesday, July 29, from 3 p.m. to 7 p.m., Jean Harvie Senior and Community Center, 14273 River Road, Walnut Grove To Submit CommentsWritten comments are due by close of business Friday, October 30, 2015.? Comments should be mailed to BDCP/WaterFix Comments, P.O. Box 1919, Sacramento, CA 95812 or emailed to BDCPComments at icfi.com.For additional information, please contact Theresa Olson, Reclamation, 916-930-5676 (TTY 800-877-8339) or Cassandra Enos-Nobriga, California Department of Water Resources, 916-651-0178.###The mission of the California Department of Water Resources 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.? Visit DWR?s website at www.water.ca.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 17 Western states.? Its facilities also provide substantial flood control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. ?Visit Reclamation?s 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 Thu Jul 23 11:03:27 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 18:03:27 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Digital Journal: Op-Ed: Advocates claim a secret pact has occurred with California water Message-ID: <1093291665.1222186.1437674607822.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> | | http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/environment/op-ed-advocates-claim-a-secret-pact-has-occurred-with-california-water/article/437847 | Op-Ed: Advocates claim a secret pact has occurred with California water?SPECIAL Posted Jul 22, 2015 by?Jonathan FarrellAs the drought in California continues, water advocates from non-profit organization Friends of The River claim two very important Federal agencies have been in a secret pact over access to portions of California's precious water resources.Friends of the River, a non-profit environmental group is petitioning the U.S. Government to have access to information regarding a "secret settlement" between a California water district and particular entities within the Federal Government. Friends of The River claim this settlement if allowed will be harmful and will poison, the ecosystem. They are asking that some agricultural lands be retired.Courtesy of Restore The Delta?This secret process is in violation of federal laws such as NEPA that require public environmental impact analysis and consideration of a range of reasonable alternatives before rather than after government action,? said Friends of the River?s Senior Counsel Robert Wright.?He and the environmental group claim that The Department of Justice and the Department of the Interior have been quietly setting up a negotiation of a proposed settlement of drainage and water issues with Westlands Water District in secret. As Wright explained to this reporter, "there are protocols and a process that must be followed before anything like this can be done."This past June 24, Friends of the River sent a letter to four high ranking officials; two in Sacramento with the Dept. of the Interior and one with the Dept. of Justice in Washington D.C. to call attention to this situation.?"We are informed (the letter states) and believe that the United States government has been negotiating the proposed settlement in secret-- with a public water district-- instead of identifying and evaluating the critical drainage, selenium, and other environmental issues in public NEPA and ESA processes. This process is in violation of these environmental laws that require public environmental impact analysis and consideration of a range of reasonable alternatives before rather than after government action."This reporter wanted to find out from Wright how Friends of The River learned of this secret deal with federal entities. "Whenever the public is refused access to information or documents, that (usually) is an indicator." With California Governor Jerry Brown mandating the reduction of water use, the continued availability of water is getting micromanaged. And for big businesses that depend upon water that is an issue major stakeholders want to manipulate in their favor.?Wright pointed out, in a status report filed by the Federal agencies in Firebaugh Canal Water District et al v. United States of America in April 2015 the government stated that ?negotiators for the United States and Westland?s have completed work on a draft proposed settlement agreement. This agreement included technical appendices; and that this draft proposed settlement agreement is now under review at the Department of Justice.? Wright emphasized based upon what Friends of the River discerned, the government has kept that draft settlement agreement secret so that its provisions are unknown to the public.Friends of the River also pointed out that ?the U.S. Geological Survey and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, have previously concluded that the best solution to the drainage problem would be to retire 300,000 to about 400,000 acres in the Western San Joaquin Valley from irrigation. Instead, the government?s negotiations with Westlands Water District appear headed toward producing the worst possible environmental outcome of continuing to irrigate lands producing enormous amounts of salt and selenium while allowing Westlands growers to establish in effect a permanent water supply for sale, as opposed to reducing exports as lands are and should be retired from irrigation.?Wright mentioned that this type of irrigation is harmful and evidence of it can be found "as far back as ancient Egypt," he said. Other water conservation organizations, like?Restore The Delta?and?Tuolumne River Trust,?have similar views. But often they are competing for the same funding to ensure their conservation work can continue.??It is time to have the proposed settlement fully evaluated in the public environmental, endangered species and critical habitat evaluation processes required by NEPA and the ESA,? said Eric Wesselman, Executive Director of?Friends of the River.??In light of the current extreme drought further endangering fish and water supply and requiring sacrifices by millions of Californians, crafting a dream deal for Westlands in secret while ignoring public NEPA and ESA processes is beyond incomprehensible.?Wesselman believes that nature has a right to water just as much as humans do. Wesselman has said to this reporter before how important it is for a portion of the overall water supply be allowed to be left for nature. So much of the natural landscape and ecosystem depends upon the flow and dispersment of water as found in streams, rivers, estuaries and wet lands. To divert or disrupt that natural ebb and flow would only create more problems.Yet according to the Thomas Birmingham of?the Westlands Water District,?the deal was not a secret. "it is correct that Westlands Water District and the Bureau of Reclamation have negotiated a potential settlement to resolve longstanding litigation concerning Reclamation?s obligation to provide drainage service to the District and damage to lands resulting from Reclamation?s failure to provide drainage service." Birmingham serves as General Manager for the District and noted that "the potential settlement would relieve Reclamation from a mandatory injunction to provide drainage service, which Reclamation projects will save the government more than $3 billion." And, he added, indemnify the government of any liability from claims of damage by landowners in Westlands."?"The potential settlement is currently undergoing review by the Department of Justice. But the settlement is hardly ?secret," he said. "The fact that negotiations were ongoing was frequently reported to the United States District Court, Members of Congress, and non-governmental organization," (makes it well known.) "Moreover, noted Birmingham, the terms of the potential settlement have been shared with Members of Congress and non-governmental organizations during briefings by Reclamation and Westlands." Birmingham provided documentation to this reporter of those briefings. He also went on to say..."Indeed, if you Google 'Westlands drainage settlement principles of agreement,' the first site that will be suggested is a pdf of this document." "If the proposed settlement were secret, said Birmingham, it would be the worst kept secret in history."Neither Wright nor Birmingham would comment any further. When this reporter asked Wright to clarify he continues to be silent. But when trying to piece together the larger picture, it is clear to this reporter the rift between the public and who exactly has rights to water becomes very complicated. Agricultural business interests are at risk, with the lack of water as the drought enters its fourth year. And as some like Wesselman will argue the glory days of California Agriculture are in the past, the dependency of water for the Golden State remains for other sectors of business is high.?For months?the Los Angeles Times has been devoting significant coverage?to the drought. In the past several weeks, The LA Times has detailed the on-going struggle the State of California has had imposing fines, re-establishing rationing ordinances and enforcing more stringent measures against water diversion to help protect water resources.?How this all continues to play out will be very interesting. Metiorologists are hoping El Nino storm patterns will return in the Fall. But even with a storm or two, on the horizon, how much water will arrive via El Nino? Scientists are not able to say for certain. With a population at almost 40 million people rainfall will have to be significant to meet the demands of the nation's most popular of destinations.?As Chuck Bonham, director of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, pointed out it is not so much a rift between groups or types of businesses over the other. When the dust settles so to speak, the task facing California and the entire region "is how we make it through together.?To learn more about the California drought?visit the California Drought page at The Los Angeles Times web site.? Read more:??http://www.digitaljournal.com/print/article/437847#ixzz3gjsKp5EA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jul 23 14:27:37 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 21:27:37 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Yurok Tribe finds deadly fish disease in Lower Klamath River Message-ID: <1784247218.1333449.1437686857654.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/23/1405103/-Yurok-Tribe-finds-deadly-fish-disease-in-Lower-Klamath-River Dan BacherFollowRSSDaily Kos member - Profile - Diaries?(list) - Stream THU JUL 23, 2015 AT 12:51 PM PDT Yurok Tribe finds deadly fish disease in Lower Klamath River byDan BacherFollow - ? - ? - 4 Comments / 4 New Yurok Fisheries crews conducting routine fish disease monitoring have found that salmon in the Klamath River on the Yurok Reservation are infected with a potentially deadly disease, according to a news release from the Yurok Tribe."Ichthyophthirius multifiliis, known as ich (pronounced ?ick?), is capable of causing large fish kill events, and was the primary pathogen in the 2002 fish kill in the Klamath River that killed over 35,000 adult Chinook salmon and steelhead in the Klamath River," according to the Tribe. "Last year, an outbreak of ich reached high levels, stopping just short of causing a catastrophic fish kill."This year?s outbreak occurred a month earlier than last year?s. ?This is an early warning sign for the fall migration of salmon in the Klamath River. It means that the risk of a catastrophic fish kill, such as happened in 2002, is high.? said Michael Belchik, Senior Fisheries Biologist for the Yurok Tribal Fisheries Program.Fish diseases such as ich are exacerbated by low flows and water temperatures that currently exist in the lower Klamath and Trinity Rivers, said Belchik.The Yurok Tribe said it will be working closely with Federal, State, and Tribal partners to determine what management actions to implement to protect the main portion of the fall Chinook salmon run which has not entered the river as of yet.?We take this threat to our fish very seriously, and we?re looking at every option to protect our fish. We don?t want to go through another catastrophe like the fish kill in 2002, and we will do anything we can to avoid that outcome this year.? said Thomas P. O?Rourke, Chairman of the Yurok Tribe. TAGS - Drought - Environment - Fishing - King Salmon - Klamath River - Steelhead - Yurok Tribe -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Jul 24 07:23:20 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 14:23:20 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard: Deadly fish parasite found on Klamath River fish Message-ID: <1459453779.1679678.1437747800225.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.times-standard.com/environment-and-nature/20150723/deadly-fish-parasite-found-on-klamath-river-fish - Deadly fish parasite found on Klamath River fish A steelhead trout caught on a tributary of the lower Klamath River during the September 2002 fish kill shows both a brown-colored infection by the columnaris gill disease and inflamed red gills caused by a deadly parasite known as ich. Both infections were recently found on fish at the same location on Wednesday and are likely caused by low flow conditions, according to local fisheries biologists. Photo courtesy of Michael Belchik | By Will Houston, Eureka Times-Standard POSTED: 07/23/15, 9:39 PM PDT | UPDATED: 2 HRS AGO The deadly signs were expected to surface on the lower Klamath and Trinity rivers this summer, but not this early. On the lower Klamath River, a survey on six salmonid fish at the mouth of Blue Creek on Wednesday by the Yurok Tribe Fisheries program found the presence of a deadly parasite ? the same one responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of fish on the same river system in 2002.?There is no doubt, we?re in a pretty serious situation,? Yurok senior fisheries biologist Michael Belchik said. Having witnessed the 2002 fish kill personally, Belchick said this is the earliest he has ever seen an ich infection appear on the lower Klamath River, adding that fisheries biologists returned to Blue Creek for more fish sampling Thursday afternoon. The parasite, known as Ichthyophthirius multifiliis or ?ich,? had also been found on salmonids during a survey last year in September ? the first time since the 2002 fish kill. This year it showed up five weeks earlier, Belchik said. What makes the grain-sized ich so deadly is it attaches to the fish?s gills causing them to swell, eventually suffocating the fish. Warm water temperatures caused by low flows and other factors can stress fish immune systems and make them more susceptible to the parasite and other diseases. For ich, the ongoing four-year drought is prime condition. As fish crowd together to find cooler waters, ich is able to more easily spread. In a statement released by the Hoopa Valley Tribe, fish biologist Joshua Strange wrote that the low-flow conditions on the lower Klamath River are expected to continue their decline to about 2,000 cubic feet per second ? lower than most of the driest years on record for the state and similar to one of the most deadly for fish. ?Flows during the lethal ich outbreak of 2002 were also approximately 2,000 (cubic feet per second),? he wrote. The fall run of adult Chinook salmon this year is expected to be around 120,000, according to the Pacific Fisheries Management Council. The 2002 run had about 130,000 fish, Strange wrote. On the Trinity River, Fisheries Director Mike Orcutt for the Hoopa Valley Tribe said ich has not been detected yet, though surveys have not been recently conducted. However, many salmonids on the river have been found to have severe infections from a deadly gill disease known as columnaris, which can also increase the likelihood of ich infection. Other alarming signs in the Trinity River include elevated toxic blue-green algae and another type of parasite that is particularly deadly to juvenile salmon. One of the most effective ways of avoiding another fish kill has been to release additional flows from damns on Trinity Lake to cool the waters. Several of such releases occurred last year, including an unprecedented emergency flow release made in September which doubled the flow of the river after the ich infection was detected. Orcutt said that the Hoopa tribe has received ?strong assurances? from the U.S. Interior Department?s Bureau of Reclamation for releasing fish kill preventative flows from Lewiston Dam in Trinity County as it had done for the last three years to prevent such catastrophes. The Hoopa Valley Tribe ? with backing from the Yurok Tribe ? has requested 63,000 acre-feet to be released most likely in mid-August. The bureau is currently working on an environmental assessment of such a release. But with Trinity Lake water is also being diverted to the Central Valley Project, Orcutt said irrigators from that area will likely file litigation against the releases as they have done in the past. ?Hopefully the Interior makes the right management decision and is able to defend it in court if necessary,? he said. Over the last year, the Interior Department has often sided with the North Coast, having released a legal opinion in December recognizing Humboldt County?s long-challenged right to an annual 50,000 acre-feet of Trinity River water to be used for the benefit of downstream users. The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors formally requested the full 50,000 acre-feet in May for the purpose of preventing a fish kill. Third District Supervisor Mark Lovelace said discussions with the bureau are still ongoing on when this year?s flow should be released and how to develop a regular mechanism on how to make flow requests in the future. Part of the discussions have revolved around whether to include the 50,000 acre-feet in the Hoopa tribe?s flow request, which he said is now more of a serious consideration after the recent fish survey. ?We?d anticipated some months back that we would likely almost certainly be needing these augmented flows again this year,? Lovelace said. ?That finding just reaffirms that.? Meanwhile, the Bureau of Reclamation is currently in the process of allowing the public to vet the environmental impact statement for a long-term plan it is drafting to protect salmon on the lower Klamath River. The bureau will host a meeting in Arcata on Aug. 5 at the Red Roof Inn ? 4975 Valley West Blvd. ? from 5:30-7 p.m. Will Houston can be reached at 707-441-0504. | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Thu Jul 23 18:45:04 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 01:45:04 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Jweek29 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C5619D8@057-SN2MPN1-041.057d.mgd.msft.net> To All, Please see attached for the Jweek 29 (July 16-22) update of the Trinity River trapping summary. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW29.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 60904 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW29.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Jul 27 12:25:01 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 19:25:01 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Cost_of_Delta_tunnels_doesn=E2=80=99t_add?= =?utf-8?q?_up?= Message-ID: <1652762715.3225605.1438025101757.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/the-conversation/article28509157.html Sacramento Bee Cost of Delta tunnels doesn?t add up State?s optimistic estimates don?t compute compared to $15 billion cost? Earthquake argument is economically wrong and morally outrageous? No amount of tweaking can save this fundamentally bad idea ??BY JEFFREY MICHAEL?SPECIAL TO THE BEEAfter yet another revision, the governor?s plan to build twin tunnels through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta still makes no economic sense. A closer look at the three types of economic benefits claimed for the project to export water to Central Valley farms and Southern California cities shows why it can?t possibly justify its estimated $15 billion cost. In each case, I give a value derived directly from the optimistic estimates of the state?s consultants and a more intuitive comparison.Water supply:?The latest numbers estimate the tunnels will increase water exports south of the Delta by an annual average of 257,000 acre-feet, with no increase in drought years when it is needed most. The cumulative value of that water supply over 50 years is $2 billion to $3 billion.For comparison, San Diego?s new desalination plant will provide 56,000 acre-feet of drought-proof water for a capital cost of $1 billion. Desalination is the most costly water supply alternative, but it still provides more than three times the water supply per dollar invested than the Delta tunnels.Water quality:?Because the tunnels would divert higher-quality water from the Sacramento River, the salt and other contaminants in export water supply could decrease by 20 percent. It?s estimated that this could have a cumulative value to water exporters of as much as $2 billion over 50 years.However, it is important to remember that the tunnels aren?t a water treatment or desalination plant that purifies water. Thus, the water exporter?s gain in water quality will be offset by degraded water quality elsewhere, a concern that is at the center of opposition in the five Delta counties and environmental concerns raised by the EPA and others.Seismic risk:?Listening to the governor, earthquake protection is the main economic argument. But the state?s experts estimated seismic-risk reduction to water exports was only worth a cumulative $400 million over 50 years. Why is this value so low? First, it is a very low probability event even in the most pessimistic models. Second, the outage to water exports isn?t as bad as you hear in TV commercials. Department of Water Resources Director Mark Cowin correctly described it as ?weeks or months? in a recent media call, not years. In a worst-case earthquake scenario, the tunnels might prevent 2 million to 3 million acre-feet in lost water exports, a costly but manageable shortage. For comparison, the current drought has cut surface water supplies to farms and cities by more than 10 million acre-feet.The earthquake argument is not only economically wrong, it is morally outrageous. The real damage from what some call California?s Katrina would be death and destruction in the Delta itself. The state?s model of this tragedy shows hundreds could die and that 80 percent of the economic damage was from the loss of property and infrastructure in the Delta.It?s shocking that the state?s response to this are water tunnels that protect only 20 percent of the economic loss and zero percent of the life loss. Levee upgrades are much cheaper and reduce risks for all Californians.In sum, the economic benefits of the tunnels to the water exporters total about $5 billion of its $15 billion cost, and the benefit-cost ratio is even worse when the negative impacts to the Delta and risks to the environment and upstream interests are considered.Support among water exporters has been steadily eroding as the economic and financial shortcomings of the plan become better understood.A few years ago, the state tried to shore up its economic argument by attaching a huge value to the hope of 50-year regulatory protection from the Endangered Species Act, and incorrectly attributing habitat restoration benefits to the tunnels. After heavy criticism, the latest revision to the tunnels plan eliminates the 50-year regulatory assurance and separates environmental restoration. The plan?s already flimsy economic rationale evaporated with this correction.It is increasingly clear that there are less divisive alternatives that provide more economic and environmental value than the tunnels. No amount of tweaking can save what is fundamentally a bad idea. It?s time to move on.Jeffrey Michael, an economist, is director of the Center for Business and Policy Research at the University of the Pacific. Read his blog at?valleyecon.blogspot.com?.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at att.net Tue Jul 28 09:31:08 2015 From: kierassociates at att.net (Kier Associates) Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 09:31:08 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] just FYI: Sole Source Intent - ECO Resources Group Message-ID: <001401d0c952$cf8ab660$6ea02320$@att.net> RFQ ID: RFQ1011015 Reference #: R15PS01182 RFQ Title: Sole Source Intent - ECO Resources Group Category: 899: 899 1 RFQ Issue Date: 07/27/2015 02:42:01 PM EDT Contact: LAURA STJOHN Department of the Interior lstjohn at usbr.gov RFQ Close Date: 08/05/2015 01:00:00 PM EDT (Time Remaining: 8D 0H 34M) Delivery: Period of performance: 09/01/2015 through 08/31/2016 Description: The Bureau of Reclamation intends to negotiate on a sole source basis with ECO Resources Group (GS-00F-017AA) for Klamath Project Consultation Support under the authority of FAR 8.405-6. ECO Resources Group possesses unique and specialized knowledge, skills, and direct working experience with the development of Klamath Project Operations December 2012 Biological Assessment leading to the issuance of the 2013 joint Biological Opinion, and in previous Klamath Project operations Section 7 consultation. ECO Resources has specialized experience in the successful performance of the required tasks, which is necessary due to the controversial and adversarial nature of past consultation efforts as well as the risk of not being able to carry out Reclamations mission, and litigation if compliance with the Endangered Species Act and other laws and regulations cannot be demonstrated. A sole source justification has been prepared and approved in support of this acquisition. The awarded task order will be for one year, beginning on the date of award. Firms believing they can provide these services above must provide a written capability statement to the Contracting Officer with supporting evidence that demonstrates the respondent's ability to meet the stated requirements by no later than Wednesday, August 5, 2015 at 4:00 pm PT. This notice is not a request for competitive proposals. A determination by the Government not to compete this proposed action based on responses to this notice is solely within the direction of the government. Information received in response to this synopsis will be considered solely for the purpose of determining whether to conduct a competitive procurement Responses should be emailed to the Government point of contact for this acquisition. Responses should include the firm's GSA contract number, Dun and Bradstreet number (DUNS) and Tax Identification Number (TIN). Firms should identify business size (i.e. small business, other than small business, etc.) in accordance with the size standard for NAICS Code 541620 which is $15M. Questions concerning this solicitation should be directed to Laura StJohhn by email at lstjohn at usbr.gov. This notice may represent the only official notice of such a solicitation. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Jul 28 10:30:31 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 17:30:31 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Public Scoping Meetings - Long-Term Plan for the Protection of Adult Salmon in the Lower Klamath River In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <44784732.3875980.1438104631551.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Tuesday, July 28, 2015 10:15 AM, Ann Riedesel wrote: The Bureau of Reclamation has scheduled four open house/public scoping meetings to begin preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement to evaluate the effects of the Long-Term Plan for the Protection of Adult Salmon in the Lower Klamath River.The purpose of the meetings is to solicit early input from the public regarding the alternatives to be evaluated and their potential environmental impacts. The scoping meetings will be held in: ? Arcata, Calif.: Wed, Aug. 5, 5:30 ? 7 p.m., Red Roof Inn, 4975 Valley West Blvd. Weaverville, Calif.: Thu, Aug. 6, 5:30 ? 7 p.m., Trinity County Library, 351 Main St. Klamath Falls, Ore.: Tue, Aug. 11, 5:30 ? 7 p.m., Shilo Inn, 2500 Almond Street Sacramento, Calif.: Wed, Aug. 12, 5:30 ? 7 p.m., Bureau of Reclamation Cafeteria Conference??? Rooms C-1001 & 1002, 2800 Cottage Way ? The open house will start at 5:30 p.m. At 6 p.m., there will be a brief presentation. The open house will resume after the presentation. Written comments will be accepted at the meetings or may be mailed to Paul Zedonis, Bureau of Reclamation, Northern California Area Office, 16349 Shasta Dam Blvd., Shasta Lake, CA 96019 or emailed tomailto:sha-slo-klamath-LTP at usbr.gov. Written comments must be received by Thursday, Aug. 20, 2015. For more information, please contact Zedonis at 530-275-1554 (TTY 800-877-8339) or visithttp://www.usbr.gov/mp/kbao/docs/long-term_plan_protect_lower_klamath_04-2015.pdf.?To request special assistance to attend the meeting, please contact Zedonis at the number listed above at least five days prior to the meeting. ? ? ? | Ann Riedesel Communications Specialist Phone:?(208) 557-0843?|? Cell:?(208) 569-6320 | Please consider the environment before printing. ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 627370 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 4304 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Jul 29 08:48:51 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 15:48:51 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal: Trinity Management Council mulls closed sessions Message-ID: <1069775802.4524079.1438184931338.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_26c408f0-3591-11e5-98a2-e7750a17e80d.html Trinity Management Council mulls closed sessions By AMY GITTELSOHN The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 6:15 amThe Trinity Management Council that manages Trinity River Restoration Program activities may start holding some of its meetings in closed session, much to the dismay of the Trinity County supervisor serving on that council.Sup. Keith Groves, the county?s representative on the TMC, confirmed that there are changes to the TMC?s bylaws in the works that have him concerned.?We have a couple members on the Trinity Management Council that want to meet in closed session to be able to work without the public?s oversight,? Groves said.Currently, the TMC?s bylaws don?t allow for closed meetings.Under the Trinity River Record of Decision, the Secretary of the Interior retains ultimate authority over the restoration program. The TMC meets quarterly on matters such as flow recommendations, the program budget, fisheries status reports and reviews of program accomplishments. The TMC may also have special meetings.The TMC?s meetings have been held at various locations, including Redding, Eureka, Weitchpec, Hoopa and Weaverville.Sup. Groves added that he?s the only TMC member having ?serious heartburns? over the prospect of meetings closed to the public. Other TMC members include representatives from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Hoopa Valley Tribe, Yurok Tribe, California Resources Agency, National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Forest Service.Groves and the Trinity Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) of stakeholders that advises the TMC have both recommended if the TMC does hold closed sessions that it follow the Brown Act, although as a federal organization it doesn?t have to. The Brown Act applies to local legislative bodies in California, and restricts closed session meetings to topics such as specific personnel and legal matters.?The proposal at this point is that there could be no voting allowed in a closed session,? Groves said, ?but suggestions we limit what we talk about have met resistance.??It?s very vague what they want to talk about,? Groves said.The chair of the TAMWG stakeholder group and non-voting member of the TMC, Elizabeth Hadley from the Redding Electric Utility, noted that neither she nor the executive director of the river restoration program could attend the closed sessions as proposed.Indications are the TMC members wanting to make the change want to do it for discussion of personnel matters, she said, but ?we want to make sure they wouldn?t be used for normal business discussions we believe should be open to the public.?At the last TMC meeting Hadley said she expressed her concerns, and various members did see the need to better define what the closed sessions would be used for.?I did still express our concerns that the public would be excluded and I would also be excluded,? she added.However, Groves said he doesn?t know why the closed sessions would be sought for personnel reasons when the TMC does not do the hiring and firing for the restoration program. ?It?s up to the (Bureau of Reclamation) who they have there,? he said.Groves said he believes the TMC chair, fisheries biologist Seth Naman from the National Marine Fisheries Service, is trying to negotiate a compromise that works for everyone.Naman said he understands the concerns.But he added that there have been a few times in the past when the TMC has met without inviting the public, and ?I didn?t want the TMC to do that again without it being in the bylaws.?It?s not uncommon for groups of federal managers to hold closed sessions, Naman said, and ?myself as well as other TMC members simply want that flexibility.?While the members might not want to bind themselves to the Brown Act when it isn?t required, Naman said the first proposal presented calls for the TMC to announce when it intends to hold a closed session and the topic to be discussed.The TMC might consider the proposed changes to the bylaws at its Sept. 17 meeting, scheduled to be held at the Trinity County Library in Weaverville. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vina_frye at fws.gov Wed Jul 29 11:20:53 2015 From: vina_frye at fws.gov (Frye, Vina) Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 11:20:53 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group Meeting Message-ID: Hi Folks, The Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) and The Trinity Management Council (TMC) will hold a joint meeting on August 13, 2015. We will tour the lower Douglas City restoration site and then meet at the North Fork Grange Hall. See details in the Federal Register below. Best regards, Vina Vina Frye Fish Biologist 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: Federal Register.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 276986 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jul 30 07:38:10 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 14:38:10 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Feinstein offers sweeping new state water plan Message-ID: <444493155.5186782.1438267090791.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://tablet.olivesoftware.com/Olive/Tablet/SanFranciscoChronicle/SharedArticle.aspx?href=HSFC%2F2015%2F07%2F30&id=Ar00106 Feinstein offers sweeping new state water plan ADDRESS: BY CAROLYN LOCHHEAD Drought bills How a House-passed bill dealing with the drought compares with legislation introduced Wednesday by California?s senators.HOUSE BILLSets new, higher limits on pumping from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.If native fish populations decline, the bill directs federal agencies to look for causes other than increased pumping.Sets deadlines for federal review of five proposed dams and reservoirs.Strengthens existing system of seniority in determining water rights.SENATE BILLAuthorizes $50 million over five years for desalination plants.Authorizes $600 million for five new dams and reservoirs identified by earlier studies.Identifies 105 recycling projects and authorizes $200 million for funding.Authorizes the federal government to pay farmers to conserve water and return the savings to recharge groundwater.Sets aside $24 million to provide habitat and stream flow to endangered species, $11.5 million to update fish monitoring and $2 million to improve water conveyance to wildlife refuges.Allows higher limits on pumping from the delta, but requires that actions be consistent with the Endangered Species Act.Michael Macor / The ChronicleSen. Dianne Feinstein?s bill includes funds for new dams, desalination plants, water recycling and other projects.WASHINGTON ? California Sen. Dianne Feinstein introduced a sweeping drought bill Wednesday that takes a much broader approach to the state?s water shortages than her failed effort last year to work almost exclusively with House Republicans to deliver more water to San Joaquin Valley farmers.Feinstein?s new measure is important for one big reason: Feinstein introduced it. The state?s senior senator has made herself an authority on California water policy, and no bill dealing with the state?s drought has much chance of passage without her approval.In contrast to a recently passed House measure that focuses mainly on getting water to valley farms ? and rolling back environmental protections to do it ? Feinstein included something for almost everyone.The California Emergency Drought Relief Act, co-sponsored by fellow California Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, would supply money for desalination plants for coastal cities, new and expanded dams, groundwater-recharge projects, water recycling, and expanded habitat for fish that biologists warn are hurtling toward extinction.The legislation calls for $1.3 billion in new federal spending over the next decade, nearly half of it for dams. It would be part of a larger Western drought bill that Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski is seeking to move through the Senate.House billA major challenge is reconciling any Senate bill with the House?s drought legislation. The measure, crafted by San Joaquin Valley Republicans including Kevin McCarthy, the majority leader from Bakersfield, and David Valadao of Hanford (Kings County), aims squarely at delivering more water from the delta to San Joaquin Valley farms, mainly by weakening protections for fish and wildlife.Feinstein acknowledged in an interview the criticism she drew last year when she pushed a short-term drought relief bill through the Senate without public hearings, then spent months in closed-door discussions with House Republicans on a bill much like the version they passed this year.?This has been the most difficult bill that I?ve put together in all my time in the Senate,? Feinstein said. ?There are so many different points of view, and it all depends upon who you talk to the kind of response you get.?No secrecyFeinstein noted that her critics last year, including the entire Bay Area congressional delegation, charged that she didn?t vet her bill ?with anybody, so this was done in secret.??It was not done in secret ? it was never done in secret. It?s impossible to do it in secret,? Feinstein said. ?What they may have meant was, ?Well, she didn?t give us veto over the bill.? ?This year, Feinstein incorporated ideas from Bay Area lawmakers, including a bill by Rep. Jerry McNerney, D-Stockton, to send federal money to cities that want to start water-recycling projects.Feinstein said she had combed the state for ideas, consulting every major interest group as well as government policymakers and agencies. ?I have talked to more than a dozen environmental groups, I?ve sent my staff out to almost 50 different projects in the state to look at them, I met with the governor and his staff, we met with farm groups,? the senator said.Climate changeThis year, Feinstein said, she wanted to take a longer view that incorporates climate change and the likelihood that California?s droughts will become harsher and more frequent.?It?s evident to me that we can?t depend on the Sierra Nevada snowpack, that this is a disappearing phenomenon, and it?s apparent to me we?re an ocean state,? Feinstein said. ?We?ve got water all along one side, and desalination becomes an obvious alternative.?A $1 billion desalination plant under construction in Carlsbad (San Diego County) has caught the attention of both Feinstein and Boxer. It will be the largest desalination plant in the Western Hemisphere and serve more than 110,000 customers in San Diego County.Desalination is an expensive source of water, using vast amounts of electricity whose generation contributes to global warming. Intake valves in the ocean can disturb marine life. But advances in the technology have made it appealing to coastal cities with limited access to the big federal and state projects that deliver water from interior rivers.More for recyclingThe Senate bill also spotlights recycling, which recovers wastewater, and water conservation, both of which Feinstein called an ?obvious alternative.?Feinstein would give a big boost to five long-standing dam proposals, including raising Shasta Dam, the state?s largest, and the dam at Los Vaqueros Reservoir in Contra Costa County. Her bill would also help pay for a new dam on the San Joaquin River near Fresno and a new reservoir north of the delta.?It?s pretty obvious to me that if we have a big El Ni?o, as is being predicted this winter, that we?ve got to catch that water and hold it for the dry years that could come the year after or the year that or the year after that,? Feinstein said.Her legislation also calls for storing more water underground by recharging depleted aquifers, which many see as a promising alternative or complement to dams.?We have to build a new water infrastructure, and groundwater recharge has to get accomplished,? Feinstein said. ?Recycling, conservation, desal, all of it.??Important step?Advocates on all sides of the water issue said much will hinge on any compromise with House Republicans over their bill.The Westlands Water District, which represents large farms in the western San Joaquin Valley, issued a statement calling the Senate bill ?an important step? toward enactment of new law.Rep. Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, who introduced his own big drought bill this year, called Feinstein?s legislation an improvement over last year?s version. ?I can tell that Sen. Feinstein has done a lot of work to include good ideas on a broader range of water strategies,? Huffman said.But Huffman also said he worried about a provision that would give state and federal water managers ?maximum flexibility? in making deliveries to farms and cities, at the expense of environmental protections.?I am fearful that in order for her bill to move forward, it would have to incorporate large portions of some very destructive and terrible ideas the Republicans are pushing,? Huffman said.Carolyn Lochhead is The San Francisco Chronicle?s Washington correspondent. E-mail:?clochhead at sfchronicle.comRUNNING DRY?Throughout 2015, The Chronicle will report on water growing scarce in California. Find more coverage at?www.sfchronicle.com/drought. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jul 30 07:54:42 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 14:54:42 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard: Salmon surveys find low fish counts on Salmon, Trinity Message-ID: <1861822269.5190479.1438268082548.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> It's really a shame that the Trinity River Restoration Program hasn't funded any salmon habitat restoration work in the South Fork Trinity River. ?TShttp://www.times-standard.com/environment-and-nature/20150729/salmon-surveys-find-low-fish-counts-on-salmon-trinity-rivers Salmon surveys find low fish counts on Salmon, Trinity rivers]Salmon River Restoration Council 9/20/06 A spring-run Chinook salmon spawns in the cool waters of the Salmon River in September 2006 as Karuk Tribe fisheries biologists monitor the fish populations. A survey of Chinook salmon in the Salmon River conducted last week found the fourth lowest count in over 20 years. Photo courtesy of Nat Pennington of the Salmon River Restoration Council | By Will Houston, Eureka Times-StandardPOSTED: 07/29/15, 9:35 PM PDT | UPDATED: 2 HRS AGOA fish counting survey of spring-run Chinook salmon ? pictured here swimming alongside summer steelhead trout ? conducted earlier this month found the fourth lowest number of salmon in the river in over 20 years. Similar results from a South Fork Trinity River survey this month have prompted concern by local fisheries experts of the effects of the ongoing statewide drought. Photo courtesy of Nat Pennington of the Salmon River Restoration Council At a glanceLowest counts of wild, adult, spring-run Chinook salmon on the Salmon River from 1990 to 2015:1990: 169 salmon1991: 187 salmon2005: 88 salmon2015: 256 salmonSource: Salmon River Restoration Council With recent fish counting surveys on two Klamath River tributaries showing alarmingly low numbers for one of the last wild Chinook salmon runs, local fisheries experts are growing increasingly concerned about the effects of the ongoing statewide drought and the possibility of a devastating fish kill in the near future when fall-run salmon begin to enter the system.A survey sponsored by the Salmon River Restoration Council and U.S. Forest Service that covered the entirety of the Salmon River found only 256 adult Chinook salmon on July 24 ? the fourth lowest count in 20 years and a large deviation from the some of the highest counts from recent years. ?When you?re hand counting a few hundred individual fish,? Karuk Tribe Natural Resources Policy Advocate Craig Tucker said with a dry laugh, ?you?re in big trouble.?The South Fork Trinity River is also showing a low presence of wild Chinook salmon adults, with the Hayfork-based Watershed Research and Training Center only finding 20 fish in a 60-mile survey of the river earlier this month ? the lowest number since 1989.The center?s Executive Director Joshua Smith said that their survey is normally performed in mid-August, but said it was done earlier this year out of concern of the mortality of the fish caused by low-flow conditions and high water temperatures. ?In the 1960s, they had 10,000 to 12,000 Chinook in the South Fork Trinity alone,? he said. ?They were tagging 200 fish per hole. Now we have 200 fish on average per year in the last decade. There?s been a few little spikes, but we?re really on the ragged edge.? The state Department of Fish and Wildlife is set to conduct a formal survey of the river next week, Smith said. Fisheries experts are not certain why the tributaries have such a low salmon population this year, but say that some of the fish are likely ?trapped? on the lower Klamath River trying to find cooler waters from creeks and tributaries. What makes this even more alarming is that a deadly parasite called Ichthyophthirius multifiliis, or ?ich,? was found on a sample of spring-run Chinook salmon last week at the mouth of Blue Creek on the lower Klamath River.With high water temperatures making fish more susceptible to the parasite and other diseases, senior fisheries biologist Michael Belchik of the Yurok Tribe?s fisheries program said the current heat wave in eastern areas of the county like Orleans where temperatures climbed above 110 degrees are only making matters worse for the fish. However, recent surveys show that the ich is not spreading exponentially as it did in September 2002, which resulted in a fish-kill of tens of thousands of salmon and steelhead trout on the lower Klamath River.?It?s still a cause for concern because this disease has a really explosive potential,? Belchik said. ?We have seen it five weeks earlier than last year.?If conditions do not change by early fall and the ich begins to spread, Tucker said such conditions could spell trouble for the 120,000 fall-run Chinook salmon expected to enter the lower Klamath River this year. ?When the fall-run salmon show up, the ich is already there waiting for them,? Tucker said.When adult Chinook salmon are ready to spawn, they leave their ocean abode and travel back to the freshwater locations they were born in order to spawn a new generation. Depending on when and where they were born, the salmon enter the waters at different times of the year, thus giving them the titles such as ?spring-run? or ?fall-run.? Spring-run salmon on the lower Klamath enter the river around April when the river is normally flush with snow-melt. These fish then find cool, deep pools to wait out the summer months in before spawning around September, Belchik said. Tucker said that before a series of dams were built on the Klamath River, salmon would travel as far as Oregon to wait out the summer heat.But with the upper reaches of the Klamath cut off, Belchik said that the Salmon River is one of the last remaining strongholds for the last wild populations of Chinook salmon, with the Trinity River containing both hatchery and wild populations.While there is likely not a single cause to this year?s low population, fisheries biologists agree that the ongoing four-year drought is a major contributing factor and concern. Belchik said that the drought conditions from 2010 and 2011 may have affected the survival juvenile salmon, and in turn may have led to a smaller population of spawning adults.Salmon River Restoration Council Executive Director Joshua Saxon said that the low flows on the Klamath River caused by a lack of snow melt may be causing some salmon to find whatever cool water they can get regardless of whether it?s far enough upriver.?They are basically stalled on these cold water tribs,? he said.Many are looking to Klamath and Trinity river dams as solutions to some of these issues. Water releases from Lewiston Dam on the Trinity River have helped stave off possible ich outbreaks on the lower Klamath River over the last three years. Currently, the Hoopa Valley Tribe with support of the Yurok Tribe have called for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to release 63,000 acre-feet of water from the dam to prevent a possible fish kill this year.The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors also requested the county?s federally promised 50,000 acre-feet of Trinity River water from the bureau to be used to prevent a fish kill.Smith said such a release would come too late to help any spring-run salmon, but would benefit the fall-run population. A set of water use agreements between farmers, tribes and governments on the Klamath Basin includes the removal of four hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River and is also seen as a method to help recover the salmon populations.However, the three agreements encompassed in Senate Bill 133 have been stalled in Congress since January after being referred to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.After the results of this survey, Saxon hopes that federal environmental agencies will formally recognize these spring-run Chinook salmon as a possible threatened species under the Endangered Species Act as salmon populations in other parts of the state are. ?I think it?s a wake-up call,? he said. ?It?s a wake-up call to the managing agencies that they?re not doing anything for these fish because they?re not ESA listed.?Will Houston can be reached at 707-441-0504. | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jul 30 08:06:25 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 15:06:25 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Feds won't pay to raise height of Shasta Dam Message-ID: <1953840812.5234498.1438268785795.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/feds-wont-pay-to-raise-height-of-shasta-dam_95381998 Feds won't pay to raise height of Shasta Dam ADDRESS: Damon Arthur? 7:38 PM, Jul 29, 20157:42 PM, Jul 29, 2015news?|?local news?Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.SHOW CAPTIONSHASTA COUNTY, California - The federal government will not pay the nearly $1.3 billion to raise the height of Shasta Dam up to 18 1/2 feet, according to a report released Wednesday on the feasibility of the project.While the final feasibility report says raising the height of the dam would be feasible, it stops short of recommending approval because of cost and financing issues.Typically, Congress approves up-front funding for projects such as raising the dam, and then the costs are repaid over 40 or 50 years by selling water and hydropower, but the report states that scenario is ?unrealistic? in this case because of budget constraints.That means non-federal agencies, including the current water agencies that buy water from the bureau and the state, would be left to work out how to pay for the cost of raising the dam, said Erin Curtis, a spokeswoman for the bureau.While the final feasibility report and environmental assessment ? also released Wednesday ? include many changes since the draft versions were released in 2012, the question of how to pay for raising the dam overshadows all of them, Curtis said.?I would say that?s the most pressing issue because if you can?t fund it, the rest of it is moot,? Curtis said. ?We still have work to do, obviously, when it comes to making a recommendation to Congress.?Some agricultural irrigation districts are interested in helping pay the cost of raising the dam, she said.?Current Central Valley Project water and power contractors, and other potential beneficiaries, are evaluating the project costs and benefits to determine their level of interest in providing construction cost shares. Westlands Water District has signed an agreement in principle to provide a cost share if Congress authorizes a project,? Curtis said.The state also could not participate in construction of the dam raise because of the McCloud River?s status as a protected wild trout stream, the report states. Raising the dam would flood several miles of the McCloud River above the lake, according to the report.Financing was also on Harold Jones? mind when he heard about the new reports released Wednesday.With no official recommendation on the dam, the issue will probably linger for many more years, undercutting the value of his business, said Jones, who owns Sugarloaf Cottages Resort on Lake Shasta.The bureau has been studying raising the dam for at least the past 10 years, and the congressional authorization to conduct the environmental and feasibility studies date back to 1980.Jones said he needs to buy new air conditioners for his cabins, but he can?t get a loan because if the dam is raised he would have to close his business as parts of the resort would be under water when the lake is full.?What this means to me is they are just going to continue to financially crush us,? Jones said.The bureau has said that the numerous businesses that would be forced to move because of higher water would be bought out and compensated or the government would pay to move them to higher ground.A spokesman for U.S. Rep Doug LaMalfa said the congressman thinks raising the height of the dam could be a positive move for the North State, but he wanted to review the documents and ensure business owners and residents around Lake Shasta are compensated if they have to relocate or close.?Should this project move forward, I will work to ensure that those residents and businesses who could be affected are justly compensated and have an opportunity to relocate on the lake,? LaMalfa said in a press release. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Jul 30 09:53:52 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 16:53:52 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Feds won't pay to raise height of Shasta Dam, again Message-ID: <814353992.5297396.1438275232081.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> This didn't seem to come through right in my computer, so here it is again in case you didn't get it the first time.TS Feds won't pay to raise height of Shasta Dam ADDRESS: Damon Arthur? 7:38 PM, Jul 29, 20157:42 PM, Jul 29, 2015?SHASTA COUNTY, California - The federal government will not pay the nearly $1.3 billion to raise the height of Shasta Dam up to 18 1/2 feet, according to a report released Wednesday on the feasibility of the project.While the final feasibility report says raising the height of the dam would be feasible, it stops short of recommending approval because of cost and financing issues.Typically, Congress approves up-front funding for projects such as raising the dam, and then the costs are repaid over 40 or 50 years by selling water and hydropower, but the report states that scenario is ?unrealistic? in this case because of budget constraints.That means non-federal agencies, including the current water agencies that buy water from the bureau and the state, would be left to work out how to pay for the cost of raising the dam, said Erin Curtis, a spokeswoman for the bureau.While the final feasibility report and environmental assessment ? also released Wednesday ? include many changes since the draft versions were released in 2012, the question of how to pay for raising the dam overshadows all of them, Curtis said.?I would say that?s the most pressing issue because if you can?t fund it, the rest of it is moot,? Curtis said. ?We still have work to do, obviously, when it comes to making a recommendation to Congress.?Some agricultural irrigation districts are interested in helping pay the cost of raising the dam, she said.?Current Central Valley Project water and power contractors, and other potential beneficiaries, are evaluating the project costs and benefits to determine their level of interest in providing construction cost shares. Westlands Water District has signed an agreement in principle to provide a cost share if Congress authorizes a project,? Curtis said.The state also could not participate in construction of the dam raise because of the McCloud River?s status as a protected wild trout stream, the report states. Raising the dam would flood several miles of the McCloud River above the lake, according to the report.Financing was also on Harold Jones? mind when he heard about the new reports released Wednesday.With no official recommendation on the dam, the issue will probably linger for many more years, undercutting the value of his business, said Jones, who owns Sugarloaf Cottages Resort on Lake Shasta.The bureau has been studying raising the dam for at least the past 10 years, and the congressional authorization to conduct the environmental and feasibility studies date back to 1980.Jones said he needs to buy new air conditioners for his cabins, but he can?t get a loan because if the dam is raised he would have to close his business as parts of the resort would be under water when the lake is full.?What this means to me is they are just going to continue to financially crush us,? Jones said.The bureau has said that the numerous businesses that would be forced to move because of higher water would be bought out and compensated or the government would pay to move them to higher ground.A spokesman for U.S. Rep Doug LaMalfa said the congressman thinks raising the height of the dam could be a positive move for the North State, but he wanted to review the documents and ensure business owners and residents around Lake Shasta are compensated if they have to relocate or close.?Should this project move forward, I will work to ensure that those residents and businesses who could be affected are justly compensated and have an opportunity to relocate on the lake,? LaMalfa said in a press release. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vina_frye at fws.gov Thu Jul 30 10:01:33 2015 From: vina_frye at fws.gov (Frye, Vina) Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 10:01:33 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Updated TAMWG agenda Message-ID: Hi Folks, *CORRECTION:* The Federal Register Notice for the August 13, 2015, TAMWG meeting erroneously identified the Lower Douglas City channel rehabilitation site for the restoration site tour. The restoration site tour will be at the Lower Junction City channel rehabilitation site which is adjacent to the North Fork Grange Hall in Junction City where the meeting will be held. If you have any questions please contact Joe Polos (707) 825-5149. Sorry for the confusion. 9:30-10:00 Meet and greet at North Fork Grange 10:00-11:30 Tour Lower Junction City restoration site-TRRP staff 11:30-12:30 Lunch (bring your own) 12:30-12:45 Public Comment 12:45-1:00 Recap from 2014 TAMWG/TMC meeting-Elizabeth/Seth/Jeff Morris 1:00-2:00 Have we implemented the 5 principles effectively? - Jeff Morris 2:00-2:30 Has TRRP outreach been effective? - Jeff Morris 2:30-3:00 Next steps for future success - Jeff Morris 3:00 Adjourn Respectfully, Vina Vina Frye Fish Biologist 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 sari at sisqtel.net Thu Jul 30 12:48:52 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2015 12:48:52 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] TimesStd: 55, 000 pot plants found in raid by Yurok Tribe Message-ID: <00b101d0cb00$c3539e20$49fada60$@sisqtel.net> *http://tps10206.doubleverify.com/event.gif?impid=3818bc1d27e243e2bb66a43952 e2c81d&dvp_ltncy=1997&cbust=1438285415337165 http://www.times-standard.com/general-news/20150724/55000-pot-plants-found-i n-yurok-raid?source=most_viewed * 55,000 pot plants found in Yurok raid Photo: An above-ground swimming pool full of diverted creek water used as an impromptu reservoir for a marijuana grow operation that was searched during Operation Yurok. photo provided by Yurok Tribe By Hunter Cresswell, hcresswell at times-standard.com Posted: 07/24/15, 9:10 PM PDT | Updated: 4 days ago Two weeks of multi-agency warrant sweeps that eradicated about 55,000 growing marijuana plants on and near Yurok tribal lands ended on Thursday but will continue next summer, officials said. The Yurok Tribe enacted similar raids last year, eradicating 15,000 growing plants, and plans on doing so every summer until growers leave the area, Yurok Vice Chairwoman Susan Masten said. "We're not going to quit until there are zero plants growing on the reservation," she said. Even the prospect of recreational marijuana legalization in 2016 won't change that policy, Masten said. "It will be illegal to grow it on the Yurok reservation," she said. This raid garnered national attention when Al Jazeera America posted a news segment of the operation on its website on Monday. On top of the plants eradicated, authorities seized 1,000 pounds of processed marijuana, made seven arrests, served 30 search warrants, discovered one butane hash oil lab and saw evidence indicating the possibility of Mexican cartel involvement in some of the grows, Masten said. Agencies involved include the California State Water Board, Humboldt County Drug Task Force, California Department of Fish & Wildlife, the National Guard, California Department of Forestry, Yurok Tribal Police Department and the Yurok Environmental Program. Depending on the maturity of the plant, around six gallons of water a day is required to keep a plant growing, Yurok Tribe Environmental Director Louisa McCovey said. According to a press release posted on the Yurok Tribe's Facebook account, the purpose of this raid was to return all water possible to the Klamath River and communities downstream from grow sites. Both McCovey and Masten said they witnessed the environmental destruction present on grow sites during the raids. "One of the most egregious environmental damages we saw on the grows was water diversion," McCovey said. Masten said she witnessed water diversion, unpermitted land grading and tree cutting, raw sewage leakage and huge piles of garbage on nearly every grow site. "This was a total disrespect for our land and resources," she said. Among the piles of trash on the different grow sites Masten said she saw household garbage, batteries, irrigation hoses, appliances and both legal and illegal fertilizers. "They're not following any laws and then they're devastating the environment and the water at the same time," she said. Unpermitted grading, clearing of land to make way for grow sites, trash dumping and water diversion impact the downstream communities and the watershed itself in many ways, McCovey said. Grading land and clear cutting trees causes sediment to filter into streams and eventually rivers, covering salmon spawning beds, she said. Runoff leeches from trash and fertilizers into the watershed and cause algae blooms and health problems for communities drinking that water, Masten said. "It has a rippling effect when you have those chemicals in the ground," she said. Salmon in the Klamath River are in a delicate state not only because of blue-green algae blooms caused by excess nutrients in the water or slow and low flowing warm water caused by upstream water diversion, but also because of a deadly parasite called ich, From tstokely at att.net Fri Jul 31 23:45:41 2015 Return-Path: X-Original-To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Delivered-To: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us Received: from bikepath.dcn.davis.ca.us (bikepath.dcn.davis.ca.us [168.150.253.5]) by velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADB092594 for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 23:45:38 -0700 (PDT) X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1438411783-08ffeb43c61a7ea0001-wGOHcq Received: from mail0.ess.barracuda.com (mail0.ess.barracuda.com [64.235.150.252]) by bikepath.dcn.davis.ca.us with ESMTP id 9jCS3BYU3PkfH2P6 for ; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 23:49:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: tstokely at att.net X-Barracuda-RBL-Trusted-Forwarder: 64.235.150.252 Received: from nm13-vm5.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm13-vm5.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.91.235]) by mx19.ess.sfj.cudaops.com (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 01 Aug 2015 06:49:43 +0000 X-BESS-ID: 1438411783-566671-26380-218721-1 X-Barracuda-BWL-IP: 98.138.91.235 X-Barracuda-Apparent-Source-IP: 98.138.91.235 X-Barracuda-RBL-IP: 98.138.91.235 X-BESS-VER: 2.7.2-r1507092151 X-BESS-Apparent-Source-IP: 98.138.91.235 X-BESS-BRTS-Status: 1 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=att.net; s=s1024; t=1438411782; bh=yCzcMGYVhtQKIS5qKbWSiBCADKRvjdxl3GVwHhgkAbQ=; h=From:Subject:Date:References:To:From:Subject; b=ikJnMeZGtmok6zMazsbYML6tA5FPZghyH7u5OBestcCo54SXe1gGhfNjQCUuhgMmoeel0bTi+u0PcmBaYXogmf4ULqdhnlIrY0ASIGcK4P+H1e2AyB4vkV7beXopduBSXgR7idTKTK2zPEtU6tzg4zV+okkXgZmVEW9BkpDsIhA= Received: from [98.138.100.112] by nm13.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Aug 2015 06:49:42 -0000 Received: from [98.138.84.39] by tm103.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Aug 2015 06:49:42 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by smtp107.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 01 Aug 2015 06:49:42 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 907569.82436.bm at smtp107.mail.ne1.yahoo.com X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-YMail-OSG: 4.Afs1UVM1kCqAFNks8CrIa7IEBvzoN3YfigIilj4ghxAXY ilUOYW6d7scN_MhIXvR7X4cvgwDTWNabgvEPYCNNPj8HF.utg7zfqdf09_pC dl2799lbw8nMeoOhMmX6sGD0K0TWfxexbp7Gs59p7FKBbHxF2td50P02rMq9 xKmwzEUzAOuaTdGY71EvrfWo0H_44b8qFYoT.M1CbzqVsiJM4V7ZlWHnw17Z 36NPOABkVxy1ZzHbg0nl0yv.ZvxNgTCzW4zPxfNi1Fb2pGR4vcqCwyXExiwx gTPzdFVvUpQkNv6JMrYZg5jmc6z0Pc15bJbztiBzvJBRWJpwvAFezMM2gEeL tcr0kv9zFCRzwluYaUQh9wpK1Y8WO0PVTAaKlVVUCL3kAi.7jxoZ4q6XPqM3 GSu4gG95NHGFf_AJRKgUsd7kPGF53ztkJ79i1UGaaiuVnsdG6O9ELIC.7JoA 1lVLLOWP14tPO4KkBPne0NccVGc9ZT.Hnt25pA.Ji4_ei.cCk6z_SxvNsy9H 98b.W8nSEkodUe_xhBi29bKRJyt5_DucKbXWOKykdudaUdw-- X-Yahoo-SMTP: tzg5tTKswBAMluIXf_Kv9rHcvGok742EFfFzqAY- From: Tom Stokely Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-20A5F350-BD07-42FF-9221-40B4BF9F9F60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Message-Id: X-ASG-Orig-Subj: Fwd: Draft EA to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klamath River with Trinity Reservoir Water Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 23:49:41 -0700 References: <71cf8edebc6b4c4381424290b14e9d59 at usbr.gov> To: "env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us" X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (12H143) X-Barracuda-Connect: mail0.ess.barracuda.com[64.235.150.252] X-Barracuda-Start-Time: 1438411783 X-Barracuda-URL: http://mx.dcn.davis.ca.us:8000/cgi-mod/mark.cgi X-Barracuda-BRTS-Status: 1 X-Virus-Scanned: by bsmtpd at dcn.davis.ca.us X-Barracuda-Spam-Score: 0.82 X-Barracuda-Spam-Status: No, SCORE=0.82 using global scores of TAG_LEVEL=3.5 QUARANTINE_LEVEL=1000.0 KILL_LEVEL=6.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE_2 X-Barracuda-Spam-Report: Code version 3.2, rules version 3.2.3.21266 Rule breakdown below pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.00 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.00 MIME_QP_LONG_LINE RAW: Quoted-printable line longer than 76 chars 0.82 MIME_QP_LONG_LINE_2 RAW: Quoted-printable line longer than 76 chars Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Draft EA to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klamath River with Trinity Reservoir Water X-BeenThere: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Trinity River Restoration List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2015 06:45:41 -0000 --Apple-Mail-20A5F350-BD07-42FF-9221-40B4BF9F9F60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: "Janet Sierzputowski" > Date: July 31, 2015 at 5:06:18 PM PDT > To: tstokely at att.net > Subject: Draft EA to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klamath River with Trin= ity Reservoir Water >=20 >=20 > Mid-Pacific Region > Sacramento, Calif. >=20 > MP-15-129 >=20 > Media Contact: Erin Curtis, 916-978-5100, eccurtis at usbr.gov >=20 > For Release On: July 31, 2015 >=20 > Reclamation Releases Draft Environmental Document to Supplement Flows in t= he Lower Klamath River with Trinity Reservoir Water >=20 > REDDING, Calif. =E2=80=93 The Bureau of Reclamation has released the Draft= Environmental Assessment for using Trinity Reservoir-stored water to supple= ment flows in the lower Klamath River to lessen the likelihood of a fish dis= ease outbreak and a die-off of adult salmon during the late summer of 2015. >=20 > Continued dry hydrologic conditions and the recent discovery of the presen= ce of Ich, the fish disease thought primarily responsible for the fish die-o= ff in 2002, has prompted Reclamation to consider supplementing flows to the l= ower Klamath River in 2015. The Proposed Action includes supplemental flows t= o prevent a disease outbreak and a contingency volume to be used on an emerg= ency basis to avoid a significant die-off of adult salmon. Real-time environ= mental and biological monitoring by federal, state and tribal biologists wou= ld be used to determine if and when to implement supplemental flows. >=20 > The Draft EA was prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Po= licy Act and is available at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cf= m?Project_ID=3D22309. If you encounter problems accessing the document onlin= e, please call 916-978-5100 or email mppublicaffairs at usbr.gov. >=20 > Please email comments by close of business, Friday, Aug. 7, 2015, to sha-s= lo-krff2015 at usbr.gov, or mail comments to Kylene Lang, Bureau of Reclamation= , 2800 Cottage Way, MP-152, Sacramento, CA 95825, or email comments to 916-9= 78-5055. >=20 > For additional information or to request a copy of the Draft EA, please co= ntact Paul Zedonis at 530-275-1554 (TTY 800-877-8339). Copies of the Draft E= A may also be viewed at Reclamation's Northern California Area Office, 16349= Shasta Dam Boulevard, Shasta Lake, CA 96019. >=20 > # # # >=20 > Reclamation is the largest wholesale water supplier and the second largest= producer of hydroelectric power in the United States, with operations and f= acilities in the 17 Western States. Its facilities also provide substantial f= lood control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. Visit our website a= t http://www.usbr.gov. >=20 >=20 >=20 > If you would rather not receive future communications from Bureau of Recla= mation, let us know by clicking here. > Bureau of Reclamation, Mid-Pacific 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, CA 95825 U= nited States --Apple-Mail-20A5F350-BD07-42FF-9221-40B4BF9F9F60 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Sent from my iPhone
=
Begin forwarded message:

= From: "Janet Sierzputowski" <jsierzputowski at usbr.gov>
Date: July 31, 2015 at 5:06:18 P= M PDT
To: tstokely at att.net=
Subject: Draft EA to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klamath Riv= er with Trinity Reservoir Water

Draft EA to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klamath River with Trinity R= eservoir Water

3D"Reclamation

Mid-Pacific Region
Sacramento, Calif.

MP-15-129

Media Contact: Erin Curtis, 916-978-5100, eccurtis at usbr.gov

For Release On: July 31, 2015

Reclamation Releases Draft Enviro= nmental Document to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klamath River with Trinity= Reservoir Water

REDDING, Calif. =E2=80=93 The Bureau of Reclamation has r= eleased the Draft Environmental Assessment for using Trinity Reservoir-store= d water to supplement flows in the lower Klamath River to lessen the likelih= ood of a fish disease outbreak and a die-off of adult salmon during the late= summer of 2015.

Continued dry hydrologic conditions and the recent discovery of the prese= nce of Ich, the fish disease thought primarily responsible for the fish die-= off in 2002, has prompted Reclamation to consider supplementing flows to the= lower Klamath River in 2015. The Proposed Action includes supplemental flow= s to prevent a disease outbreak and a contingency volume to be used on an em= ergency basis to avoid a significant die-off of adult salmon. Real-time envi= ronmental and biological monitoring by federal, state and tribal biologists w= ould be used to determine if and when to implement supplemental flows.

The Draft EA was prepared in accordance with the National Environmental P= olicy Act and is available at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projde= tails.cfm?Project_ID=3D22309. If you encounter problems accessing th= e document online, please call 916-978-5100 or email mppublicaffairs at usbr.gov.

Please email comments by close of business, Friday, Aug. 7, 2015, to sha-slo-krff2015 at usbr.gov, or m= ail comments to Kylene Lang, Bureau of Reclamation, 2800 Cottage Way, MP-152= , Sacramento, CA 95825, or email comments to 916-978-5055.

For additional information or to request a copy of the Draft EA, please c= ontact Paul Zedonis at 530-275-1554 (TTY 800-877-8339). Copies of the Draft E= A may also be viewed at Reclamation's Northern California Area Office, 16349= Shasta Dam Boulevard, Shasta Lake, CA 96019.

# # #

Reclamation is the largest wholesale water supplier and the second larges= t producer of hydroelectric power in the United States, with operations and f= acilities in the 17 Western States. Its facilities also provide substantial f= lood control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits. Visit our website a= t http://www.usbr.gov.

=

If you w= ould rather not receive future communications from Bureau of Reclamation, le= t us know by clicking here.
Bureau= of Reclamation, Mid-Pacific 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, CA 95825 United S= tates
= --Apple-Mail-20A5F350-BD07-42FF-9221-40B4BF9F9F60-- From sari at sisqtel.net Mon Aug 3 10:34:49 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 10:34:49 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?iso-8859-1?q?CBB=3A_California_=27Rain_Debt=27_Eq?= =?iso-8859-1?q?ual_To_Full_Year_Of_Precip=3B_Will_Strengthening_El?= =?iso-8859-1?q?_Nino_Bring_Relief=3F?= Message-ID: <007401d0ce12$b42aa050$1c7fe0f0$@sisqtel.net> THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN: Weekly Fish and Wildlife News www.cbbulletin.com July 31, 2015 Issue No. 758 California ?Rain Debt? Equal To Full Year Of Precip; Will Strengthening El Nino Bring Relief? A new NASA study has concluded California accumulated a debt of about 20 inches of precipitation between 2012 and 2015 -- the average amount expected to fall in the state in a single year. The deficit was driven primarily by a lack of air currents moving inland from the Pacific Ocean that are rich in water vapor. In an average year, 20 to 50 percent of California's precipitation comes from relatively few, but extreme events called atmospheric rivers that move from over the Pacific Ocean to the California coast. "When they say that an atmospheric river makes landfall, it's almost like a hurricane, without the winds. They cause extreme precipitation," said study lead author Andrey Savtchenko at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. Savtchenko and his colleagues examined data from 17 years of satellite observations and 36 years of combined observations and model data to understand how precipitation has varied in California since 1979. The results were published Thursday in Journal of Geophysical Research - Atmospheres, a journal of the American Geophysical Union http://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/agu/jgr/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)2169-89 96/ The state as a whole can expect an average of about 20 inches of precipitation each year, with regional differences. But, the total amount can vary as much as 30 percent from year to year, according to the study. In non-drought periods, wet years often alternate with dry years to balance out in the short term. However, from 2012 to 2014, California accumulated a deficit of almost 13 inches, and the 2014-2015 wet season increased the debt another seven inches, for a total 20 inches accumulated deficit during the course of three dry years. The majority of that precipitation loss is attributed to a high-pressure system in the atmosphere over the eastern Pacific Ocean that has interfered with the formation of atmospheric rivers since 2011. Atmospheric rivers occur all over the world. They are narrow, concentrated tendrils of water vapor that travel through the atmosphere similar to, and sometimes with, the winds of a jet stream. Like a jet stream, they typically travel from west to east. The ones destined for California originate over the tropical Pacific, where warm ocean water evaporates a lot of moisture into the air. The moisture-rich atmospheric rivers, informally known as the Pineapple Express, then break northward toward North America. Earlier this year, a NASA research aircraft participated in the CalWater 2015 field campaign to improve understanding of when and how atmospheric rivers reach California. Some of the water vapor rains out over the ocean, but the show really begins when an atmospheric river reaches land. Two reached California around Dec. 1 and 10, 2014, and brought more than three inches of rain, according to NASA's Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM)'s multi-satellite dataset. The inland terrain, particularly mountains, force the moist air to higher altitudes where lower pressure causes it to expand and cool. The cooler air condenses the concentrated pool of water vapor into torrential rains, or snowfall as happens over the Sierra Nevada Mountains, where water is stored in the snowpack until the spring melt just before the growing season. The current drought isn't the first for California. Savtchenko and his colleagues recreated a climate record for 1979 to the present using the Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications, or MERRA. Their efforts show that a 27.5 inch deficit of rain and snow occurred in the state between 1986 and 1994. "Drought has happened here before. It will happen again, and some research groups have presented evidence it will happen more frequently as the planet warms," Savtchenko said. "But, even if the climate doesn't change, are our demands for fresh water sustainable?" The current drought has been notably severe because, since the late 1980s, California's population, industry and agriculture have experienced tremendous growth, with a correlating growth in their demand for water. Human consumption has depleted California's reservoirs and groundwater reserves, as shown by data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) mission, leading to mandatory water rationing. "The history of the American West is written in great decade-long droughts followed by multi-year wet periods," said climatologist Bill Patzert at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. He was not involved in the research. "Savtchenko and his team have shown how variable California rainfall is." According to Patzert, this study added nuance to how scientists may interpret the atmospheric conditions that cause atmospheric rivers and an El Ni?o's capacity to bust the drought. Since March, rising sea surface temperatures in the central equatorial Pacific have indicated the formation of El Ni?o conditions. El Ni?o conditions are often associated with higher rainfall to the western United States, but it's not guaranteed. Savtchenko and his colleagues show that El Ni?o contributes only six percent to California's precipitation variability and is one factor among other, more random effects that influence how much rainfall the state receives. While it's more likely El Ni?o increases precipitation in California, it's still possible it will have no, or even a drying, effect. A strong El Ni?o that lasts through the rainy months, from November to March, is more likely to increase the amount of rain that reaches California, and Savtchenko noted the current El Ni?o is quickly strengthening. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which monitors El Ni?o events, ranks it as the third strongest in the past 65 years for May and June. Still, it will likely take several years of higher than normal rain and snowfall to recover from the current drought. "If this El Ni?o holds through winter, California's chances to recoup some of the precipitation increase. Unfortunately, so do the chances of floods and landslides," Savtchenko said. "Most likely the effects would be felt in late 2015-2016." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Mon Aug 3 15:25:19 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 15:25:19 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] MedfordMailTrib: Heat may overcook Rogue River chinook Message-ID: <00e801d0ce3b$484ea3d0$d8ebeb70$@sisqtel.net> http://www.mailtribune.com/article/20150731/ENTERTAINMENTLIFE/150739980 OUTDOOR JOURNAL Heat may overcook chinook By Mark Freeman Mail Tribune Posted Jul. 31, 2015 at 12:01 AM GOLD BEACH - Seeing the seining crew nab 15 wild fall chinook salmon from the Rogue River Wednesday at Huntley Park east of town should be a good sign for inland anglers with chinook on their minds. These big fish in the survey net are the first real shot of prized chinook this season to head out of the Rogue bay toward the middle Rogue, where hordes of anglers await them in the most popular Grants Pass-area fishery of the year. But with triple-digit air temperatures gripping the Rogue Valley, this best of times could become the worst of times. Migrating chinook are headed into a cauldron of hot and likely lethal lower Rogue waters prime for a drought-triggered disease outbreak that's so far sidestepped the Rogue during one of the hottest and driest years on record. But as hot as it will get this weekend, the image of belly-up chinook is almost inevitable. "It'll be lava," says Pete Samarin, a fish biologist on the Rogue for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. "That river's going to be slow and it's going to be hot. "It's going to be hard for anything to survive, chinook-wise," he says. Rogue River temperatures at Agness are expected to eclipse 80 degrees, hot enough to trigger a columnaris outbreak, which biologists feared would take out significant chunks of the Rogue spring chinook run, and which is now drawing a bulls-eye on the upcoming fall chinook run. The ones that have migrated past Huntley Park by now could be goners this week, but that's just the early tip of what has become a robust wild chinook run. The only hope is today's 108-degree air will cook the Rogue so hot that chinook won't venture upstream out of the bay's relatively cool, salt-infused waters. "We'll see," Samarin says. "But it's not good." It is good, however, if you happen to fish west of the head of tidewater. Bay trollers are running into chinook that aren't finning upstream in any large numbers like they normally would at this time of year. "It's not red-hot, but it's been good," says Jim Carey, who keeps tabs on the bay's fishing pulse from his Rogue Outdoor Store in Gold Beach. Red-hot has not been a positive phrase in the history of Rogue fall chinook, whose numbers historically have been tamped down by regular columnaris outbreaks in the Agness area and the Lower Rogue Canyon due to low, hot summer flows. But summer flow augmentation from Lost Creek Lake has changed that, cooling the Rogue most years to stave off this natural disease outbreak and creating very popular late-summer fisheries first in the bay, then the canyon and, finally, the Grants Pass-Gold Hill environs. Drought years, however, can take their toll, like in 1992 when low water triggered a columnaris outbreak that killed off almost 70 percent of the spring chinook run and triggered an emergency fishing closure. Shades of '92 were feared this year, but some deft water-release juggling and a very timely rainstorm helped get virtually all the springers to the upper Rogue disease-free. The Bureau of Land Management reports no dead salmon in the canyon all of last week, so protecting that run has been a success. But the current wave puts the all-wild fall run in peril, particularly any that get the itch to move out of the bay this weekend. "Those chinook in the bay," Samarin says, "just need to stop." But they won't stop forever. Within two weeks, the chinook will start showing up in the Huntley Park survey nets. When they do, ODFW's water-management strategy calls for increasing Lost Creek Lake releases from 1,500 cubic feet per second to 1,900 cfs in an attempt to cool the water in the Agness area to palatable levels. A dearth of natural tributary flow, however, means 1,900 cfs might be the flow at Agness. In the past, that's not been good enough to stave off disease if it's met with another round of triple-digit temps. "I don't know if that'll be good enough," Samarin says. "My intuition tells me otherwise." Reach reporter Mark Freeman at 541-776-4470 or mfreeman at mailtribune.com. Follow him at www.twitter.com/MTwriterFreeman. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Aug 4 08:51:09 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 15:51:09 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Times-Standard=3A_Tribes_blast_feds?= =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=99_Klamath_plan?= Message-ID: <881596192.445883.1438703469872.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.times-standard.com/general-news/20150803/tribes-blast-feds-klamath-plan Tribes blast feds? Klamath plan This March 12, 2003 file photo shows the Trinity River flowing below the Lewiston Dam outside Lewiston. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation released its plan to prevent the spread of disease among salmon returning to spawn in drought conditions for public review until Aug. 7, which includes releases from Lewiston Dam.Jeff Barnard ? The Associated PressBy?Will Houston, Eureka Times-StandardPOSTED:?08/03/15, 11:45 PM PDT?|?UPDATED: 2 HRS AGO# COMMENTSA federal plan to prevent a potential fish kill this summer on the lower Klamath River drew criticism on Monday from Hoopa Valley and Yurok tribe officials, who condemned the proposal as a lukewarm response to the threat of rising water temperatures and deadly parasites.The public review draft of the U.S. Interior Department Bureau of Reclamation?s preventative flow increase proposal includes a month-long flow increase from a Trinity River dam and a sizeable emergency release if conditions worsen. The proposed flow is just over half of what the tribes had requested in mid-July. As a result, the Hoopa Valley Tribe plans to protest the bureau?s proposal on Wednesday in Arcata at the Red Roof Inn, where the bureau is set to hold a public meeting on a separate long-term plan to protect fish on lower Klamath River.??It?s now come to the 11th hour and we?re still entertaining armchair quarterback approaches to protecting Klamath-Trinity River fish,? Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries Director Mike Orcutt said in a statement.Yurok Tribe senior fisheries biologist Mike Belchik said the bureau?s proposal also makes it unclear whether a release would ever occur even with a deadly parasite already being detected on fish huddled near one of the river?s tributaries.?We think that right now conditions on the river warrant a commitment of the release of a preventative flow,? Belchik said.The environmental assessment released last week would call for 32,000 acre-feet of water from Trinity Lake reservoir to be released from Lewiston Dam between around Aug. 19 and Sept. 20 to help flush away deadly pathogens and cool waters to promote further upriver migration by fall-run fish.?The cooler waters would improve fish immune systems as warm waters caused by ongoing low flows can make the fish more susceptible to infection. The proposed dam releases would increase the flow of the lower Klamath river to 2,500 cubic feet per second ? the same flow used in the 2014 releases. These types of preventative flows also occurred in 2003, 2004, and 2012 through 2014 and were implemented in the aftermath of a massive fish kill on the lower Klamath River in 2002 that left tens of thousands of fish dead due to an outbreak of the parasite known as ich.In their July proposal, the Hoopa Valley and Yurok tribes had requested the bureau release 63,700 acre-feet of water from Lewiston year to achieve a river flow of 2,800 cubic feet per second.However, bureau protocol under a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service states that a flow of 2,800 cubic feet per second can only occur if the fall-run Chinook salmon run is estimated to be above 170,000 fish. Only 119,000 fall-run Chinook are expected to return to the lower Klamath this year, which only requires a minimum 2,500 cubic feet per second flow.Bureau of Reclamation Deputy Public Affair Officer Louis Moore said that reservoir has to meet the demands of several water users, including those in the Central Valley, while also conserving enough water in the midst of an ongoing drought now in its fourth year.?In discussion, this number would seem to satisfy at least a minimum standard,? he said of the bureau?s flow rate.The tribes? flow request is just under the 64,000 acre-feet of water the bureau released in 2014 to prevent a potential fish kill, which also included an unprecedented emergency release the bureau made in September 2014 after an ich outbreak was detected.?This year?s proposed flow plan now includes the option for an emergency release of up to 51,000 acre-feet should high fish mortality, continuous high water temperatures or severe ich infection be observed.?Orcutt said he found it interesting that the bureau would plan for a large emergency release rather than just releasing higher preventative flows as the tribes had proposed.?I think the logic is the preventative release means that you?re going to do whatever you can do on the conservation side of it to try to avert ever having to pull the trigger on an emergency release,? he said. ?Last year we dodged a bullet. Will we this year? I?m not sure.?Three criteria would have to be met in order to trigger the preventative flows: the Yurok Tribe?s fishery in the Klamath River Estuary harvests 7,000 or more fall-run fish; average daily water temperature is greater than 73.4 degrees Fahrenheit for three consecutive days; and observed impacts to fish health and related river conditions.Bureau Public Affairs Officer Erin Curtis said that monitoring results from federal, state, and tribal agencies will allow for the bureau to decide if river conditions have worsened enough to warrant a preventative release. Curtis said that river conditions have improved over the last few weeks due to smoke from the ongoing wildfires shielding the waters from the sun and cooling them.Belchik said that the information already submitted is still enough to warrant a release, even with the shielding smoke.?Although there has been some improvement from the smoke and cloud coverage, we?re still really concerned for this fall given that we have the ich in the river here already,? he said.Even the bureau?s assessment acknowledges the risks associated with the low-flow conditions and the early ich outbreak.?Such high levels of ich present this early in the year indicate a significant risk for a large fish die-off in 2015,? the assessment states.North Coast Congressman Jared Huffman (D-Santa Rosa) called for quick action in a letter sent Monday to Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell.??Your agencies should be planning for a worst-case scenario that may fall well outside the scope of historical conditions,? Huffman?s letter states. The 2nd District lawmaker also called for long-term planning to address the issue.As of Aug. 2, Trinity Lake reservoir was at 33 percent capacity ? less than half the historical average for that date, according to the California Department of Water Resources. The reservoir has several drawers, including water districts that supply farmers in the bureau?s Central Valley Project that receive water through the Clear Creek Tunnel diversion to the Sacramento River. County and tribal officials have stated that these irrigators will likely challenge the fish-kill preventative releases through a temporary restraining order as they have consistently done in years past. As to whether this injunction filing would delay the dam releases is ?unknown,? according to Moore.The irrigator?s last attempt for a temporary injunction was denied by a federal judge in Fresno in September 2014.But what about that annual 50,000 acre-feet of Trinity River water promised to Humboldt County in the 1959 contract between the bureau? The Humboldt County Board of Supervisors had already formally requested the full amount earlier this year to be used to prevent a fish kill. The bureau?s current flow assessment currently does not include the county?s water, though bureau officials said it could be encompassed into the flow release.?We are working with all our contract to ensure as much water is delivered as possible,? Moore said, citing low water supply as a limiting factor.The lower Klamath River flow assessment is open for public comment through Friday and can be found online athttp://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=22309Contact Will Houston at 707-441-0504. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Aug 4 20:01:02 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 03:01:02 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: Tribes Slam Federal Water Plan for Klamath River In-Reply-To: <3568E39B-180A-4698-99BF-292D063C1100@fishsniffer.com> References: <3568E39B-180A-4698-99BF-292D063C1100@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <1303467602.66254.1438743662226.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Tuesday, August 4, 2015 6:16 PM, Dan Bacher wrote: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/05/1408820/-Tribes-Slam-Federal-Water-Plan-For-Klamath-River-Salmon Tribes Slam Federal Water Plan for Klamath River ? Hoopa Valley Tribe will hold protest in Arcata Wednesday by Dan Bacher The Hoopa Valley and Yurok Tribes criticized a federal environment assessment to release supplemental flows from Trinity Reservoir this August and September for not doing enough to prevent a fish kill on the lower Klamath River, since the proposal releases only half the water requested by scientists. Continued dry hydrologic conditions and the recent discovery of the presence of "Ich," the fish disease thought primarily responsible for the fish die-off in September 2002, when an estimated 35,000 to 78,000 adult salmon perished, prompted the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to supplement flows to the lower Klamath River in 2015. The Yurok Tribe discovered the outbreak of "Ich" on the lower river five weeks earlier than it found the disease last year. "The Proposed Action includes supplemental flows to prevent a disease outbreak and a contingency volume to be used on an emergency basis to avoid a significant die-off of adult salmon," said Erin Curtis of Reclamation. "Real-time environmental and biological monitoring by federal, state and tribal biologists would be used to determine if and when to implement supplemental flows." The Draft EA was prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and is available at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=22309. If you encounter problems accessing the document online, please call 916-978-5100 or email mppublicaffairs at usbr.gov.? The Bureau's environmental assessment calls for 32,000 acre-feet of water from Trinity Reservoir to be released from Lewiston Dam between Aug. 19 and Sept. 20 to help remove the pathogens and to cool the water to spur further upriver migration by fall-run Chinook salmon. The proposed releases would increase the flows to 2,500 cfs - the same releases used last year to prevent a fish kill.? However, the Bureau proposal provides for only half of the 63,700 acre feet of water that the Hoopa Valley and Yurok tribes had requested of the agency to sustain flows of 2,800 cfs. ??The Hoopa Valley Tribe said BOR's proposal outlining proposed flow releases from the Trinity River "does little to protect fish and does not use the best available science." "The Hoopa Valley Tribe has submitted a scientific and technically sound proposal to protect returning Chinook salmon that BOR has rejected," according to a statement from the Tribe. Mike Orcutt, Fisheries Director for the Tribe, said, "It is disheartening after having put all of our resources into a good faith effort to develop a sound and scientifically valid proposal to have it be rejected. Further, much to our dismay BOR now puts forth a scientifically untested and cumbersome proposal offered by federal agencies who profess to be fishery experts.?? Orcutt said, "It seems that Interior is considering last minute proposals not intended to protect fish but rather meet political agendas (CVP water supplies) of San Joaquin Valley Agribusiness." "It's now come to the 11th hour and we're still entertaining arm chair quarterback approaches to protecting Klamath-Trinity River fish," he added, noting that BOR will finalize its EA on Friday, August 7. "If a fish kill does occur it will be environmentally and politically devastating, but a direct reflection to how this administration has managed water resources," said Hoopa Tribal Chairman, Ryan Jackson. "Another fish kill on the Klamath River would be devastating to North coast communities, especially when Interior can still make the right choice and protect our culture and way of life." "Why are our people reduced to hauling dead fish from our river, instead of working with our trustees to prevent the disease that BOR?s operations cause?? Jackson asked. "Everyone knows that the Klamath River is in the state of environmental collapse and daily reports on the conditions of the river foretell an imminent fish kill," he added. "Both Hoopa and Yurok Tribes have done everything in their power legally and scientifically to convince Interior. We fully intend to work with anyone that wants to help save Klamath Basin salmon. We're hoping to get Humboldt County on board and collectively accomplish that." The Tribe said residents of Klamath and Trinity Rivers are "fed up with the deplorable water conditions" while their water is being piped over the hill to Central Valley agribusinesses.? Trinity River water is shipped, via a tunnel through the Trinity Mountains, to the Sacramento River watershed through Whiskeytown Reservoir and Clear Creek. The water is used by corporate agribusiness interests farming toxic, drainage-impaired lands on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley to grow almonds, pistachios, watermelons and other crops.? Mike Belchik, Yurok Tribe senior fisheries biologist, said, ?We think that right now conditions on the river warrant a commitment of the release of a preventative flow." In addition, Belchik noted that the Bureau's proposal makes it unclear whether a release would ever take place even with a deadly pathogen already being detected on fish concentrated near one of the river?s tributaries. ? On July 23, Yurok Fisheries crews conducting routine fish disease monitoring found that salmon in the Klamath River on the Yurok Reservation are infected with ?Ichthyophthirius multifiliis, commonly known as ich (pronounced ?ick?), ?This is an early warning sign for the fall migration of salmon in the Klamath River. It means that the risk of a catastrophic fish kill, such as happened in 2002, is high," said Belchik. The Hoopa Valley Tribe has decided to protest the Bureau's decision at a public scheduled scoping hearing on the Klamath River Long Term flow plan EIS on Wednesday, 5pm, at the Red Roof Inn, 4975 Valley West Blvd. Arcata CA. "We are already seeing diseased and dying salmon in the Klamath and Trinity rivers and the mouth of the Klamath River is nearly closed off during low tides," according to an action alert from the Tribe. "Most of our communities cannot drink the water, and some are completely without running water." "Yet, BOR released a proposal last Friday that is supposed to protect returning salmon, but is not based upon the best available science and is inadequate to prevent a fish kill this year? The Klamath River is on the state of environmental collapse and daily reports of conditions on the river predict an imminent fish kill." For more information, go to: https://www.facebook.com/events/896618100415479/ Please email comments by close of business, Friday, Aug. 7, 2015, to sha-slo-krff2015 at usbr.gov, or mail comments to Kylene Lang, Bureau of Reclamation, 2800 Cottage Way, MP-152, Sacramento, CA 95825, or email comments to 916-978-5055. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 5 08:36:27 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 15:36:27 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Ablaze Message-ID: <618791372.417532.1438788987891.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Redding.com says 63 square miles have burned. ?The?fires were reported at 5,000 acres last Friday. ?TS http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_9e876510-3b10-11e5-88b2-17c23f80fa89.html Timbre Beck Barker fire A helicopter carrying a bucket of water flies toward the Barker fire on Friday. Related Galleries ?Fire in the pines Posted:?Wednesday, August 5, 2015 6:15 am?|?Updated: 7:59 am, Wed Aug 5, 2015.By AMY GITTELSOHN The Trinity Journal?|?0?commentsFires ignited by lightning in Trinity County have burned more than 50,000 acres and forced residents from their homes, slamming the Trinity Pines area where structures have been lost.Containment is still low for the fires, one of which swept into the Pines subdivision Friday ?like a freight train,? as Post Mountain Fire Chief Tim Spiersch put it. Firefighters are still working to contain the other fires as well, with evacuation orders remaining in effect in numerous communities including parts of Hyampom, Hayfork, Mad River and Ruth, Denny and Trinity Pines.?We?re not out of the thick of this by any means,? said Rocky Opliger, who leads the interagency management team working on the Fork Complex of fires in the Hayfork, Trinity Pines, Harrison Gulch and Barker Creek areas.At a community meeting in Hayfork Monday evening, Opliger said more severe weather is expected Thursday and Friday with higher temperatures, downdrafts and lightning potential. Evacuations remain in place because of that potential, he said.The fires are being managed jointly by interagency teams including the U.S. Forest Service and Cal Fire. Crews from fire departments around the country have also traveled to Trinity County.Gov. Jerry Brown declared a state of emergency in California on Friday to help mobilize additional firefighting and disaster response teams due to the number of wildfires burning in much of the state.Air advisories due to smoky conditions resulting from the many fires have been issued in Trinity County even in communities not currently threatened by fire, including Weaverville.Chief Spiersch from Post Mountain estimated that 20 percent of the Pines burned in Friday?s firestorm, with the South Ridge and Pipeline areas devastated.Early this week he had confirmed that 12 residences were destroyed and estimated the total number of homes destroyed to be around 20 although he had not made it down every driveway. Also, many of the 200 parcels that burned had trailers or unpermitted structures used as dwellings, he said.He estimated there were more than 100 burned vehicles.The burned properties will have to be checked with a cadaver dog, he said, but at this point no one has been reported missing.With the roads blocked, Trinity Pines residents who chose to stay in spite of the evacuation order are short of food and supplies, he said.Opliger was asked about that situation at the meeting in Hayfork, and said the team is trying to work something out to get food and water to the area. However, he noted that the Trinity Pines is a mandatory evacuation area and said his focus is to get people out and to the evacuation shelter in Hayfork.?We will escort them out,? he said.The comment was also made that mandatory evacuations apply to everybody, and a man in the audience responded that if not for the people who stayed, ?there wouldn?t be any Pines.?On Sunday the scene around the area of the Pines that burned was of trees turned to blackened poles, rubble from what had once been homes and structures, and vehicles gutted by flames and such intense heat that aluminum parts melted and ran in rivulets onto the ground. With fences destroyed and blackened tree trunks now devoid of foliage, withered marijuana grows could be seen at many locations.Volunteers and residents fought to protect homes on their own the first day, with more firefighting resources arriving Saturday morning, Spiersch said.The volunteers took a stand and were able to save homes, he said.James Wallace and his son, Jason, surveyed the devastation at the home of his in-laws, Ernie and Connie Hall, in the Pines. A home and large shop had been destroyed and the couple?s 2 acres were blackened and still smoking.?Heart wrenching,? Jason Wallace said.The family had been working on the place for about 35 years, said James Wallace, who lives nearby but was not home when the fire swept through. Angrily he noted that his family pays the Cal Fire fee but the agency was not in the Pines when the flames came through.The Halls had been in Redding for an appointment Friday but managed to return and rescue their dog in the nick of time.?They ran to the house to get the dog, and the place went up,? Wallace said.The Trinity County Sheriff?s Office along with officers from other counties responded to help with evacuations. Officers went through the Pines with air horns and sirens, said Trinity County Sheriff?s Cpl. Ron Hanover, who responded from the Hyampom area.?Most of the places I contacted were already vacant when we came through,? Hanover said.Although things had quieted on Sunday, firefighters from out of the area remained on the scene.?The concern is with the weather that could possibly be coming in,? said Capt. Eric Janert with a crew staffing an Office of Emergency Services engine from the city of Hemet.The crew was doing perimeter control to see that the fire doesn?t cross into unburned area, he said, given the potential for wind, rolling debris and the unsecured fire edge.The communities of Hayfork and Hyampom have also been under siege.Two fires in the Fork Complex, the Rail and Barker fires, quickly blew up on Friday afternoon and spread toward the town of Hayfork from the south and east. The ongoing fires have caused the cancellation of the Trinity County Fair which was scheduled for this Friday, Saturday and Sunday. The junior livestock events will be held.Hayfork Interim Fire Chief Jerry Hlavac said as of early this week he had not heard of any residences burning in the Hayfork fire district area.So far the biggest threat was from the Rail fire that came up from Peanut, he said.?It came roaring into town really hot and fast,? Hlavac said, burning up to the county dump and over to Kingsbury Road. ?Fire burned down to the property lines where they had bulldozer lines.?Hayfork District Ranger Tom Hall said in the South Complex affecting Hyampom, the Pelletreau fire has high priority with a line being put in on its northeast side. The Castle fire started to push toward power lines, and poles are being treated, he said. Ranches in Corral Bottom are being prepared.In Southern Trinity, Fire Chief Bill German said the Mad River Complex which has burned large swathes around Ruth Lake destroyed a couple of summer cabins on South Fork Mountain above the lake. That complex is also being managed by an interagency team, and on Tuesday German said firefighting efforts seemed to be going well but there is still ?a tremendous amount of open edge to this fire.?On Tuesday at the Forest Service?s request the Sheriff?s Department added Denny to the list of mandatory evacuations. The Forest Service advised that due to the amount of fire activity they have limited resources for structure protection.At the community meeting in Hayfork, residents asked how they can get from one non-evacuated area to another for appointments given the road closures. Sheriff Bruce Haney said the roadblocks are in part to prevent looting of evacuated areas; however, people needing to get through should ask the Caltrans or CHP people at the roadblock to contact the Sheriff?s Office, which will arrange an escort. He said that, of course, an emergency would be handled differently.Law enforcement from around the North State has responded to assist the Sheriff?s Office with about 20 additional officers.Multiple fires in five areas have burned more than 50,000 acres, forced evacuations -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 5 08:38:46 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 15:38:46 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] 9/13 River stakeholder meeting (bring your gas mask) Message-ID: <305372849.430196.1438789126213.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_cf96ad00-3b0b-11e5-8e66-87078e522667.html River stakeholder meeting A public meeting of the Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group and Trinity Management Council is scheduled from 9:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. Thursday, Aug. 13, at the North Fork Grange Hall, Dutch Creek Road, Junction City.The primary objectives of this meeting include discussion of the following topics: Tour Lower Junction City restoration site-TRRP staff; Public Comment; Recap from 2014 TAMWG/TMC meeting; Have we implemented the five principles effectively?; Has TRRP outreach been effective?; Next steps for future success.A draft meeting agenda is available for download from the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office Web site at?www.fws.gov/arcata.For more information contact Joe Polos, TAMWG designated federal officer, at?joe_polos at fws.gov. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 5 08:40:20 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 15:40:20 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal: Meetings slated on long-term salmon plan Message-ID: <1955665337.407380.1438789220926.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_c0c9adac-3b08-11e5-a5ee-ef10df2ff47a.html The Bureau of Reclamation has scheduled four open house/public scoping meetings to begin preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement to evaluate the effects of the Long-Term Plan for the Protection of Adult Salmon in the Lower Klamath River. The purpose of the meetings is to solicit early input from the public regarding the alternatives to be evaluated and their potential environmental impacts. The scoping meetings will be held in:Weaverville, Thursday, Aug. 6, 5:30 to 7 p.m., Trinity County Library, 351 Main St.Arcata, Calif., today, Wednesday, Aug. 5, 5:30 to 7 p.m., Red Roof Inn, 4975 Valley West Blvd.Klamath Falls, Ore., Tuesday, Aug. 11, 5:30 to 7 p.m., Shilo Inn, 2500 Almond St.Sacramento, Calif., Wednesday, Aug. 12, 5:30 to 7 p.m., Bureau of Reclamation Cafeteria Conference Rooms C-1001 & 1002, 2800 Cottage WayThe open house will start at 5:30 p.m. At 6 p.m. there will be a brief presentation. The open house will resume after the presentation. Written comments will be accepted at the meetings or may be mailed to Paul Zedonis, Bureau of Reclamation, Northern California Area Office, 16349 Shasta Dam Blvd., Shasta Lake, CA 96019 or e-mailed to?sha-slo-klamath-LTP at usbr.gov.Written comments must be received by Aug. 20. For more information, contact Zedonis at 530-275-1554 (TTY 800-877-8339) or visit?www.usbr.gov/mp/kbao/docs/long-term_plan_protect_lower_klamath_04-2015.pdf. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 5 10:47:02 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 17:47:02 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] 9/13 River stakeholder meeting (bring your gas mask) In-Reply-To: <305372849.430196.1438789126213.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <305372849.430196.1438789126213.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <309185930.514008.1438796822321.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Please note that the correct date is August 13, not September 13 for the joint TMC/TAMWG meeting.?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 Wednesday, August 5, 2015 8:38 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_cf96ad00-3b0b-11e5-8e66-87078e522667.html River stakeholder meeting A public meeting of the Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group and Trinity Management Council is scheduled from 9:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. Thursday, Aug. 13, at the North Fork Grange Hall, Dutch Creek Road, Junction City.The primary objectives of this meeting include discussion of the following topics: Tour Lower Junction City restoration site-TRRP staff; Public Comment; Recap from 2014 TAMWG/TMC meeting; Have we implemented the five principles effectively?; Has TRRP outreach been effective?; Next steps for future success.A draft meeting agenda is available for download from the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office Web site at?www.fws.gov/arcata.For more information contact Joe Polos, TAMWG designated federal officer, at?joe_polos at fws.gov. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 5 11:42:29 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 18:42:29 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Correction 8/13 River stakeholder meeting (not 9/13) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1867529264.521441.1438800149354.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Tom Stokely wrote: http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_cf96ad00-3b0b-11e5-8e66-87078e522667.html River stakeholder meeting A public meeting of the Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group and Trinity Management Council is scheduled from 9:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. Thursday, Aug. 13, at the North Fork Grange Hall, Dutch Creek Road, Junction City.The primary objectives of this meeting include discussion of the following topics: Tour Lower Junction City restoration site-TRRP staff; Public Comment; Recap from 2014 TAMWG/TMC meeting; Have we implemented the five principles effectively?; Has TRRP outreach been effective?; Next steps for future success.A draft meeting agenda is available for download from the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office Web site at?www.fws.gov/arcata.For more information contact Joe Polos, TAMWG designated federal officer, at?joe_polos at fws.gov. _______________________________________________ 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 Aug 5 16:37:02 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 23:37:02 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] CSPA, C-WIN and AquAlliance File State Lawsuit to Save Sacramento River salmon Message-ID: <2025148392.751640.1438817822650.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> https://www.c-win.org/content/cspa-c-win-and-aqualliance-file-state-lawsuit-against-swrcb-bor-and-dwr.html CSPA, C-WIN and AquAlliance File State Lawsuit to Save Sacramento River salmon ?Press Release5 August 2015For Immediate ReleaseContact:? ??Bill Jennings, California Sportfishing Protection Alliance: 209-464-5067?? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Barbara Vlamis, AquAlliance; 530-895-9420????????????????? Michael Jackson: Law Offices of Michael B. Jackson; 530-283-0712????????????????? Jason Flanders, Aqua Terra Aeris Law Group; 916-202-3018Groups Sue State Water Board to Prevent Fishery ExtinctionsCaptive Regulatory Agency Refuses to Enforce and Comply with Laws?Protecting Fisheries and Water QualityOn 4 August 2015, The California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA), California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) and AquAlliance, collectively ?Petitioners,? filed a lawsuit against the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) seeking declaratory and injunctive relief and a writ of mandate, under California Code of Civil Procedure, in Alameda County Superior Court.? The lawsuit alleges that the State Water Board and its Executive Director violated the California Water Code, Public Trust Doctrine and a suite of environmental laws when it issued a series of Temporary Urgency Change Orders (TUCP Orders) that weakened legally adopted standards protecting water quality and fisheries.??This action is a companion to a 3 June 2015 federal lawsuit against the Department of Interior and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation for violations of the Administrative Procedure Act, Central Valley Project Improvement Act and Clean Water Act.? The lawsuit asks the court to issue a writ of mandate ordering the State Water Board to vacate its TUCP Orders, to preliminarily and permanently enjoin the Board from activities undertaken pursuant to the TUCP Orders, enter a declaratory judgment that the Board has engaged in an illegal pattern and practice of adopting TUCP Orders and enjoin the Board from further engaging in an illegal pattern and practice of adopting TUCP Orders that violate the law.??This lawsuit is an effort to prevent the extinction of fisheries that thrived for millennia.? If Delta and longfin smelt and winter- and spring-run Chinook salmon go extinct, it will not be because of drought.? These fish survived the great mega-droughts of the past.? They may not survive the State Water Board?s serial violations of law,? said CSPA Executive Director Bill Jennings adding, ?fallowed fields will be replanted after the drought, extinct fisheries are forever lost.?????We?re either a society of law or not and this action is an effort to enforce the law.? ?The Water Board has morphed from an independent regulatory agency into a political agent of a Governor that cares little for the law or fish and wildlife,? said Michael Jackson, attorney for the plaintiffs.??Operation of the state and federal water projects by DWR and Reclamation has brought fisheries to historic lows.? Since 1967, abundance indices for striped bass, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, American shad, splittail and threadfin shad have declined by 99.7, 97.8, 99.9, 91.9, 98.5 and 97.8%, respectively. ?Natural production of Sacramento winter-run and spring-run Chinook salmon have decline by 98.2 and 99.3%, respectively, and are only at 5.5 and 1.2 percent of doubling levels mandated by the Central Valley Project Improvement Act, California Water Code and California Fish & Game Code. ??The State Water Board?s weakening of minimal critically dry year standards has pushed already depressed fishery populations to the brink of extinction.? The California Department of Fish and Wildlife?s Fall Midwater Trawl, Spring Kodiak Trawl, 20-mm Survey and Summer Townet Survey of fish abundance have all reported historically low abundance indices far below previous lows.? For example, recent 20-mm Survey trawls of 47 sites (3 trawls each site) found only a single Delta smelt and no longfin smelt.? Weakening of Sacramento River temperature standards last year led to the loss of 95% of winter-run, 98% of fall-run and virtually all of the spring-run Chinook salmon.? This year, the State Water Board weakened the standards even further setting the stage for another disaster.???Salmon are the harbinger of the malady afflicting California?s greatest watershed ? and he agencies sworn to protect them,? said AquAlliance Executive Director Barbara Vlamis.? ?We cannot shut the door on our fisheries because the state and federal water projects drain reservoirs on the Sacramento and Feather Rivers during a drought in the hope that the next year might be wet.? ??California has experienced 10 multi-year droughts of large-scale extent in the last 100 years, spanning 41 years.? Although the state experiences drought conditions more than forty percent of the time, the CVP and SWP continue to operate and deliver water without consideration of drought conditions. They draw down reservoir storage under the assumption that the coming year will be wet, providing little reserve storage in the event the following year is dry. In the event of another dry year, they endeavor to maximize deliveries in the hope that it will rain next year. This pattern has repeated itself for decades, most recently during the 1987-1992, 2000-2002, 2007-2009 and 2013-2015 droughts.?The Central Valley Project and State Water Project count on the State Water Board to bail them out by relaxing standards and reducing water flows crucial to water quality and healthy and reproducible fisheries. ?And the Board has obliged the projects by relaxing standards thereby encouraging them to continue to operate on the edge of crisis while fisheries, hanging on the lip of extinction, pay the price.? During the drought of 1987-1992, the State Board informed the projects that it would not take enforcement action for more than 245 violations of standards protecting Delta agriculture and fisheries, even though further violations were expected.? This drought is little different.? In 2013 State Board Executive Director Tom Howard informed the projects that he would take no action if the projects failed to comply with applicable standards.? Last year, he weakened Bay-Delta standards on 9 different occasions and, in 2015, has already relaxed standards 6 times.???Our fisheries and public trust resources cannot be sacrificed simply because regulatory agencies refuse to balance the public trust with unreasonable demands for water in an arid state,? said CWIN Executive Director Carolee Krieger.??The Aqua Terra Aeris Law Group and the Law Offices of Michael B. Jackson represent CSPA, C-WIN, and AquAlliance in this action.??View the lawsuit?here. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Aug 6 06:50:03 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 13:50:03 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal: Trinity Collaborative in transition Message-ID: <1102970.97832.1438869003434.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_d7837f90-3b09-11e5-84cf-c349c0b253c9.html Trinity Collaborative in transition Posted:?Wednesday, August 5, 2015 6:15 amBy Sally Morris The Trinity Journal?|?0?commentsThere have been some changes in how the Trinity County Collaborative Group is working to create more successful land and resource management projects on the ground, but the two-year-old effort involving a consistent list of 55 participants continues.That was the report last given to the Trinity County Board of Supervisors in July as the Collaborative transitions to a group that meets quarterly now instead of monthly and new leadership is recruited.The group was formed in the spring of 2013 as an attempt to bridge long-standing controversy and impasse over forest land and resource management issues in the county. Following a personal visit to the county by Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, the Collaborative involving several former adversaries began meeting on a monthly basis with professional facilitation to develop priorities that all could agree to work on.Smaller groups formed based on common areas of interest and expertise. Participation from the start has come from varied stakeholders including landowners, local and regional conservation groups, business owners, Sierra Pacific Industries, Trinity River Lumber Company, Fire Safe Councils, the Trinity County Resource Conservation District, U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Natural Resources Conservation Service, the Trinity County Board of Supervisors and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.For the first two years, the full group met monthly to develop consensus, work on landscape assessment, and develop and prioritize projects. The group now meets quarterly with active subgroup meetings happening more frequently to work on each area of focus.Retired Trinity County Resource Conservation District Manager Pat Frost presented an update of the Collaborative?s activities to the Trinity County Board of Supervisors in July, noting he is temporarily back at work there as the RCD hires a new manager to replace Alex Cousins who recently left the position for a job at Trinity River Lumber Company. Cousins was also present to provide project updates to the board and said he will continue to participate in the Collaborative process as an employee of the mill.The RCD is the entity that continues to receive grant funds to support facilitation of the Collaborative. Frost said that after two years of meetings, participants felt there wasn?t enough productivity to warrant monthly meetings of the full group ?yet the smaller working groups continue to meet between the quarterly meetings to get the yeomen?s work done.?He said the keystone project of the Collaborative is a pilot program to create shaded fuel breaks that reduce fire hazards along strategic roadsides and ridges. The pilot program involves treatment on approximately 3,000 acres, in planning now for work to be accomplished in the 2015/16 federal fiscal year. The pilot project is located mostly in Trinity County?s Supervisorial District 5 including the areas of Tule Creek, Butter Creek and Indian Valley.Then there will be monitoring and assessments to see how it worked and how to scale it up to a goal of treating 30,000 acres, Frost said, adding the work will involve thinning fuels within varying roadside widths as well as some timber harvest to generate logs for the mill and revenue to help pay for additional projects.Other subgroups are working on assorted projects other than forestry, including a proposal to improve existing boat launch ramps at Trinity Lake and install a low-water ramp; build a trail that circumnavigates the entire lake; preservation of the Bowerman Barn historic site and development of an interpretive trail there; and other trail projects. A proposal to re-establish a boat ramp at Estrellita has also been submitted.?Despite all our successes and progress over the past two years, there certainly continues to be frustration regarding the processes you have to go through to get something approved,? Frost said, adding that under the required NEPA process, ?getting something on the Forest Service program of work can take years. The pilot project attempts to tweak that a little by getting a lot of the specialized elements done under contract through the RCD or the Hayfork Watershed Center so that?s moving along pretty well.?Sup. Keith Groves said he ran into a problem with having the Collaborative meetings reduced to a quarterly schedule when he was looking for a letter of support for proposed emergency spending on long-term improvements at existing boat ramps before the group was scheduled to meet again.Sup. Judy Morris suggested there will be times like that when the Board of Supervisors ?just has to leapfrog over the Collaborative.?Frost said it?s an issue he will bring up at the next meeting of the Collaborative, noting ?it?s true for grant applications as well. Some of those have a short, 30-day turnaround. We need a procedure for that type of situation when quick action is needed to take advantage of opportunities that come up.?Morris thanked Cousins ?for all his efforts, keeping us on course and keeping it going over these last two years.??I?m not going anywhere. I?m still in the community and working on collaborative issues,? Cousins said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Aug 6 07:15:45 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 14:15:45 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Editorial: Ich a symptom of larger problems Message-ID: <1504947627.129559.1438870545409.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-ich-a-symptom-of-larger-problems_07698924 Editorial: Ich a symptom of larger problems 6:00 PM, Aug 4, 2015editorials A minuscule parasite nicknamed ?Ebola of the Klamath salmon? is striking fear in the hearts of the few people tasked with eliminating the little beasts and loathing in the hearts of big scale water and power agencies for which salmon carry ?public enemy? status.For the latter group, every move to divert water for salmon survival is a blow to their crops and water and power customers.Even the North State?s U.S. Rep. Doug LaMalfa, R-Richvale, agrees with that philosophy. The rice farmer has introduced an amendment to a federal appropriations bill that would forbid the high river flows that help protect the fish. He thinks the water needs to go to water agencies in Central and Southern California for agriculture and other uses.The Yurok Tribe has a long and fruitful history with the Klamath River?s once prolific salmon ? Coho and Chinook ? and the steelhead that once flourished in those bountiful waters. Times and water levels may have changed, and the salmon runs have declined, but the Yurok are a people committed preserving what?s left of the once plentiful salmon runs.That?s why they can?t ? and mustn?t ? forget what history has taught. The most recent disaster was in 2002 when some 35,000 Chinook perished in the fall run. Ichthyophthirius multifiliis, commonly called ?ich,? was the culprit.The die-offs have continued, albeit on a smaller scale.Now that icky Ich is back again ? months earlier than it arrived last year. It was found in a pool where 200 spring-run Chinook and about 800 steelhead trout are trapped near where Blue Creek flows into the Klamath, the tribe?s senior fisheries biologist, Michael Belchik reported. Since the parasite thrives in warm, low water and crowded conditions, it?s not surprising that ich is popping up early in this, our fourth year of drought. It?s hot and water is low everywhere.Not surprising, maybe, but ominous ? Belchik calls the situation an early warning of a high risk for another catastrophic fish kill in the fall run, which state Department of Fish and Wildlife biologists have predicted at just under 120,000 fish.Since that 2002 debacle state and federal water managers have experimented with attempts to improve conditions for the fish ? not just on the Trinity River, which feeds the lower Klamath near the coast, but on the Sacramento. They?ve tried gradually ramping up releases from the dams and low pulse flows ? in hopes that the spurts will help clean out the ponds where ich thrives.So far nobody had come up with a permanent plan that would set the standards for releases and establish trigger factors for when they?re necessary.This week stakeholders are holding scoping meetings on a proposed plan that could be put into place, perhaps by next year.It?s tricky. In addition to the Yurok and Hoopa Valley tribes, many other interests are in play, including the powerful Metropolitan Water District of Southern California and the Westlands Water District, both of which tend to sue when they see Sacramento River flows reduced.When water stored behind the Lewiston Dam is released into the Trinity River, that means it?s not going to Whiskeytown Lake, through power plants there and eventually into the Sacramento.That scenario pulls in all the same political power players who are pushing raising Shasta Dam by 18 ? feet.It all comes down to two sides battling over what?s more important ? fish or agriculture.In Shasta County, where the salmon are a huge tourist draw, we expect our neighbors to the south to strike a balance. If more water is needed here, where it was before humans interfered with the natural flows that helped those fish flourish, we need to provide enough to save them from perishing. Corporate farmers who planted vast orchards on arid soil took a big gamble, and the fish shouldn?t be left to settle up the tab.If some larger water releases can save the salmon, as they appear to be doing if properly administered, then we should use that technology to protect the dwindling salmon runs.What a shame it would be if they disappeared permanently. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Aug 6 07:24:31 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 14:24:31 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard: Tribes to feds: Klamath plan unacceptable Message-ID: <2069507663.125467.1438871071233.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.times-standard.com/20150805/tribes-to-feds-klamath-plan-unacceptable Tribes to feds: Klamath plan unacceptable Will Houston -- The Times-Standard A boy yells phrases of protest on Wednesday during a demonstration held by the Hoopa Valley Tribe outside of a U.S. Bureau of Reclamation meeting in Arcata regarding a long-term plan to protect Klamath River fish. The tribe states the bureau's planned dam releases to prevent a possible fish kill this summer will not be enough.?By?Will Houston, Eureka Times-StandardPOSTED:?08/05/15, 10:43 PM PDT?|?UPDATED: 2 HRS AGO# COMMENTSWill Houston -- The Times-Standard Members of the Hoopa Valley and Yurok tribes protested the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation meeting in Arcata on Wednesday that focused on a long-term plan to protect fish on the lower Klamath River. The tribes state the bureau's proposed dam releases to protect fish this summer will not be enough to stave off a possible fish kill caused by low flow conditions.? At a glanceFish-kill prevention flow releases and forecast fall-run Chinook salmon runs on lower Klamath River:2003:Salmon adults: 192,000Flow release: 38,000 acre-feet2004:Salmon adults: 79,000Flow release: 36,313 acre-feet2012:Salmon adults: 384,000 (record high)Flow release: 39,000 acre-feet2013:Salmon adults: 272,000 (second highest on record)Flow release: 17,500 acre-feet2014:Salmon run: 92,800Flow release: 22,700 acre-feetEmergency release: 41,300 acre-feet2015:Salmon run: 119,000Proposed flow release: 32,000 acre-feetProposed emergency release: 51,000 acre-feetSource: U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of ReclamationAfter a U.S. Bureau of Reclamation representative wrapped up a presentation in Arcata regarding the agency?s long-term plan to protect salmon in the lower Klamath River, a Yurok Tribe member unexpectedly picked up the microphone to voice disappointment of the bureau?s separate plan to protect fish this summer.?The proposed amount of water that is in your impact statement is not acceptable,? Yurok Tribe member Annelia Hillman said during the bureau?s meeting at the Red Roof Inn conference room on Wednesday afternoon. ?We need flows that are preventable for fish disease that guarantee that our fish will live on and that we will live on.?Hillman was one of the many North Coast tribal members, families and supporters that attended the meeting to protest the bureau?s recently proposed plan to release 32,000 acre-feet of Trinity River dam water to prevent a possible fish kill on the lower Klamath River this summer caused by low-flow conditions. The protest was put on by the Hoopa Valley Tribe which had, with backing from the Yurok Tribe, submitted a recommendation to the bureau in mid-July calling for 64,000 acre-feet of Trinity River water to be released.However Wednesday?s meeting itself focused on a completely separate plan the bureau is working on that bureau Supervising Natural Resources Specialist Paul Zedonis said would protect lower Klamath River fish ?for the long haul.?The bureau has had to make five fish kill preventative flow releases for lower Klamath River fish since 2003, but each year required its own environmental review as there was no set protocol in place on how such releases would be carried out.This lack of set procedure has led to many disagreements between tribes, government agencies, biologists and Central Valley water users as to how and whether dam water should be used to protect the fish.Wednesday?s meeting and the five flow releases are all tied together by an environmentally catastrophic event in September 2002 that left tens of thousands adult Chinook salmon and steelhead trout dead in the lower Klamath. An outbreak of two deadly pathogens had occurred as the fish packed together near cooler tributaries along the river to get out of the warm, low-flowing waters that weaken their immune systems and cease upriver migration. Within two weeks, 35,000 fish had died.The bureau?s proposed long-term plan currently encompasses and combines several protocols that were put into place during the five years these preventative flow releases were made.The plan draws most of its policies from 2012 and 2013 when the highest and second-highest fall Chinook salmon runs were predicted, respectively. Under the current proposed plan, the bureau would release preventative flows to increase the flow of the lower Klamath River to a minimum of 2,500 to 2,800 cubic feet per second depending on the estimated fall Chinook salmon run size.The flow releases would start when either the Yurok Tribe?s fishery in the Klamath River estuary area harvests 7,000 or more Chinook salmon, or on the set date of Aug. 22 should that catch size not be met. The flows would end Sept. 21 unless water temperatures stayed at or above 73 degrees Fahrenheit.The plan also includes protocol for when a emergency doubling flow should take place as had to occur in 2014 after preventative flows failed to stop the spread of the deadly gill parasite known as ?ich.?The long-term plan is currently undergoing the initial stages of the federal environmental review process, which requires the drafting of an environmental impact statement.Stillwater Sciences fisheries biologist Joshua Strange said that the estimated year-long process should address some of the deficiencies he sees in the plan, such as basing flow allocations on predicted sizes of fall-run salmon. Strange said this lesson was already learned in 2014 when the actual fall run size had more than 67,000 more fish than projected, and the unprecedented emergency flow release had to be made.?We can?t push the preventative flows down to the bare minimum when there is a projected small run because, in fact, the run was twice as big as what was predicted,? he said.Strange said that the minimum standard flow to protect fish from disease should be 2,800 cubic feet per second ? the same that the Hoopa Valley and Yurok tribes are seeking to protect this year?s salmon run.Along with fish health, the plan?s environmental impact statement will address several other factors such as maintaining reservoir supply in the midst of an ongoing four-year drought, Humboldt County?s promised annual 50,000 acre-feet of Trinity River water, Central Valley contractors, impacts to power generation and tribal interests.While oral public comment wasn?t being taken at the meeting, several tribal members took it upon themselves to take up the microphone and voice how impacts to the river are also impacts to tribal culture.?It?s not just water to us. It?s not ?Oh, I like to eat fish for dinner,?? Hoopa Tribal member Sara Chase said to the meeting attendees. ?It?s part of our soul. It?s part of our blood. It goes back thousands and thousands of years before time was even recorded.?It?s part of who were are,? she continued. ?And when you say, ?Oh, we can?t give you enough water so you can be who you are,? then that is the most disrespectful thing that I can think of.?After the tribal members were done speaking, bureau Deputy Public Affairs Officer Louis Moore thanked them for voicing their views and asked them to submit their comments.The bureau plans to release a draft environmental impact statement by early 2016, with a public comment period beginning in spring 2016, according to Zedonis.Will Houston can be reached at 707-441-0504. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Reach the author at?whouston at times-standard.com@times-standard.com?or follow Will on Twitter:?@Will_S_Houston. - Full bio and more articles by Will Houston -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Aug 6 10:27:00 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 17:27:00 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] More water for Klamath Project irrigators In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1293855233.263214.1438882020217.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.heraldandnews.com/klamath/more-water-for-project-irrigators/article_5cf45980-2ab8-557f-b2c3-05be8434548a.html Klamath Project farmland may get a little greener in coming weeks.According to Terri Reaves Gilmore, deputy area manager for the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) Klamath Basin Area Office, a combination of improved hydrologic conditions and conservation efforts by Klamath Project water users, including voluntary land idling, has given the agency more flexibility in making water available to the Project?s Warren Act contractors.?At this time, BOR has determined that up to an additional three-quarter (.75) acre-feet of water per irrigable acre is available for delivery to Warren Act contractors,? Reaves Gilmore said in a statement. ?This amount is in addition to the quarter (.25) acre-foot per acre that BOR made available in June.? Fourteen irrigation districts and several individual contractors make up 59,948 acres of Warren Act land in the Klamath Project. According to BOR documents, Warren Act, or ?B,? contractors receive water secondary to Klamath Project contractors who have ?A? rights. Deliveries to Warren Act contractors are curtailed when water supplies cannot meet the demands of ?A? irrigators.In April, the BOR announced that under the 2015 Drought Plan, Warren Act contractors would not receive any surface water this year. Rain events in May later helped Warren Act farmers get a small jump on this season?s crops, according to Enterprise Irrigation District Manager Shane McDonald. He said farmers with small lots, orchards and pastures and can capitalize on the bonus water.?They?ll be able to get a decent second cutting (of alfalfa) if I can extend the water. Possibly a third cutting if the allocation can be extended through the beginning of September,? McDonald said.McDonald said in an effort to extend the water season, Enterprise will pump water July 21-28; Aug. 5-13; and Aug. 19 until the water allocation expires, which is estimated to occur Sept. 2. Water will not be available between these dates because the district?s system will be shut down for maintenance, he added.Luke Robison, manager of Shasta View and Malin irrigation districts, said irrigators in his districts farm potatoes and cereal grains, but the vast majority of farmland is alfalfa. He said the extra water won?t irrigate any new acres, but it will be helpful to folks who already have crops in the works. ?That?s three irrigations ? one more cutting of alfalfa,? Robison said.According to Reaves Gilmore, the BOR will continue coordinating with Project water users, and other stakeholders to seek out opportunities for increasing water availability for Project agricultural and national wildlife refuge lands.According to Gilmore, on July 19, Upper Klamath Lake was 62 percent full, with a volume of 317,395 acre-feet.Last year on July 19, the lake was only 45 percent full, she said.To date, approximately 120,000 acre-feet has been diverted from Upper Klamath Lake to Project water users, according to Reaves Gilmore. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Aug 6 10:34:31 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 17:34:31 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Online Application Training for Proposition 1 Grants In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <807426814.264308.1438882471945.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> | | | | | | Proposition 1 Application Training CDFW will host an online training seminar for applicants using theFinancial Assistance Application Submittal Tool (FAAST)for Proposition 1 Restoration Grant Program applications. The seminar will take place Wednesday, August 12, 2015, from 2:00-3:30 pm, PST. Seeseminar details and instructions (PDF). CDFW has released its Proposal Solicitation Notice (PDF) for its Proposition 1 Restoration Grant Programs and is now accepting applications. Applications must be submitted using the FAAST system. Please visit CDFW's Proposition 1 Restoration Grant Programs web page for more information on the grant programs and solicitation process. ? | | | | CDFW Watershed Restoration Grants Branch 1416 9th Street, 12th Floor Sacramento, California 95814 (916) 445-0411 | | | | | | | | ? | | | | | Forward this email | | | | | CDFW Grants |1416 9th Street, 12th Floor |Sacramento |CA |95814 | | | | | | ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ~WRD000.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 823 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 332 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image006.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 332 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Aug 7 09:21:43 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2015 16:21:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Bureau seeks long-term solution for Klamath salmon Message-ID: <886482152.855825.1438964503099.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/news/local-news/fish-plan_04512694 Bureau seeks long-term solution for Klamath salmon ADDRESS: Damon Arthur? 9:15 PM, Aug 6, 20159:25 PM, Aug 6, 2015?Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.Meeting gets underway Thursday evening in Weaverville on a long-term plan promoting the health of fish in the Klamath River.?DAMON ARTHUR/RECORD SEARCHLIGHTHIDE CAPTIONWEAVERVILLE, California - WEAVERVILLE ? As a Trinity River fishing guide, Travis Michel said he has a stake not only on what happens on the Trinity but also the Klamath River.That?s why Michel attended a workshop in Weaverville on Thursday night on a proposal to develop a long-term plan to protect the health of fish in the Klamath River, mainly through managing the amount of water flowing down the Trinity River and into the Klamath.?I?m here to learn more about what the proposal is,? Michel said. ?These flows will definitely affect what I do for the fall.?The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has proposed increasing the amount of water flowing from Lewiston Dam down the Trinity River out of concern for salmon and steelhead in the lower Klamath dying of a deadly bacteria called ich.Ich flourishes where fish are crowded in warm, slow-moving water, and in 2002 some 33,000 Chinook salmon died under those conditions.As the drought has left the Klamath with similar low and warm conditions over the past three years, the bureau has ramped up releases from Lewiston Dam to flush out the river with cooler water to prevent a widespread ich outbreak.But each year, the bureau has also had to prepare environmental reports to justify the higher flows in the face of legal challenges from the Westlands Water District and the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority, two agricultural irrigation agencies in the San Joaquin Valley.Water and hydropower agencies have resisted sending more water down the Trinity for the fish because some of the water from the Trinity River is shipped via tunnels, power plants and dams to the Sacramento River and eventually the San Joaquin Valley.After three years of annual litigation and environmental impact reports, the bureau this year has begun working on a long-term plan to manage fish health in the Klamath.Developing a long-term plan means the agency won?t have to write an annual environmental report, and it could streamline the process of when and under what conditions the bureau decides to increase Trinity River flows to help salmon in the lower Klamath, said Paul Zedonis, a project manager with the bureau.About 15 people showed up to listen to a presentation from Zedonis and visit information stations set up at the Trinity County Library in Weaverville.Zedonis said the purpose of the workshop was to answer questions and take information from the public about what needs to be considered in the environmental reports and the long-term plan.But fishing guides Michel and Steve Townzen said after listening to bureau officials Thursday night they still didn?t know much about the long-term plan.?I thought they were going to tell us what the plan was,? Townzen said.?I think we have more questions now than when we came,? Michel said.While long-term plans for the Klamath are still developing, federal and state officials say the river has low, warm water conditions again this summer and the chance of another fish die off is high.Because of the ongoing drought, biologists monitoring fish in the Klamath have seen ich in fish about a month earlier than normal.The bureau?s proposal to deal with ich this year says there will be about 2,000 cubic-feet per second of water flowing down the Klamath in late August when the estimated 119,000 fall-run of Chinook salmon begin swimming upstream to spawn.To prevent an ich outbreak, the bureau has proposed increasing releases from Lewiston Dam so the Klamath flows would be at 2,500 cfs from Aug. 19 through Sept. 20.During the 2002 fish die-off, there was 2,528 cfs in the Klamath River when an estimated 170,000 Chinook salmon came upriver to spawn, according to the bureau.Members of the Hoopa Tribe, which live along the Klamath, have slammed the bureau?s proposal, claiming it is not enough water to help the fish.?It seems that Interior is considering last-minute proposals not intended to protect fish but rather meet political agendas of San Joaquin agribusiness,? the tribe said in a statement. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Fri Aug 7 11:50:09 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2015 11:50:09 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?iso-8859-1?q?CBB=3A_Changing_central_Pacific_El_N?= =?iso-8859-1?q?i=F1os_reduce_stability_of_North_American_salmon_su?= =?iso-8859-1?q?rvival_rates?= Message-ID: <006e01d0d141$e32979d0$a97c6d70$@sisqtel.net> http://www.cbbulletin.com/434695.aspx http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/07/28/1503190112.abstract?sid=142826d f-a34f-4b88-88aa-c2561d84dfcc El Nino Weather Patterns May Be Cause Of Coho, Chinook Ocean Survival Becoming Similar Posted on Friday, August 07, 2015 (PST) The biodiversity of two Northern Pacific salmon species may be at risk due to changes in ocean conditions at the equator, reports a study by the University of California, Davis. In the study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences http://www.pnas.org/ Aug. 3, researchers tracked the survival of chinook and coho salmon from hatcheries in North America between 1980 and 2006. Before the 1990s, ocean survival rates of chinook and coho salmon varied separately from each other. However, the researchers were surprised to find that survival rates of the two species have since become increasingly similar. "Two species that historically have had different responses and seem to be very different in their coastal-wide patterns now appear to be more synchronized," said lead author Patrick Kilduff, a postdoctoral scholar under Louis Botsford in the UC Davis Department of Wildlife, Fish and Conservation Biology at the time of the study. "When salmon populations are synchronized, it's either good for everyone or bad for everyone--similar to the stock market." >From an economic perspective, it means that when catch of one species is low, catch of the other also will tend to be low. This synchronous response to ocean conditions represents a loss in biological diversity that cannot be addressed directly by freshwater management actions, the study said. It's not yet well understood what is causing the increasing similarity, but the researchers said it could reflect a change in coastal ocean food-web linkages or perhaps a change in the salmon species themselves. Historically, many Pacific salmon species were thought to be influenced by the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), an El Nino-associated eastern Pacific warming pattern. As the nature of El Ni?os has changed, another ocean indicator, the North Pacific Gyre Oscillation (NPGO) has grown increasingly important, but its impact on salmon was not well-understood. This new study found that coho and chinook salmon survival rates along the West Coast are more strongly connected to the NPGO than to the PDO. "Changes in equatorial conditions lead to more of the large-scale Pacific Ocean variability being explained by North Pacific Gyre Oscillation, and it's influencing the survival of salmon from Vancouver Island south to California," Kilduff said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Fri Aug 7 18:00:25 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2015 01:00:25 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Jweeks 30-31 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C5639AF@057-SN2MPN1-041.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hello Everyone, Please see attached for the Jweek 30 and 31 update to the Trinity River trapping summary. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW30-31.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 60961 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW30-31.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Aug 9 16:15:49 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2015 23:15:49 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Editorial: Ich a symptom of larger problems Message-ID: <1754085104.1745852.1439162149337.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-ich-a-symptom-of-larger-problems_07698924 Editorial: Ich a symptom of larger problems 6:00 PM, Aug 4, 2015A minuscule parasite nicknamed ?Ebola of the Klamath salmon? is striking fear in the hearts of the few people tasked with eliminating the little beasts and loathing in the hearts of big scale water and power agencies for which salmon carry ?public enemy? status.For the latter group, every move to divert water for salmon survival is a blow to their crops and water and power customers.Even the North State?s U.S. Rep. Doug LaMalfa, R-Richvale, agrees with that philosophy. The rice farmer has introduced an amendment to a federal appropriations bill that would forbid the high river flows that help protect the fish. He thinks the water needs to go to water agencies in Central and Southern California for agriculture and other uses.The Yurok Tribe has a long and fruitful history with the Klamath River?s once prolific salmon ? Coho and Chinook ? and the steelhead that once flourished in those bountiful waters. Times and water levels may have changed, and the salmon runs have declined, but the Yurok are a people committed preserving what?s left of the once plentiful salmon runs.That?s why they can?t ? and mustn?t ? forget what history has taught. The most recent disaster was in 2002 when some 35,000 Chinook perished in the fall run. Ichthyophthirius multifiliis, commonly called ?ich,? was the culprit.The die-offs have continued, albeit on a smaller scale.Now that icky Ich is back again ? months earlier than it arrived last year. It was found in a pool where 200 spring-run Chinook and about 800 steelhead trout are trapped near where Blue Creek flows into the Klamath, the tribe?s senior fisheries biologist, Michael Belchik reported. Since the parasite thrives in warm, low water and crowded conditions, it?s not surprising that ich is popping up early in this, our fourth year of drought. It?s hot and water is low everywhere.Not surprising, maybe, but ominous ? Belchik calls the situation an early warning of a high risk for another catastrophic fish kill in the fall run, which state Department of Fish and Wildlife biologists have predicted at just under 120,000 fish.Since that 2002 debacle state and federal water managers have experimented with attempts to improve conditions for the fish ? not just on the Trinity River, which feeds the lower Klamath near the coast, but on the Sacramento. They?ve tried gradually ramping up releases from the dams and low pulse flows ? in hopes that the spurts will help clean out the ponds where ich thrives.So far nobody had come up with a permanent plan that would set the standards for releases and establish trigger factors for when they?re necessary.This week stakeholders are holding scoping meetings on a proposed plan that could be put into place, perhaps by next year.It?s tricky. In addition to the Yurok and Hoopa Valley tribes, many other interests are in play, including the powerful Metropolitan Water District of Southern California and the Westlands Water District, both of which tend to sue when they see Sacramento River flows reduced.When water stored behind the Lewiston Dam is released into the Trinity River, that means it?s not going to Whiskeytown Lake, through power plants there and eventually into the Sacramento.That scenario pulls in all the same political power players who are pushing raising Shasta Dam by 18 ? feet.It all comes down to two sides battling over what?s more important ? fish or agriculture.In Shasta County, where the salmon are a huge tourist draw, we expect our neighbors to the south to strike a balance. If more water is needed here, where it was before humans interfered with the natural flows that helped those fish flourish, we need to provide enough to save them from perishing. Corporate farmers who planted vast orchards on arid soil took a big gamble, and the fish shouldn?t be left to settle up the tab.If some larger water releases can save the salmon, as they appear to be doing if properly administered, then we should use that technology to protect the dwindling salmon runs.What a shame it would be if they disappeared permanently. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Aug 9 16:18:43 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2015 23:18:43 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Price, risk weigh heavily on farmers who would draw from Delta water tunnels Message-ID: <1979741369.1727488.1439162323377.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Sacramento Bee Water & Drought? August 8, 2015? Price, risk weigh heavily on farmers who would draw from Delta water tunnels? A few thousand farmers to decide whether project gets builtAgricultural interests eager for water but wary of $15.5 billion cost, uncertaintyUrban agencies more supportive of project?1?of 2?Mike Stearns, chairman of the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority, stands on fallowed farmland he manages for the Hammonds Ranch on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. Stearns, who supports the Delta tunnels project as long as there is an assurance that water will be delivered, says about half of his ranch has been fallowed this year due to lack of water.?CRAIG KOHLRUSS?The Fresno BeeBy Dale Kasler and Ryan Sabalowdkasler at sacbee.comFIREBAUGH?Grape and pistachio farmer Mike Stearns is something of a big deal in California water circles, leader of a regional agency that operates a critical piece of the state?s man-made plumbing system.But in this humbling fourth year of drought, Stearns can barely irrigate half of his Fresno County farm. More than 2,700 acres sit idle, with leftover tufts of cotton lying in the weeds and cartoonish dust devils sprouting from the cracked soil.?Little wonder that Stearns welcomes the promise embodied in Gov. Jerry Brown?s plan to build a pair of tunnels around the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, 90 miles north, a project designed to enhance the delivery of water that gets pumped south and west from the fragile estuary.But as much as he likes the concept, Stearns isn?t sure it makes financial sense for him.Sometime over the next year or so, Stearns and several thousand other farmers from Tracy to Bakersfield will decide the fate of a project that?s supposed to resuscitate their parched San Joaquin Valley farms while stabilizing the delivery of drinking water to 25 million Southern Californians.These farmers, along with a handful of large, urban water agencies in western and Southern California that also rely on water shipped through the Delta, would shoulder the entire cost of the tunnels, $15.5 billion at last count. Whether they?ll agree to do so is shaping up as a close call. Although the urban agencies ? including the influential Metropolitan Water District of Southern California ? appear to support the project, the sprawling agricultural districts that will tip the scales aren?t so sure.The cost would be substantial and the benefits unclear. Under the plan, shipments of water from the Delta could actually decline slightly, compared with historical averages, although state officials say those deliveries would become more dependable. Farmers, distrustful of environmental regulations that govern the movement of water through the Delta, want more certainty than that.?We need the tunnels, but can?t afford them if we?re going to be subject to the same level of regulation, and (have) no guarantees or assurances that we will even get any water,? said Stearns, chairman of the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority, which delivers Central Valley Project water to much of the west side of the valley. ?That?s the big hang-up.?The risks to farmers are considerable. Potential benefits could be as many as 15 years away, when the tunnels would become operational. The project could double farmers? water costs, to as much as $400 per acre-foot. If they commit to the tunnels, growers essentially would be gambling that prices of critically important crops such as almonds and pistachios would stay high for years to come.?Think about the magnitude of that decision for these farmers and their families,? said Jim Beck, general manager of the Kern County Water Agency, a collection of water districts at the southern end of the valley. ?It?s the most significant decision most will make in their careers.?For all their hesitation, farmers already have invested heavily in the project. Agricultural districts and urban agencies have spent a combined $250 million on environmental reviews and other pre-development costs for the tunnels over the last decade. Yet patience is growing thin.?We?ve spent $250 million, we?ve spent 10 years developing this project, and we?ve accomplished very little,? said Tom Birmingham, general manager of the powerful?Westlands Water District?west of Fresno. ?We haven?t saved a fish, we haven?t produced a drop of water, we have a roomful of paper. That?s very frustrating.?Birmingham said farmers aren?t demanding hard-and-fast guarantees about how much water the tunnels would deliver, but ?we?d love to have some level of comfort.??Some growers would prefer what they consider a simpler fix for California?s water network: revise the Endangered Species Act in order to devote more water to agriculture and less to nearly extinct fish such as the Delta smelt. A bill that passed the Republican-controlled House of Representatives takes exactly that course, but its prospects for becoming law are uncertain.??We?re losing our water to an extinct species,? said Keith Gardiner, a farmer in the Wasco area near Bakersfield. ?All the while, we?re in danger of going extinct here in Kern County.? ?We need to try everything? Even as they rail at what they see as misplaced environmental concerns, many in agriculture acknowledge that a thorough overhaul of the state?s plumbing system needs to happen. Environmental limitations and four years of drought have slowed water shipments from the Delta to a relative trickle. The?State Water Project,?built in the 1960s by Brown?s father, Gov. Pat Brown, is delivering just 20 percent of its promised allotment. The U.S. government?s Central Valley Project is making zero deliveries for the second straight year to many of its south-of-Delta customers, including Westlands and other districts in the San Luis & Delta-Mendota territory.?To compensate, farmers are buying water from senior water rights holders in the north state, where fresh water is more plentiful, and furiously pumping groundwater. But aquifers are receding, and statewide restrictions on groundwater pumping are coming in 2020. Many experts believe that tens of thousands of acres of farmland will be permanently idled if the surface-water supply isn?t improved. The tunnels might represent the last, best opportunity to keep a large agricultural presence alive south of the Delta.Westlands grower John Harris, whose well-known Harris Ranch has fallowed thousands of acres during the past two years, summed up agriculture?s conflicted view of the Delta tunnels project this way:?My main concern on the tunnels is that they could cost too much and yield so little new water that they may not be an economic investment,? he said in an email. ?But there are so many perils facing the California water supply that we need to try everything.?California WaterFix, as the project is known, is probably the most talked-about water infrastructure project the state has seen in decades. The plan calls for building two 30-mile tunnels, 40 feet in diameter, that would draw water from intake facilities on the east bank of the Sacramento River between Clarksburg and Courtland, and route it around the Delta to the existing pumping plants near Tracy. From there, the water would be diverted west to Silicon Valley and south to the San Joaquin Valley and on to Los Angeles and San Diego.Think about the magnitude of that decision for these farmers and their families. It?s the most significant decision most will make in their careers.Jim Beck, general manager, Kern County Water AgencyOfficials aren?t promising the project would return the Delta?s ecosystem to its former state, before decades of pumping led to catastrophic collapses in fish populations. But they say the tunnels, along with a parallel habitat restoration plan, would stabilize and improve environmental conditions in the estuary. ?The ecological problems with the current system could be greatly reduced,? the state Department of Water Resources said in an environmental impact statement released last month.These plumbing improvements, by enhancing protections for fish, would enable operators of the state and federal pumping projects to ship water south more reliably. Proponents say it would be particularly beneficial in wet years to fill reservoirs and recharge underground water banks that can be drawn on in droughts.Many environmentalists, however, say the project would worsen conditions in the Delta and put its endangered fish population in even greater peril. Northern California elected officials have branded it a ?water grab? engineered by monied agricultural and urban interests south of the Delta. Farmers in the Delta, one of the most fertile agricultural regions in the state, say diverting much of the Sacramento River?s flow into the tunnels would ruin the quality of water they use.Another issue: By raising water prices, the tunnels likely would increase farmers? reliance on?thirsty, permanent crops such as almonds, which generate big profits but have become controversial in the drought. Because almond orchards can?t be fallowed, their expanded footprint increases the pressure on the state?s water supplies during extended dry periods. Dollars and cents While the debate rages over environmental impacts, it?s likely the decision on whether the tunnels get built will boil down to dollars and cents. State officials and their partner in the project, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, are trying to persuade the south-of-Delta water agencies to commit to funding the project.Essentially, the costs would be allocated according to water usage. For instance, Metropolitan takes about 30 percent of all the water pumped out of the Delta and would expect to pay 30 percent of the tunnels? cost, or $4.6 billion. But lots of details need to be worked out, including how to treat agencies that opt out of the project.?Figuring out how the financing is going to happen, and how it?s going to be spread, is the next step,? said Erin Curtis, a spokeswoman for Reclamation. ?We?re turning our attention to that now.?Proponents believe the severity of the drought will bring more water agencies into the fold. Farmers who thought their water supplies were ironclad are now discovering the virtues of the project, said Mark Cowin, director of the?state Department of Water Resources.?I think that these last three or four years of drought have radically changed the perspective of even the ag folks who thought they had the most secure, senior water rights,? said Cowin, whose agency is leading the charge on the project.Cowin said the project doesn?t need 100 percent buy-in from the water districts, but a ?critical mass? is vital. He expects to get approval from the urban agencies: Metropolitan in Southern California and the Santa Clara Valley Water District in Silicon Valley. They can spread the costs over millions of ratepayers, making the project relatively affordable.?I think at the end of the day it will probably happen,? said Roger Patterson, assistant general manager at Metropolitan.For agriculture ? facing a doubling of water costs ? the economics aren?t quite as easy to swallow. ?Can ag afford this investment? That?s the question we?ll need to answer,? Cowin said.The answer, so far, is a very qualified ?yes.? The water would still probably be affordable for many farmers, depending on what they grow and whether crop prices stay healthy. Sky-high values for almonds and pistachios, increasingly the commodity of choice in the valley, would make the tunnels a good buy, said Kettleman City farmer Ted Page, chairman of the?Kern County Water Agency.?At $4 almonds? Come on. $3.50 pistachios?? said Page, quoting per-pound prices being paid to farmers. ?I want this project because it?s the only way we?ll ever be able to have enough water.?Exactly how much water will farmers get? Figuring that out depends greatly on the Delta?s complicated plumbing system.Currently, a portion of the Delta?s flow is sucked into the federal and state pumping plants near Tracy. The process reverses the estuary?s natural flow at critical points and pulls fish toward predators and other perils. To protect fish, the pumps are shut down periodically, and more water flows to the ocean. In 2012 alone, Cowin said, pump shutdowns necessitated by the ?reverse flow? problem deprived south-of-Delta customers of 800,000 acre-feet of water they were expecting.Can ag afford this investment? That?s the question we?ll need to answer.Mark Cowin, director, California Department of Water Resources?Cowin said the tunnels would reduce the ?reverse flow? problem significantly by diverting about half of the Sacramento River?s flow into the tunnels at Courtland, from where the water would flow to Tracy. There, the giant pumps could do their job ? shipping water south ? with far less harm to fish.Cowin said the tunnels would be particularly helpful to state and federal water customers in wet years. Gobs of water could be moved south with fewer interruptions in pumping.Cowin said federal and state contractors could expect average annual deliveries of 4.9 million acre-feet. That?s down slightly from the historical average of 5.2 million. But it?s a lot more than contractors have been getting in recent years. The 2015 deliveries, to state and federal customers combined, are expected to total 1.6 million acre-feet.?It?s not a question of ?Do I want 5.2 (million) or 4.9?? ? Cowin said. ?It?s a question of ?Do I want 4.9 or 3.5 or 3, or shut down the facilities altogether over time?? ?Even as Cowin touts increased reliability, many farmers still have questions. They are particularly displeased that the Brown administration, bowing to?concerns from federal environmental regulators, gave up on seeking a 50-year permit for the project. Instead, the tunnels would operate on a year-to-year basis. Farmers say this could give environmental regulators the authority to shut down their exports at a whim.More broadly, many in agriculture simply question the state?s ability to make good on the tunnels? benefits. The state?s promises give them an unsettling sense of d?j? vu.At a recent drought conference in Bakersfield, farmers recalled how their fathers and grandfathers agreed to share the costs to build Lake Oroville, the California Aqueduct and other pieces of the State Water Project decades ago. The agricultural contractors are still paying for the project, to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars a year, even as water shipments have dwindled in volume.Now farmers are being urged to kick in additional money to keep water flowing down the very canals their forefathers financed.??We?re being asked to fix it again,? said Jason Gianquinto, general manager of the Semitropic Water Storage District in northwest Kern County. ?That?s tough to swallow.?Dale Kasler:?916-321-1066,?@dakasler To build or not?? Gov. Jerry Brown?s plan for twin tunnels around the Delta depends on water districts in Southern California and the San Joaquin Valley, customers of the State Water Project and Central Valley Project, agreeing to shoulder the $15.5 billion cost.San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority:?Wholesaler that delivers federal Central Valley Project water, primarily to farmers covering 2.1 million acres in 29 separate districts. Zero CVP water deliveries in 2014 and 2015.?Where they stand: ?We?re going to have to come up with a lot more money and there is still no guarantee we would even get it constructed. So people are really concerned.? -- Mike Stearns, chairman.Westlands Water District:?Largest member of San Luis authority. Powerful, well-connected voice in California water, wary of costs but eager to improve reliability of water deliveries.Where they stand: ?They may not be an economic investment. But?we need to try everything.? ? John Harris, head of Harris Ranch.Friant water users:?Collection of farmers irrigating 1 million acres with CVP water. Saddled with weak water rights, lost their CVP allocation in 2014 and 2015 to San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors. Benefit from tunnels uncertain.?Where they stand: ?I don?t have a lot of faith in Gov. Brown.? ? Kole Upton, chairman, Friant North Alliance.San Joaquin River Exchange Contractors Water Authority:?Just 240,000 acres of land but special legal rights. Receiving 50 percent allotment from CVP this year.Where they stand: ?If they can show us a benefit or an increase in reliability?we will definitely take a look at that.? ? Steve Chedester, executive director.Kern County Water Agency:?SWP contractors covering 674,000 acres. Getting 20 percent of normal SWP allotment, but other sources available.?Where they stand: ?We need the pipeline to be fixed in order to have better opportunity to manage the storage opportunities that are out there.? -- Jim Beck, general manager.Metropolitan Water District of Southern California:?One of the major players in California water, serving 19 million urban residents. SWP contractor and one of the tunnels? strongest supporters.?Where they stand: ?I think at the end of the day it will probably happen.? -- Roger Patterson, assistant general manager.Santa Clara Valley Water District:?SWP and CVP contractor serving 1.9 million residents of Silicon Valley. Relies on Delta deliveries for 40 percent of its total supply.Where they stand: ?The proposed tunnels?guard against major supply disruptions in the Delta, for instance due to earthquakes or widespread levee failure.? ? district policy statement in May.? Read more here:?http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article30511836.html#storylink=cpy? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 126120 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/png Size: 174 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 155167 bytes Desc: not available URL: From njharris30 at gmail.com Mon Aug 10 11:24:04 2015 From: njharris30 at gmail.com (Nathan Harris) Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 11:24:04 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Willow Creek in-season trapping update - August 10th Message-ID: Please see the attached documents for weekly catch data from the Willow Creek traps. Nathan Harris Biologist Yurok Tribal Fisheries Program Trinity River Division 3723 N. Hwy 96 Willow Creek, CA 95573 Office: (530) 629-3333 x1703 Cell: (707) 616-8742 njharris30 at gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Willow Creek RST raw catch update 2015.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 33166 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: trapping update summary 8.10.15.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 14592 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Aug 11 15:32:22 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 22:32:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: The Joint TAMWG/TMC mtg is ON! In-Reply-To: <8AAAA7EAE2249D4B95F2A2C92B61C98ECF2E1271@COREXCHG6.ci.redding.ca.us> References: <8AAAA7EAE2249D4B95F2A2C92B61C98ECF2E1271@COREXCHG6.ci.redding.ca.us> Message-ID: <190026900.3155884.1439332342210.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Tuesday, August 11, 2015 3:00 PM, "Hadley, Elizabeth" wrote: Folks ? ? We greatly appreciate your patience and flexibility as we have tried to assess the smoke and fire situation. ?Seth, Joe and I have been on the phone all day trying to work through our options and we all agree that the meeting should go on!? While the air quality in Weaverville is not perfect, it has greatly improved and trying to reschedule would be a great challenge. ? So? looking forward to seeing you this Thursday; as a reminder, here is the agenda for our day: ? ? 9:30-10:00 Meet and greet at North Fork Grange ? 10:00-11:30 Tour Lower Junction City restoration site-TRRP staff ? 11:30-12:30 Lunch (bring your own) ? 12:30-12:45 Public Comment ? 12:45-1:00 Recap from 2014 TAMWG/TMC meeting-Elizabeth/Seth/Jeff Morris ? 1:00-2:00 Have we implemented the 5 principles effectively? - Jeff Morris ? 2:00-2:30 Has TRRP outreach been effective? - Jeff Morris ? 2:30-3:00 Next steps for future success - Jeff Morris ? 3:00 Adjourn ? ? 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: From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 12 08:14:18 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 15:14:18 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Time to move the lawn chairs: Trinity Journal- Trinity River to rise for ceremony Message-ID: <1638415393.3594562.1439392458021.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_0bdbc234-40a0-11e5-98f7-830ba6d05758.html River to rise for ceremony The federal Bureau of Reclamation is expected to begin increasing flows to the Trinity River from Lewiston Dam this Sunday, Aug. 16, for the Hoopa Valley Tribe biannual Boat Dance. The flows will be adjusted gradually to protect the public and fish and wildlife.The releases at Lewiston are to peak Monday morning, Aug. 17, at 2,650 cfs. The peak will reach Hoopa Tuesday, Aug. 18. Beginning Monday, Aug. 17, the flows are to begin ramping back down to return to the summer base of 450 cfs on Thursday, Aug. 20.For more information contact Reclamation?s Northern California office at 275-1554. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vina_frye at fws.gov Wed Aug 12 13:15:33 2015 From: vina_frye at fws.gov (Frye, Vina) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 13:15:33 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group Teleconference Message-ID: Hi Folks, The Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) and Trinity Management Council (TMC) will hold a joint teleconference on August 25, 2015. We will discuss the FY 2016 Trinity River Restoration Plan (TRRP) budget. For further information, see the Federal Register below. Best regards, Vina Vina Frye Fish Biologist 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: Vina.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 87307 bytes Desc: not available URL: From twashburn at usbr.gov Wed Aug 12 14:30:14 2015 From: twashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy) Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2015 14:30:14 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order -- Trinity River Message-ID: Please make the following release change to the Trinity River [image: Inline image 3] Comment: Hoopa Valley Tribe's bi-annual Boat Dance Ceremony Issued by: Thuy Washburn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image.png Type: image/png Size: 22763 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 12 21:06:40 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 04:06:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: Reclamation to Increase Releases from Lewiston Dam to the Trinity River for Tribal Ceremony In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <743657751.77347.1439438800215.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Wednesday, August 12, 2015 5:52 PM, Lisa Navarro wrote: Reclamation to Increase Releases from Lewiston Dam to the Trinity River for Tribal CeremonyMid-Pacific Region Sacramento, Calif.MP-15-140Media Contact: Erin Curtis, 916-978-5100, eccurtis at usbr.govFor Release On: Aug. 12, 2015Reclamation to Increase Releases from Lewiston Dam to the Trinity River for Tribal CeremonySHASTA LAKE, Calif. ? On Sunday afternoon, Aug. 16, 2015, the Bureau of Reclamation will begin to increase releases from Lewiston Dam to the Trinity River in support of the Hoopa Valley Tribe's bi-annual Boat Dance Ceremony. The increased flows in the Trinity River will be adjusted at rates that protect the public and fish and wildlife.The increased releases at Lewiston will raise flows gradually from the summer base flow of 450 cubic feet per second to a peak of 2,650 cfs by around 6 a.m. Monday, August 17. The peak flow of 2650 cfs is expected to reach the town of Hoopa, Calif. on Tuesday, August 18.The flows will be gradually reduced at Lewiston beginning about 10 p.m. on Monday, August 17. The releases from Lewiston will continue to decline until they reach the summer base flow again, around 10 p.m. on Thursday, August 20.The ceremonial flows are separate from the Trinity River restoration and potential release of fall flows. Initial estimates of the downstream flow rates and timing are preliminary and typical minor fluctuations can be expected. As always, the public is urged to exercise caution when recreating in or around the Trinity River.For more information, please contact Reclamation?s Northern California Area Office at 530-275-1554 (TTY 800-877-8339).# # #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, Mid-Pacific Region 2800 Cottage Way, Sacramento, CA 95825 United States -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From joe_polos at fws.gov Thu Aug 13 13:59:31 2015 From: joe_polos at fws.gov (Polos, Joe) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 13:59:31 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group Teleconference In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Correction: The tele-conference call that will be held on August 25th will just be the TAMWG. This is not a joint TAMWG-TMC call. Sorry for any confusion. If you have any questions please give me call (707-825-5149) On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Frye, Vina wrote: > Hi Folks, > > The Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group (TAMWG) and Trinity > Management Council (TMC) will hold a joint teleconference on August 25, > 2015. We will discuss the FY 2016 Trinity River Restoration Plan (TRRP) > budget. For further information, see the Federal Register below. > > Best regards, > Vina > > Vina Frye > Fish Biologist > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity > > -- Joe Polos U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office 1655 Heindon Road Arcata, CA 95521 707-825-5149 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Aug 14 08:24:49 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 15:24:49 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Maven's Notebook: SLDMWA- Bureau poised to dump 27 billion gallons of water in hopes of preventing Ich outbreak Message-ID: <1629562605.203365.1439565889149.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://mavensnotebook.com/2015/08/14/news-worth-noting-state-climatologist-says-do-not-count-on-el-nino-to-end-drought-sldma-says-bureau-poised-to-dump-27-billion-gallons-of-water-16-million-in-grants-for-endangered-species-conservat/ Bureau poised to dump 27 billion gallons of water in hopes of preventing Ich outbreak:? ?California?s water supplies are critically low. During this time of uncertainty, people should expect what water remains to be managed carefully. Millions of Californians are sacrificing to do their part to help with the drought, working hard to make what scarce supplies we have stretch as far as possible. Unfortunately, the Federal government is moving in the opposite direction.? The Bureau of Reclamation is poised to dump more than 27 billion gallons, or 83,000 acre-feet of our dwindling water supplies, into the ocean in a gamble to prevent one of several possible causes of a 2002 outbreak of a fish parasite that affected salmon.? Learn more about the problem, Reclamation?s proposed response, and the consequences of past ?Flow Augmentation? on communities, people, and other at-risk species by checking out the fact sheet by?clicking here.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Mon Aug 17 09:40:51 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 16:40:51 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Jweek 32 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C56B6D7@057-SN2MPN1-041.057d.mgd.msft.net> Please see attachment for the JWeek 32 (Aug 6-12) update to the Trinity River trapping summary. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW32.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 60997 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW32.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Aug 17 17:16:05 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 00:16:05 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?This_just_in_=E2=80=A6_From_Restore_the_D?= =?utf-8?q?elta=3A_Delta_Tunnels_=E2=80=9CConfidential=E2=80=9D_Documents_?= =?utf-8?q?Reveal_State_Plans_to_Take_Delta_Farms?= In-Reply-To: <88af2b23c65f1c863838dd9a5ee51fcf060.20150817232147@mail39.atl11.rsgsv.net> References: <88af2b23c65f1c863838dd9a5ee51fcf060.20150817232147@mail39.atl11.rsgsv.net> Message-ID: <359433692.6328952.1439856965476.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Monday, August 17, 2015 4:22 PM, Maven wrote: This just in ? From Restore the Delta: Delta Tunnels ?Confidential? Documents Reveal State Plans to Take Delta Farms#yiv7152179525 #yiv7152179525outlook a{padding:0;}#yiv7152179525 body{width:100% !important;}#yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525ReadMsgBody{width:100%;}#yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525ExternalClass{width:100%;}#yiv7152179525 body{}#yiv7152179525 body{margin:0;padding:0;}#yiv7152179525 img{border:0;height:auto;line-height:100%;outline:none;text-decoration:none;}#yiv7152179525 table td{border-collapse:collapse;}#yiv7152179525 #yiv7152179525backgroundTable{height:100% !important;margin:0;padding:0;width:100% !important;}#yiv7152179525 body, #yiv7152179525 #yiv7152179525backgroundTable{background-color:#FAFAFA;}#yiv7152179525 #yiv7152179525templateContainer{border:1px solid #DDDDDD;}#yiv7152179525 h1, #yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525h1{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:34px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv7152179525 h2, #yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525h2{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:30px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv7152179525 h3, #yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525h3{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:26px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv7152179525 h4, #yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525h4{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:22px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv7152179525 #yiv7152179525templatePreheader{background-color:#FAFAFA;}#yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525preheaderContent div{color:#505050;font-family:Arial;font-size:10px;line-height:100%;text-align:left;}#yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525preheaderContent div a:link, #yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525preheaderContent div a:visited, #yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525preheaderContent div a .yiv7152179525yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv7152179525 #yiv7152179525templateHeader{background-color:#FFFFFF;border-bottom:0;}#yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525headerContent{color:#202020;font-family:Arial;font-size:34px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;padding:0;text-align:center;vertical-align:middle;}#yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525headerContent a:link, #yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525headerContent a:visited, #yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525headerContent a .yiv7152179525yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv7152179525 #yiv7152179525headerImage{height:auto;max-width:600px !important;}#yiv7152179525 #yiv7152179525templateContainer, #yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525bodyContent{background-color:#FFFFFF;}#yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525bodyContent div{color:#505050;font-family:Arial;font-size:14px;line-height:150%;text-align:left;}#yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525bodyContent div a:link, #yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525bodyContent div a:visited, #yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525bodyContent div a .yiv7152179525yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525bodyContent img{display:inline;height:auto;}#yiv7152179525 #yiv7152179525templateFooter{background-color:#FFFFFF;border-top:0;}#yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525footerContent div{color:#707070;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;line-height:125%;text-align:left;}#yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525footerContent div a:link, #yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525footerContent div a:visited, #yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525footerContent div a .yiv7152179525yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv7152179525 .yiv7152179525footerContent img{display:inline;}#yiv7152179525 #yiv7152179525social{background-color:#FAFAFA;border:0;}#yiv7152179525 #yiv7152179525social div{text-align:center;}#yiv7152179525 #yiv7152179525utility{background-color:#FFFFFF;border:0;}#yiv7152179525 #yiv7152179525utility div{text-align:center;}#yiv7152179525 #yiv7152179525monkeyRewards img{max-width:190px;} | | | Breaking News from Maven's Notebook | Is this email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. | | | | | | | | | Just posted at Maven's Notebook: This just in ? Restore the Delta: Delta Tunnels ?Confidential? Documents Reveal State Plans to Take Delta Farms | | | | | | ?follow on Twitter | friend on Facebook | forward to a friend? | | Copyright ? 2015 Maven's Notebook, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you opted in at Maven's Notebook. Our mailing address is: Maven's NotebookP. O. Box 2342Canyon Country,, CA 91386 Add us to your address book | | | | | | | | | This email was sent to tstokely at att.net why did I get this?????unsubscribe from this list????update subscription preferences Maven's Notebook ? P. O. Box 2342 ? Canyon Country,, CA 91386 ? USA | | @media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv7152179525 table[id="yiv7152179525canspamBar"] td{font-size:14px !important;}#yiv7152179525 table[id="yiv7152179525canspamBar"] td a{display:block;margin-top:10px !important;}} -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From magallagher at usbr.gov Thu Aug 20 18:25:32 2015 From: magallagher at usbr.gov (Gallagher, Michele) Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 18:25:32 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Reclamation to Release Additional Water from Trinity Reservoir Message-ID: Please see the attached public notice and 2015 Late Summer Flow Augmentation Hydrograph. Flows to commence August 21 and will continue into September, according the 8/20/2015 Bureau of Reclamation press release, to reduce the potential for a large-scale fish die-off. For additional information, please contact the BOR Public Affairs Office at 916-978-5100 or email mppublicaffairs at usbr.gov. Thank you, Michele Gallagher Project Coordination Specialist Trinity River Restoration Program Tel (530) 623-1804 Fax (530)623-5944 magallagher at usbr.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 Late-summer flow augmentation hydrographs.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 162552 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: MP-15-143 Reclamation to Release Additional Water From Trinity Reservoir to Supplement Flows (1).pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 186684 bytes Desc: not available URL: From twashburn at usbr.gov Fri Aug 21 09:11:20 2015 From: twashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy) Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 09:11:20 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Trinity River Message-ID: Please make the following release change to the Trinity River. *Date* *Time* *From(cfs)* *To **(cfs)* *8/21/15* *1300* *450* *700* *8/21/15* *1500* *700* *950* *8/21/15* *1700* *950* *1150* Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Supplemental Flows for the Lower Klamath River -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Aug 21 10:11:45 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 17:11:45 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard: Feds, tribes agree on fish-kill preventative flows Message-ID: <1950045611.8675334.1440177105943.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.times-standard.com/general-news/20150820/feds-tribes-agree-on-fish-kill-preventative-flows#disqus_thread Feds, tribes agree on fish-kill preventative flows This March 2003 file photo shows the Trinity River flowing below the Lewiston Dam outside Lewiston, Calif. Tribal fisheries officials said the tribes and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation reached an agreement Thursday on fish-kill preventative releases. (AP Photo/Jeff Barnard)?By?Will Houston, Eureka Times-StandardPOSTED:?08/20/15, 7:54 PM PDT?|?UPDATED: 2 HRS AGO0 COMMENTSOn Thursday afternoon, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation agreed to release fish-kill preventative flows from a Trinity River dam starting this weekend in order to protect fish on the lower Klamath River from deadly pathogens caused by warm, low-flowing water conditions, tribal fisheries officials said. The decision comes just after the Yurok Tribe Fisheries Department found two Chinook salmon on the Klamath River?s Blue Creek tributary with more severe infections of the parasite ich ? the same responsible for the devastating fish kill of 2002 ? than had been found in a survey conducted in mid-July.Having just gotten off the phone with bureau officials, Hoopa Valley Tribal Fisheries Director Mike Orcutt said Thursday?s agreement was ?a lot better than it had been previous to today?s discussions.?According to Orcutt, the bureau agreed to the tribe?s proposal to ramp up flows on the lower Klamath River to 2,800 cubic feet per second for about a month and include an emergency doubling flow should the prior supplemental flows prove to be ineffective at protecting fish. The flows will be released from Lewiston Dam on the Trinity River and will last from Saturday through Sept. 20. The higher flows help to literally wash away deadly pathogens such as ich as well as to cool the waters, which can improve fish immune systems. In its mid-July proposal, the bureau had recommended increasing flows to 2,500 cubic feet per second as well as an emergency release if needed. Local fisheries experts argued the bureau?s proposed flow would not be enough to protect fish from pathogens, with ich already having been detected on a group of fish on the Blue Creek tributary and the gill disease columnaris also appearing on fish in the Trinity and Klamath rivers.?While the Blue Creek fish in mid-July were found to have about 40 ich parasites per gill arch, Yurok Tribe senior fisheries biologist Mike Belchik said that they found two more fish this week with much more severe infections.?We got one earlier this week that had a count of 240 (parasites per gill arch) and another one that had 640,? he said.During the ich outbreak that occurred in September last year, which prompted an unprecedented emergency flow release into the lower Klamath River, the fish had about 950 parasites per gill arch, Belchik said. However, fewer fish are infected this year compared to last year.?The severity is similar and the numbers of infected fish are smaller,? he said. ?The main part of the fall run has not entered the river yet.?Due to the recent finding, both the Hoopa Valley and Yurok tribes are calling for the bureau to release the water as soon as possible.?Belchik expressed appreciation for the bureau?s use of recent studies of the river to make what he called a ?difficult decision.??My crews have been and we will continue to keep a really close eye on the river,? he said. ?That?s our job.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Aug 22 09:09:41 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2015 16:09:41 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?_This_just_in_=E2=80=A6_San_Luis_=26_Delt?= =?utf-8?q?a_Mendota_Water_Authority_and_Westlands_Water_District_file_law?= =?utf-8?q?suit_to_stop_Trinity_River_releases_to_Klamath_River?= In-Reply-To: <88af2b23c65f1c863838dd9a5ee51fcf060.20150822000652@mail20.atl111.rsgsv.net> References: <88af2b23c65f1c863838dd9a5ee51fcf060.20150822000652@mail20.atl111.rsgsv.net> Message-ID: <1350927986.163251.1440259781333.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Friday, August 21, 2015 5:07 PM, Maven wrote: This just in ??San Luis & Delta Mendota Water Authority and Westlands Water District file lawsuit to stop Trinity River releases to Klamath River#yiv1463546884 #yiv1463546884outlook a{padding:0;}#yiv1463546884 body{width:100% !important;}#yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884ReadMsgBody{width:100%;}#yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884ExternalClass{width:100%;}#yiv1463546884 body{}#yiv1463546884 body{margin:0;padding:0;}#yiv1463546884 img{border:0;height:auto;line-height:100%;outline:none;text-decoration:none;}#yiv1463546884 table td{border-collapse:collapse;}#yiv1463546884 #yiv1463546884backgroundTable{height:100% !important;margin:0;padding:0;width:100% !important;}#yiv1463546884 body, #yiv1463546884 #yiv1463546884backgroundTable{background-color:#FAFAFA;}#yiv1463546884 #yiv1463546884templateContainer{border:1px solid #DDDDDD;}#yiv1463546884 h1, #yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884h1{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:34px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv1463546884 h2, #yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884h2{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:30px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv1463546884 h3, #yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884h3{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:26px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv1463546884 h4, #yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884h4{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:22px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv1463546884 #yiv1463546884templatePreheader{background-color:#FAFAFA;}#yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884preheaderContent div{color:#505050;font-family:Arial;font-size:10px;line-height:100%;text-align:left;}#yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884preheaderContent div a:link, #yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884preheaderContent div a:visited, #yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884preheaderContent div a .yiv1463546884yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv1463546884 #yiv1463546884templateHeader{background-color:#FFFFFF;border-bottom:0;}#yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884headerContent{color:#202020;font-family:Arial;font-size:34px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;padding:0;text-align:center;vertical-align:middle;}#yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884headerContent a:link, #yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884headerContent a:visited, #yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884headerContent a .yiv1463546884yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv1463546884 #yiv1463546884headerImage{height:auto;max-width:600px !important;}#yiv1463546884 #yiv1463546884templateContainer, #yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884bodyContent{background-color:#FFFFFF;}#yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884bodyContent div{color:#505050;font-family:Arial;font-size:14px;line-height:150%;text-align:left;}#yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884bodyContent div a:link, #yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884bodyContent div a:visited, #yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884bodyContent div a .yiv1463546884yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884bodyContent img{display:inline;height:auto;}#yiv1463546884 #yiv1463546884templateFooter{background-color:#FFFFFF;border-top:0;}#yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884footerContent div{color:#707070;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;line-height:125%;text-align:left;}#yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884footerContent div a:link, #yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884footerContent div a:visited, #yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884footerContent div a .yiv1463546884yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv1463546884 .yiv1463546884footerContent img{display:inline;}#yiv1463546884 #yiv1463546884social{background-color:#FAFAFA;border:0;}#yiv1463546884 #yiv1463546884social div{text-align:center;}#yiv1463546884 #yiv1463546884utility{background-color:#FFFFFF;border:0;}#yiv1463546884 #yiv1463546884utility div{text-align:center;}#yiv1463546884 #yiv1463546884monkeyRewards img{max-width:190px;} | | | Breaking News from Maven's Notebook | Is this email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. | | | | | | | | | Just posted at Maven's Notebook: This just in ? San Luis & Delta Mendota Water Authority and Westlands Water District file lawsuit to stop Trinity River releases to Klamath River | | | | | | ?follow on Twitter | friend on Facebook | forward to a friend? | | Copyright ? 2015 Maven's Notebook, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you opted in at Maven's Notebook. Our mailing address is: Maven's NotebookP. O. Box 2342Canyon Country,, CA 91386 Add us to your address book | | | | | | | | | This email was sent to tstokely at att.net why did I get this?????unsubscribe from this list????update subscription preferences Maven's Notebook ? P. O. Box 2342 ? Canyon Country,, CA 91386 ? USA | | @media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv1463546884 table[id="yiv1463546884canspamBar"] td{font-size:14px !important;}#yiv1463546884 table[id="yiv1463546884canspamBar"] td a{display:block;margin-top:10px !important;}} -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From frank.t.emerson at gmail.com Sat Aug 22 10:31:21 2015 From: frank.t.emerson at gmail.com (Frank Emerson) Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2015 10:31:21 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?This_just_in_=E2=80=A6_San_Luis_=26_Delta?= =?utf-8?q?_Mendota_Water_Authority_and_Westlands_Water_District_fi?= =?utf-8?q?le_lawsuit_to_stop_Trinity_River_releases_to_Klamath_Riv?= =?utf-8?q?er?= In-Reply-To: <1350927986.163251.1440259781333.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <88af2b23c65f1c863838dd9a5ee51fcf060.20150822000652@mail20.atl111.rsgsv.net> <1350927986.163251.1440259781333.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Will a judge issue an injunction? On Aug 22, 2015 9:10 AM, "Tom Stokely" wrote: > On Friday, August 21, 2015 5:07 PM, Maven > wrote: > > > Breaking News from Maven's Notebook > Is this email not displaying correctly? > View it in your browser > . > > > > Just posted at Maven's Notebook: > > This just in ? San Luis & Delta Mendota Water Authority and Westlands > Water District file lawsuit to stop Trinity River releases to Klamath River > > follow on Twitter | friend on > Facebook | forward to a friend > > > *Copyright ? 2015 Maven's Notebook, All rights reserved.* > You are receiving this email because you opted in at Maven's Notebook. > *Our mailing address is:* > Maven's Notebook > P. O. Box 2342 > Canyon Country,, CA 91386 > > Add us to your address book > > > > > > > > > This email was sent to tstokely at att.net > *why did I get this?* > > unsubscribe from this list > > update subscription preferences > > Maven's Notebook ? P. O. Box 2342 ? Canyon Country,, CA 91386 ? USA > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Aug 25 18:54:00 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 01:54:00 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Chronicle: Crystal Geyser bottling plant draws lawsuit Message-ID: <1474325877.661805.1440554040887.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.sfgate.com/science/article/Crystal-Geyser-sued-over-bottling-plant-that-6465184.php#photo-7894096 Crystal Geyser bottling plant draws lawsuit By?Peter Fimrite? Updated 3:45?pm, Tuesday, August 25, 2015 An environmental group opposed to a bottling plant near Mount Shasta filed a lawsuit accusing Crystal Geyser of pushing through an illegal plan to suck thousands of gallons of water a day from an aquifer that feeds the drought-diminished Sacramento River.The group called We Advocate?Thorough Environmental Review, or Water, filed the suit Monday in Napa County Superior Court, claiming the Calistoga company failed to get proper permits and will be violating land-use provisions if it carries out its plan this fall to tap Big Springs, which burbles out through lava tubes at the base of California?s largest volcano.? RELATED STORIES - Bug outbreak irks California towns - Northern California is in El Ni?o?s sights - Study: Global warming has made California?s drought worse Siskiyou County was also named in the suit for allegedly ignoring its own rules and ?rubber stamping? the plant, said?Bruce Hillman, president of the nonprofit group?s board of directors.??The ultimate goal is to have an environmental impact report,? Hillman said. ?We don?t know what the effect of this plant will be on the local environment, so we are asking for an injunction until these issues have been decided.?The purveyor of sparkling mineral water and juice was not required to do such a report or obtain a permit from the state to open the plant, even though it will use drinking water that would normally go to millions of Californians struggling to cope with the four-year drought.?The plant, which is being readied for opening, is a bitter pill for some of the 3,394 residents of the city of Mount Shasta, who like everyone else in the state have been asked to conserve the very water Crystal Geyser intends to sell. Opponents fear the bottling operation could drain wells and deplete the aquifer, which fills Siskiyou County rivers and streams and feeds the headwaters of the Sacramento River.?Judy Yee, the executive vice president of marketing and business strategy for Crystal Geyser, said company officials were disappointed but could not comment on pending litigation.?We are moving ahead, however, with our plans to open the plant in the coming months,? Yee said. ?We will also continue our support for local community events and organizations, abiding by our commitment to strengthen communities where we do business and protect the environment where we source our water.??Greg Plucker, Siskiyou County?s community development director, said he could not comment on the suit because he had not yet read it. He has said in the past that his department does not have authority to require an environmental review, because there are no permits or other approvals that require ?discretionary action? by the county.Crystal Geyser paid $5 million in 2013 for the existing 145,000-square-foot bottling plant, which was given permission by the?Regional Water Quality Control Board?to tap the aquifer when it was built in 2000. The operation, which is on 266 acres, was once owned by Coca-Cola, which abandoned the plant in 2010 when it stopped selling spring water.The facility, which is under county jurisdiction but would have to use city services, would eventually make juice, flavored tea and mint drinks. The company plans to phase out its Calistoga and Bakersfield plants and move its entire mineral water operation to Siskiyou County, a concern for 26 adjacent homeowners who rely on well water.Peter Fimrite is a?San Francisco Chronicle?staff writer. E-mail:?pfimrite at sfchronicle.com?Twitter: @pfimrite -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vina_frye at fws.gov Wed Aug 26 10:59:38 2015 From: vina_frye at fws.gov (Frye, Vina) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 10:59:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group Meeting Message-ID: Hi Folks, The Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group has scheduled a meeting on September 15-16, 2015. For further details, see the attached Federal Register. Best regards, Vina Vina Frye Fish Biologist 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: Federal Register September.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 194127 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Aug 26 15:49:15 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 22:49:15 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Judge O'Neill Denies Injunction, Trinity Supplemental Flows to continue Message-ID: <38889343.1259149.1440629355974.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Attached is Judge O'Neill's order denying a request by the San Luis Delta Mendota Water Authority and Westlands Water District for an temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against the higher flow releases from Trinity Reservoir. "IV. CONCLUSION AND ORDER?The Court concludes that there is no clear showing of likelihood of success on the merits. Even if Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of at least one of their claims against Reclamation in connection with the 2015 FARs, the balance of the harms does not warrant an injunction at this time. The potential harm to the Plaintiffs from the potential, but far from certain, loss of added water supply in 2015 or 2016 does not outweigh the potentially catastrophic damage that ?more likely than not? will occur to this year?s salmon runs in the absence of the 2015 FARs.?There will be those who credit the Court for this decision, and those who will discredit the Court for this decision. Let it be understood by both camps that the Court is obligated to follow the law as it is.?That has occurred, regardless of the absence or presence of the popularity of the ruling.?Plaintiffs? TRO/PI Motion is DENIED.IT IS SO ORDERED.?Dated: August 26, 2015 /s/ Lawrence J. O?Neill?UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE"? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 15-1290Doc45DenyingTRO.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 239080 bytes Desc: not available URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Wed Aug 26 18:52:28 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2015 18:52:28 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Judge denies Westlands' request to block higher Trinity River flows/Take Action Now to Stop Jerry Brown's Delta Tunnels/C-WIN intends to file suit against S.L.O. County In-Reply-To: <38889343.1259149.1440629355974.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <38889343.1259149.1440629355974.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4F37B8FC-E133-4F3E-BF89-55A1C5915483@fishsniffer.com> Good evening Wow - it's been a busy day in the water wars! Here are my latest three posts: 1. my article about the Judge O'Neill decision against Westlands' attempt to block Trinity River releases; (2) an action alert to stop the tunnels and (3) today's C-WIN press release regarding notice of intent to file a lawsuit against San Luis Obispo County for approving new wells without the EIRs required by CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act). Thanks! Dan http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/08/26/18776696.php http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/26/1415828/-Judge-O-Neill-denies-Westlands-request-to-block-higher-Trinity-River-flows "The potential harm to the Plaintiffs from the potential, but far from certain, loss of added water supply in 2015 or 2016 does not outweigh the potentially catastrophic damage that 'more likely than not' will occur to this year?s salmon runs in the absence of the 2015 FARs," ruled Judge O'Neill. judge_o_neill_s_aug._26_decision.pdf download PDF (231.9 KB) Judge denies Westlands' request to block higher Trinity River flows by Dan Bacher A federal judge today denied a request by the San Luis Delta Mendota Water Authority and Westlands Water District for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against the higher supplemental flows from Trinity Reservoir being released to stop a fish kill on the lower Klamath River. The releases that the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation began last week, resulting from requests by the Hoopa Valley and Yurok Tribe fishery scientists to release Trinity River water to stop a fish kill like that one that killed up to 78,000 adult salmon in September 2002, will continue. The two Tribes, the Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman's Associations and the Institute for Fisheries Resources were intervenors for the defendant, Interior Secretary Sally Jewell and the U.S. Department of Interior, in the litigation. In his decision, U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence O'Neill said, "The Court concludes that there is no clear showing of likelihood of success on the merits. Even if Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of at least one of their claims against Reclamation in connection with the 2015 FARs (FARs = Flow Augmentation Releases), the balance of the harms does not warrant an injunction at this time." "The potential harm to the Plaintiffs from the potential, but far from certain, loss of added water supply in 2015 or 2016 does not outweigh the potentially catastrophic damage that 'more likely than not' will occur to this year?s salmon runs in the absence of the 2015 FARs," ruled O'Neill. This denial of the request by corporate agribusiness interests to halt badly needly flows for the lower Klamath River is a big victory for the Hoopa Valley Tribe, Yurok Tribe and fishing groups. Both this year and last, Tribal activists held protests demanding the release of Trinity River to stop a fish kill. "I'm very pleased with the decision in terms of the protection of fish and the preventive flows being released," said Mike Orcutt, Fisheries Director of the Hoopa Valley Tribe. "Humboldt County's annual right to 50,000 acre feet of water from Trinity Reservoir was a key part of the court's decision and reasoning. We're glad that court interpreted the use of that water, as we have advocated for years, for beneficial uses including protecting fish. We have never give up on this souce of water supply since 2003 and we have worked on securing that water for Humboldt County and downstream users." The 15 page decision is available here: http://mavensnotebook.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/15-1290Doc45DenyingTRO.pdf The Bureau of Reclamation last week announced that it would release additional water from Trinity Reservoir for the lower Klamath River to help protect returning adult fall run Chinook salmon from a disease outbreak and mortality. Supplemental flows from Lewiston Dam began on Friday, August 21 and will extend into late September. ?In this fourth year of severe drought, the conditions in the river call for us to take extraordinary measures to reduce the potential for a large-scale fish die-off,? said Mid-Pacific Regional Director David Murillo. Releases from Lewiston Dam were adjusted to target 2,800 cubic feet per second in the lower Klamath River starting last week. Flows from Lewiston could be raised as high as 3,500 cubic feet per second for up to five days if real-time monitoring information suggests a need for additional supplement flows as an emergency response. Dan Nelson, executive director of the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority, explained the reasoning behind the lawsuit that they launched after Reclamation announced the flow release. "As our state is faced with a water supply crisis affecting every sector of people, businesses, and communities, an action like this is unthinkable. This will cause irreparable damage to drought stricken communities already facing water restrictions,? said Nelson in a press released. However, Judge O'Neill disagreed. "There will be those who credit the Court for this decision, and those who will discredit the Court for this decision. Let it be understood by both camps that the Court is obligated to follow the law as it is. That has occurred, regardless of the absence or presence of the popularity of the ruling," Judge O'Neill concluded. Trinity River water is shipped, via a tunnel through the Trinity Mountains, to the Sacramento River watershed to Whiskeytown Reservoir and Clear Creek. The water is used by corporate agribusiness interests farming toxic, drainage-impaired lands on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley to grow almonds, pistachios, watermelons and other crops. For more information about the the battle by the Tribes to get supplemental flows released, go to: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/08/05/18775808.php 2. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/26/1415666/-Take-Action-Now-to-Stop-Jerry-Brown-s-Delta-Tunnels Take Action Now to Stop Jerry Brown's Delta Tunnels by Dan Bacher If you want to save the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas, and Pacific Coast fisheries, it's time to take action against Governor Jerry Brown's Delta Tunnels Plan. The pork barrel project, if constructed, would hasten the extinction of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River Chinook salmon, Delta and longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other fish species, as well as imperil salmon and steelhead populations on the Trinity and Klamath rivers. The last round of public comments on the California Water Fix, formerly called the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP, ends in just 65 days (Oct 30). That's why it is essential that you submit a public comment to go on record opposing the Delta tunnels/CA WaterFix/BDCP. This will be your last chance to submit a public comment -- federal agencies may attempt to permit this plan as early as 2016! Go to the Restore the Delta website to submit a public comment, sign their petition to send an automatic letter or create your own using their letter template: http://restorethedelta.org/take-action-oppose-the-delta-tunnels/ "Let's get our neighbors, friends and family members to submit as many public comments as we can opposing the tunnels," according to an action alert from Restore the Delta (RTD). "Together, Californians can stop this insane project. We have done it before and we can do it again!" Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, emphasized what is at stake if the tunnels are built. "I believe that the Delta should stay the same for future generations of salmon and people," said Chief Sisk. "The tunnels will kill the Delta by diverting all the Sacramento River, the tunnels are being build large enough to divert the entire river. This will be a irreversible water tragedy affecting our air and food sources and clean waters!" According to RTD, "The impact on wildlife and plant species in the Delta that depend on freshwater include the Delta smelt, chinook salmon, steelhead, San Joaquin kit fox, and tricolored blackbird, protected species already on the brink that will face decimation due to a diminishing food-web." On the ocean, the ESA-listed South Pacific Puget Sound Orca Whales depend on migrating Central Valley salmon that will be harmed by less water flowing through the Delta. The tunnels plan also appears to ignore Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, which prohibits federal agency actions that are likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or that ?result in the destruction or adverse modification of [critical] habitat of [listed] species.? The problem is that the Brown administration refuses to consider any other options to the tunnels to solve our ecosystem and water supply problems, such as the Environmental Water Caucus' responsible exports plan that sets an annual cap on Delta water exports of 3 million acre- feet. Our tax and ratepayer dollars would be much better spent on: ? More aggressive water efficiency program statewide that would apply to both urban and agricultural users. ? Funding water recycling and groundwater recharging projects statewide that would be billions of dollars less expensive for rate payers than constructing a new version of the Peripheral Canal or major new surface storage dams. Meanwhile, these projects move communities towards water sustainability. ? Retiring thousands of acres of impaired and pollution generating farmlands in the southern San Joaquin Valley and using those lands for more sustainable and profitable uses, such as solar energy generation. ? Improving Delta levees in order to address potential earthquake, flooding, and future sea level rise concerns at a cost between $2 to $4 billion and is orders of-magnitude less expensive than major conveyance projects that are currently being contemplated. ? Increasing freshwater flows through the Delta to reduce pollutants so ecosystems and wildlife can be restored. ? Installing modern, state-of-the-art fish screens at the south Delta pumps to reduce the "salvage" of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River Chinook salmon, Sacrament splittail, Delta and longfin smelt, striped bass, threadfin shad, American shad and a host of other fish species. The Delta smelt, an indicator species that demonstrates the health of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, reached a new record low population level in 2014, according to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife's fall midwater trawl survey released this January. Department staff found a total of only eight smelt at a total of 100 sites sampled each month from September through December. Since then, the Delta surveys have revealed the continuing march of Delta fish species to the edge of extinction. (https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentId=92840 ) The surveys were initiated in 1967, the same year the State Water Project began exporting water from the Delta. The surveys show that population indices of Delta smelt, striped bass, longfin smelt, threadfin shad, American shad and Sacramento splittail have declined 97.80%, 99.70%, 99.98%, 97.80%, 91.90%, and 98.50%, respectively, between 1967 and 2014, according to Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA). Fortunately, people throughout California strongly oppose Jerry Brown's salmon-killing tunnels. Outside the plush Los Angeles headquarters of agribusiness tycoon Stewart Resnick on August 19, 25 protesters chanted, "Hey Hey, Ho Ho, Corporate Greed has got to go" and ?Mayor Garcetti, have some will. Don?t let Resnick raise our bills.? The protesters, including Los Angeles ratepayers, community leaders and representatives of water watchdog groups, demanded that Los Angeles Mayor Garcetti protect LA water ratepayers from funding the massive Delta tunnels project promoted by Governor Jerry Brown to export more water to corporate agribusiness interests and oil companies on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. To read the full story, go to: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/08/24/18776566.php. 3. http://www.calitics.com/diary/15769/san-luis-obispo-county-notified-of-intended-lawsuits-to-apply-ceqa-to-new-wells Below is the press release from the California Water Impact Network (C- WIN) regarding a pending lawsuit against the County of San Luis Obispo in an attempt to secure CEQA compliance with well drilling permits: https://www.c-win.org/content/media-release-c-win-notifies-san-luis-obispo-county-notified-intended-lawsuit-apply-ceqa-new August 26, 2015 For Immediate Release Contacts: Carolee Krieger, California Water Impact Network, 805-969-0824 caroleekrieger7 at gmail.com Babak Naficy: Law Offices of Babak Naficy, 805-593-0926 babaknaficy at sbcglobal.net San Luis Obispo County Notified of Intended Lawsuits to Apply CEQA to New Wells Proposed SLO Conservation Program Will Not Prevent Aquifer Overdraft The California Water Impact Network (C-WIN, online at www.c-win.org) has notified the County of San Luis Obispo of its intent to file lawsuits challenging the County?s approval of new water well permits without the environmental impact reviews required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). ?Groundwater is the critical water source for San Luis Obispo County,? says Carolee Krieger, the executive director of C-WIN. ?The county has little in the way of surface sources, and State Water Project deliveries are both minimal and unreliable. Residents live or die by groundwater.? The County's proposed water conservation program is based on "offsets" that are inadequate to stop overdraft of local aquifers, Krieger says. ?The only option left for protecting dwindling groundwater resources is to apply CEQA to all new permit applications,? Krieger says. ?Without specific language that proscribes overpumping, any proposed ?water conservation program? is meaningless. It?s just verbiage, hot air, and wheel spinning. California is in a water emergency, and the situation in San Luis Obispo County is especially dire. We can?t afford half measures that will only exacerbate the crisis.? Krieger says the lawsuit initially will challenge wells not subject to conservation offsets because the county?s emergency offset program expires on August 27, and the adoption date for a new proposed offset program has not been finalized. Ultimately, the lawsuit may address all new wells. A letter signed by Devin Best, the executive director of the Upper Salinas-Las Tablas Resource Conservation District, noted the plan fails to meet its own stipulated goals of providing a means to ?substantially reduce groundwater extraction and lowering of groundwater levels in the Paso Robles Groundwater Basin (PRGB).? ?The PRGB is one of the largest and most important aquifers in the state,? Best says. ?Not only does the current plan fail to address overdrafting of the PRGB. It provides insufficient information on impacts to hydrology, water quality, and biological resources. The RCD is ready to offer its services and expertise to mitigate the plan?s shortcomings.? Given that overdrafting is causing severe groundwater depletion, says Best, ?There must be a process that assesses the environmental effect of new wells. CEQA provides that process.? In explaining C-WIN?s decision to sue the county, Krieger observed that groundwater overdraft is an accelerating problem throughout the state, citing recent data from NASA confirming massive land subsidence throughout the Central Valley due to groundwater depletion. ?This isn?t a temporary problem that will disappear if heavy precipitation returns,? Krieger says. Aquifers can take years to recharge in the best of circumstances, and overdraft can greatly reduce groundwater availability because land subsidence destroys aquifer structure and holding capacity. Land subsidence also compromises infrastructure such as pipelines, roads, and bridges. We have to protect San Luis Obispo County?s aquifers before it?s too late.? Read the Notice of Intent: https://www.c-win.org/webfm_send/472 # The California Water Impact Network (C-WIN, online at www.c-win.org) promotes the just and environmentally sustainable use of California's water, including instream flows and groundwater reserves, through research, planning, media outreach, and litigation. www.c-win.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: judge_o_neill_s_aug._26_decision.pdf_600_.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 87740 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 11954675_10153240686409563_2580408545267143482_n.png Type: image/png Size: 263467 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Aug 27 08:38:23 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 15:38:23 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Redding=2Ecom_opinion=3A_Russell_?= =?utf-8?q?=E2=80=98Buster=27_Attebery_and_Larry_Nicholson=3A_Lack_of_Cong?= =?utf-8?q?ressional_action_threatens_to_reignite?= Message-ID: <442792475.1609612.1440689903509.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/opinion/speak-your-piece/russell-buster-attebery-and-larry-nicholson-lack-of-congressional-action-threatens-to-reignite_61846747 Russell ?Buster' Attebery and Larry Nicholson: Lack of Congressional action threatens to reignite 6:01 PM, Aug 26, 2015speak your pieceFrom the foggy shores of the Pacific to the high mountain desert of southeastern Oregon, the Klamath?s diverse and often warring rural communities have committed to equitably share the region?s most precious resource ? water. Tribes, ranchers, farmers, fishermen, conservation groups and the local power company, PacifiCorp, have brokered an unprecedented agreement to ensure that both fishing and irrigation communities can survive into the future. However, if Congress does not act this year, it will likely reignite the West?s most contentious water war. If that happens, it?s Klamath Basin communities that have the most to lose.The Klamath Agreements were signed in 2010 after decades of hostilities within the Klamath River Basin. The Agreements are admittedly complex, but in order to address the needs of farming, fishing, and tribal communities and to restore one of America?s greatest rivers they have to be. The Agreements provide greater water supply security for agriculture and refuges, provide more water for fish in Upper Klamath Lake and the Klamath River, and resolve numerous legal disputes. Irrigators get assistance with improving water conservation in order to do more with less; tribes get what many see as the mother of all restoration projects ? removal of the lower four Klamath River dams.Importantly, the Klamath agreements remain the only viable compromise that has been put forward to settle these complex conflicts.Despite support from the owner of privately-owned dams, Oregon?s largest tribe and California?s two largest tribes, commercial and sport salmon fishermen, Trout Unlimited and other conservation groups, as well as dozens of irrigation districts and agricultural organizations, Congress risks allowing the Agreements to wither on the vine if it does not pass legislation by the end of this year.Failure by Congress to act will not ensure the status quo. The disputes over water-sharing and the future of the dams will go on, only in a courtroom, with uncertain outcomes and without the negotiated compromise that respects all interests. Instead, without a negotiated compromise on these issues, the future will hold continued conflict and litigation and ensure perpetual water insecurity for most Klamath Basin irrigators.Key to jump-starting the agreements in Congress is support from the two members of the House of Representatives whose districts are most affected ? Rep. Doug LaMalfa, R-Richvale, and Rep. Greg Walden, R-Hood River, Ore. Rep. Walden is looking for a pathway to drop a bill in the House, however Rep. LaMalfa has still not taken a position on the agreement. We need Mr. LaMalfa to stand with Klamath communities and his constituents directly affected by the water and other Klamath conflicts to pass the federal legislation needed to implement the Klamath Agreements. Otherwise his enduring legacy will be one of missed opportunity.Russell ?Buster? Attebery is the chairman of the Karuk Tribe and Larry Nicholson is an Upper Klamath Basin rancher. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Aug 31 09:01:54 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 16:01:54 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Management Council Budget Meeting Monday, August 31, 9:30 am Message-ID: <1832573459.3459756.1441036914999.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> TRINITY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL Trinity County Public Library Weaverville, CA Agenda for August 31, 2015 ? Call in: 866-721-5952 Passcode: 4702048 ? ? Time ????????????? Topic,Purpose and/or Decision to be Made?????????? ?????????????????????? DiscussionLeader ? ? 9:30???????????????? Introductions:?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? SethNaman, Chair ??????? Approval of agenda ? 9:45???????????????? Open Forum:? Comments from the public????????????????????????????? Seth Naman ? 10:00?????????????? 2016 ProposedBudget? ??????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????? Robin Schrock ??????? Planned rehab sites ??????? Fish population dynamics model ??????? DSS ??????? USFS Technical Assistance (Watershed) ??????? Design and Implementation support ? 12:00?? ??????????? Lunch ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????? Group ??????????????????????????????????? 1:00???????????????? 2017 budgettimelines and process ??????????????????????????????????????????????? RobinSchrock ? 1:30???????????????? Long-termdesign and construction schedule?????????????????? DaveHillemeier/Robin Schrock ??????? Site design schedule ??????? Construction schedule ??????? Monitoring and analyses ? 3:00???????????????? Action Itemsand next steps??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? SethNaman ? 3:30???????????????? Adjourn ??????????????????????????????????????????????? ? ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Aug 31 10:02:50 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 17:02:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: TAMWG Budget Recommendation to TMC In-Reply-To: <519301772.1919283.1440722182411.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <519301772.1919283.1440722182411.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1086717853.3525881.1441040570287.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Thursday, August 27, 2015 5:36 PM, Tom Stokely wrote: Dear Seth and the Trinity Management Council: The TAMWG met on August 25 and has the following recommendation letter to you for the 2015-2016 TRRP budget. I will be attending Monday's meeting for Elizabeth. Sincerely,?Tom Stokely?TAMWG Vice Chairman? V 530-926-9727 Cell 530-524-0315 tstokely at att.net? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TAMWG to Seth Naman 8.27.15.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 143242 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Tue Sep 1 15:24:20 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 15:24:20 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] CBB: Humans exploit adult fish populations at 14 times rate of marine predators Message-ID: <01c901d0e504$f369c710$da3d5530$@sisqtel.net> Columbia Basin Bulletin Unsustainable Predators? Humans Exploit Adult Fish Populations At 14 Times Rate Of Marine Predators Posted on Friday, August 28, 2015 (PST) Are humans unsustainable 'super predators'? Research published in the journal Science reveals new insight behind widespread wildlife extinctions, shrinking fish sizes and disruptions to global food chains. "These are extreme outcomes that non-human predators seldom impose," says the article titled "The Unique Ecology of Human Predators." "Our wickedly efficient killing technology, global economic systems and resource management that prioritize short-term benefits to humanity have given rise to the human super predator," says lead researcher Dr. Chris Darimont, the Hakai-Raincoast professor of geography at the University of Victoria, Darimont is also science director for the Raincoast Conservation Foundation. "Our impacts are as extreme as our behavior and the planet bears the burden of our predatory dominance." The team's global analysis indicates that humans typically exploit adult fish populations at 14 times the rate of marine predators. Humans hunt and kill large land carnivores such as bears, wolves and lions at nine times the rate that these predatory animals kill each other in the wild. Humanity also departs fundamentally from predation in nature by targeting adult quarry. "Whereas predators primarily target the juveniles or 'reproductive interest' of populations, humans draw down the 'reproductive capital' by exploiting adult prey," says co-author Dr. Tom Reimchen, biology professor at UVic. Reimchen originally formulated these ideas during long-term research on freshwater fish and their predators at a remote lake on Haida Gwaii, an archipelago on the northern coast of British Columbia. The data set includes wildlife, tropical meat and fisheries systems from every continent and ocean, except Antarctica. The authors conclude with an urgent call to reconsider the concept of "sustainable exploitation" in wildlife and fisheries management. A truly sustainable model, they argue, would mean cultivating cultural, economic and institutional change that places limits on human activities to more closely follow the behavior of natural predators. The full story in Science appears here: http://www.sciencemag.org/lookup/doi/10.1126/science.aac4249 "The Unique Ecology of Human Predators" project, supported by UVic, the Raincoast Conservation Foundation and the Hakai Institute includes 2,125 estimates of annual finite exploitation rates, drawing on data from more than 300 studies. Other co-authors include Caroline H. Fox and Heather M. Bryan of UVic, Raincoast and the Hakai Institute. During four decades of fieldwork on Haida Gwaii, UVic biologist Dr. Tom Reimchen conceived the idea to look at how human predators differ from other predators in nature. Reimchen's predator-prey research revealed that predatory fish and diving birds overwhelmingly killed juvenile forms of freshwater fish. Collectively, 22 predator species took no more than two per cent of the adult fish. Nearby, Reimchen observed a stark contrast: fisheries exclusively targeted adult salmon, taking 50 per cent or more of the runs. Bookmark and Share -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 8928 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.gif Type: image/gif Size: 605 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 2 08:48:30 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 15:48:30 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] 6 minute video on Trinity River conflict from McClatchy, DC Message-ID: <1210753487.457307.1441208910223.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> This is a short video showing both sides of the Trinity River conflict.? TS Drought In drought-stricken?California, the drops that divide farmers and tribes McClatchy Washington BureauIn?California's?fourth year of drought, officials are finding it increasingly difficult to fulfill their legal and contractual obligations to distribute?water. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 2 08:52:27 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 15:52:27 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Boxer vows to block 'devastating' House drought bill In-Reply-To: <0daf01d0e58a$110ee220$332ca660$@erols.com> References: <0daf01d0e58a$110ee220$332ca660$@erols.com> Message-ID: <1699792645.440047.1441209147492.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> | "Water is the issue that if you touch it, your body gets shocked," she said. "I'm done with the water wars. If you're one stakeholder and you want me to turn against the other ones, call somebody else. And if you want me to do this in secret, call somebody else, because I won't.?? Sen. Barbara Boxer ? ? E&E Daily ? CALIFORNIA: ? Boxer vows to block 'devastating' House drought bill Debra Kahn, E&E reporterPublished: Tuesday, September 1, 2015 ?Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) promised yesterday that she would block a House bill aimed at easing the effects of California's drought. ?In wide-ranging remarks yesterday at a San Francisco event put on by the think tank Public Policy Institute of California, Boxer called a House bill by Rep. David Valadao (R-Calif.) damaging to endangered species and said she would have to get 41 votes in the Senate to block cloture on it. ?"That bill is devastating," she said in response to a question. "It's already a battle to save the endangered species given climate change. Now if we take water away from them, it's going to only exacerbate the problem, so we need those 41 votes and we'll stop it in its tracks." ?The Valadao bill, which passed the House in July, would loosen environmental restrictions on how much water could be pumped from the state's main water delivery hub, the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, and repeal a law to restore the San Joaquin River, as well as encourage new water storage projects (Greenwire, July 16). ?Boxer's own drought?bill, introduced with Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) in late July, also seeks to move more water from the delta to parched farms and communities in central and Southern California by tweaking criteria governing flows, but it specifies that the adjustments must comply with the Endangered Species Act and other environmental laws protecting fish. It also includes a number of longer-term provisions aimed at boosting desalination technology, water reuse projects and conservation measures (E&E Daily, July 30). ?Both bills have been welcomed by Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who plans to hold a hearing on them in the fall but also "advance her own legislative language with the goal of addressing water issues for the western region of the country as a whole," committee spokesman Robert Dillon said yesterday. ?Boxer, a veteran of the California water wars, also said she was hoping to avoid inflaming tensions between environmentalists and farmers with her latest legislative efforts to deal with the drought. ?She has introduced two other bills this year attempting to fight the drought by increasing funding for conservation, water recycling, desalination and other techniques, as well as her measure with Feinstein that would increase deliveries of existing water from Northern to Southern California. ?"Water is the issue that if you touch it, your body gets shocked," she said. "I'm done with the water wars. If you're one stakeholder and you want me to turn against the other ones, call somebody else. And if you want me to do this in secret, call somebody else, because I won't. ?"We must, must, must get together," she said. "All of us, we have to get together, and we have to share the pain of this moment." ?She also said Republicans have shown appetite for encouraging desalination as a way to solve water supply issues. ?"I'm the biggest environmentalist in the Senate, I can say that without a doubt, but I think the environmentalists have to come to the table, and we have to figure out how to do desal in a way that makes sense," she said. "One environmentalist came to me very agitated, my friend, and said, 'What about all the salt?' I said, you know, it's not nuclear material. We can deal with this, we can figure this out."Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman James Inhofe (R-Okla.) is "very interested in holding hearings on desalinization," she said. ?"I think people understand the need to look at this," Boxer said. ?"Unless the scientists are dead wrong, it's going to be a permanent deal," she said of climate change's predicted effect on intense drought. "That means we need to figure things out."Boxer also said her memoir, "The Art of Tough," announced in July, is scheduled for release June 7, 2016 -- "right in the heart" of the presidential race, with a nationwide book tour. "It'll be very interesting," she said. "I'm going to go all over the country and talk about it." ?She said she's not sure what she'll do after that, but expects to focus on the environment, women's rights and civil rights. ?"The book itself is going to be a jumping-off place for me to do a lot of things," she said. "I could have a radio show. I don't know. I'm very open to where that particular thing leads me." ?Reprinted from Greenwire with permission from Environment &?Energy?Publishing, LLC?-?www.eenews.net?-?202-628-6500 ?Back to TOP | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 2 18:05:31 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 01:05:31 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal Editorial: Stop this merry-go-round of suplemental flows, lawsuits Message-ID: <1306167222.769080.1441242331119.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/opinion/editorials/article_43a41a86-5117-11e5-9f8c-bb596716696a.html?_dc=190487556392.32697 Stop this merry-go-round of suplemental flows, lawsuits Posted:?Wednesday, September 2, 2015 6:15 am Once again the Bureau of Reclamation is releasing supplemental water from from Trinity Lake now going down the Trinity River in order to protect salmon on the lower Klamath River from disease.Once again, irrigation agencies in the San Joaquin Valley sought an injunction to stop the releases.And once again, a federal judge refused to block the higher water releases.This is d?j? vu all over again.At issue is the salmon run which needs cool water to survive, which it can?t find on the lower Klamath River. Reclamation cited dry hydrologic conditions and the recent discovery of the presence of Ich, the fish disease thought primarily responsible for a fish die-off in the river in 2002.Hence, additional cold water releases from Lewiston Dam which flow down the Trinity River and into the Klamath, providing cooler water temperatures and additional flow.U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence J. O?Neill wrote, ?The potential harm to the plaintiffs from the potential, but far from certain, loss of added water supply in 2015 or 2016 does not outweigh the potentially catastrophic damage that ?more likely than not? will occur to this year?s salmon run in the absence of the 2015 (flow augmentation releases).?Surely, opponents of releases argue, fish have survived droughts before, with low flows, warm temperatures and crowded conditions. No doubt, but likely with a more shaded path, deeper holes in which to cool down, and much less water extraction by humans and the full waters of the Trinity River watershed.As we?ve written here many times, the waters of Trinity Lake serve many masters ? irrigation and electrical production when going over the hill; recreation and tourism when it stays in the lake; fisheries, environmental and additional recreation when it flows down the river, not to mention serving human water supply needs along its natural course. It?s near impossible to make all parties happy at the same time. The best anyone can do is seek a reasonable balance.Reclamation is working to finalize a long-term solution to the issue of supplemental releases so that we all don?t have to get on the same merry-go-round every year. That would be nice, provided the federal agency comes up with a fair and reasonable solution. We?re all getting a little dizzy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Sep 3 07:57:18 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 14:57:18 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity McClatchy video on new url Message-ID: <1670937998.1071515.1441292238044.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> The video link that I posted yesterday is now gone, but if you missed it,you can find it at?http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article33417963.html ?Tom Stokely?Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact?California Water Impact Network?V 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 Fri Sep 4 09:36:11 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 16:36:11 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] California farm revenue grew in 2014 despite drought Message-ID: <1995045263.1759187.1441384571044.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article33812181.htmlCalifornia farm revenue grew in 2014 despite droughtGross income climbs as farm economy proves resilient in droughtNet revenue falls due to higher costs for water, productionBoom in almond prices helps soften impacts of drought BY DALE KASLERdkasler at sacbee.com Take a spin through rural California and evidence of the drought is everywhere: cracked soil, unplanted fields. Unprecedented cutbacks in deliveries of water from state and federal reservoirs have put agriculture on the defensive.In terms of dollars and cents, however, farmers seem to be holding their own.California growers took in more revenue in 2014 compared to the year before, although their profits declined by about 10 percent, according to new figures from the U.S. Department of Agriculture?s Economic Research Service and the Pacific Institute, a water policy think-tank.A continued boom in prices for almonds, citrus and other high-value crops helped soften the impact of the drought, experts said. So did farmers? increased reliance on groundwater pumping, which has largely made up for the substantial reductions in surface water availability.Net farm income dropped to $15.6 billion last year from $17.4 billion a year earlier. Gross revenue increased to $56.2 billion from $54.3 billion. An analysis from the Pacific Institute released Thursday produced slightly different numbers but told the same story: The farm economy is proving resilient in the face of an epic drought.Growers ?are still doing well, not as well as they were doing in the previous year,? said Heather Cooley, co-director of the Oakland institute?s water program. Despite the drop in net income, ?it?s the second highest in California history,? she said.The revenue and profit figures are in line with other indicators suggesting the farm economy hasn?t collapsed. Far from it. Farm employment in California totaled 411,600 in July, unchanged from the same month a year ago, according to the Employment Development Department.That doesn?t mean the drought hasn?t taken a toll. A recent study by UC Davis said the cutbacks in water have cost the farm economy about $2.7 billion this year, and eliminated 10,000 jobs that would have been created otherwise.Farm advocates say the numbers for 2015, which won?t be calculated until next year, will show a more pronounced impact. Restrictions on surface water have gotten worse this year for practically all farmers, and crucial commodities such as milk have seen prices decline.Farmers? profitability has become a hot political issue as California endures its fourth year of drought. Critics have seized on agriculture?s consumption of 80 percent of the ?developed? water used by people in California; that figure drops to 40 percent when river water left to the environment is taken into account.Farm advocates say growers shouldn?t have to apologize for their profits. The growth in revenue reflects the boom in demand for almonds and other commodities in which California specializes.?You?ve got a situation where people want to buy the things that California farmers are growing,? said Dave Kranz, spokesman for the California Farm Bureau Federation. ?This is a sector of the economy that could be even more successful than it is if we had the water supplies that we wish that we had.?This is one of the economic sectors that California should be proud of and I think is proud of,? Kranz added. ?It?s a success story.?Figures from individual counties reveal how growers have been shifting crop patterns to adjust for dwindling surface water supplies and fluctuations in consumer demand. For instance, production of relatively inexpensive cotton fell nearly 30 percent in Kern County last year, continuing a long-standing trend away from that crop, according to county figures.But Kern?s almond output increased 19 percent, and the price per pound increased 29 percent. As a result, Kern farmers took in $1.43 billion from almond sales in 2014, a 55 percent increase in revenue, according to figures released by the Kern County agricultural commissioner. Almonds helped fuel a 12 percent increase in total farm revenue in Kern last year, to $7.55 billion.The growth in almonds and other permanent crops has emerged as a contentious issue as the drought has deepened; almond trees are relatively water intensive, and unlike seasonal crops, orchards can?t be fallowed in bad water years. Growers say they?re simply responding to market concerns and putting their scarce water supplies to their best economic use.Farm experts say there are limits to revenue growth if the drought continues. Already, dairy farmers have seen prices tumble this year. That?s causing concern in places like Tulare County, one of the San Joaquin Valley?s leading farm producers, where the dairy industry accounted for nearly one-third of the county?s agricultural bounty in 2014.?It?s costing more to produce a gallon of milk than they?re getting,? said Marilyn Kinoshita, the agricultural commissioner of Tulare County. ?Pretty sad.?In addition, water cutbacks have been more draconian than last year. The UC Davis study said 542,000 acres of land are being fallowed this year, about 20 percent more than in 2014. That will likely take a toll on farm finances when the value of the 2015 harvest is toted up.Surface water, when it is available, is more expensive. Farmers in the Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District, a major rice-growing area of the Sacramento Valley, are paying $130 an acre-foot for water from the U.S. government?s Central Valley Project this year, said district manager Thad Bettner. That compares with $30 last year, he said.At the same time, some farmers in the San Joaquin Valley are paying in excess of $600 an acre-foot to purchase water from farmers north of the Delta in privately negotiated deals.Many farmers are keeping their operations going through deeper, more extensive groundwater pumping. The UC Davis study said growers are pulling 6 million additional acre-feet of water from the ground this year, partially offsetting the loss of about 8.7 million acre-feet of surface water.Although environmentalists credit farmers with embracing efficient drip-irrigation technologies, they say the groundwater pumping isn?t sustainable. The relentless draining of age-old aquifers has caused large portions of the San Joaquin Valley floor to sink. The sinking land mass, in turn, is causing canals and roadways to buckle.?They?ve maintained production and revenue with serious groundwater overdraft, and that?s bad news,? said Peter Gleick, director of the Pacific Institute. ?It can?t continue forever.?The state?s first-ever groundwater pumping regulations are due to take effect starting in 2020.The groundwater pumping is taking a toll on farm finance, too: Costs have risen about $590 million this year, according to the UC Davis study.Dale Kasler: 916-321-1066, @dakasler Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article33812181.html#storylink=cpy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Fri Sep 4 09:45:29 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 09:45:29 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Take Action Now to Stop Jerry Brown's Delta Tunnels In-Reply-To: <1995045263.1759187.1441384571044.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1995045263.1759187.1441384571044.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Go to the Restore the Delta website to submit a public comment, sign their petition to send an automatic letter or create your own using their letter template:http://restorethedelta.org/take-action-oppose-the-delta-tunnels/ 11889613_1015324726983956... Take Action Now to Stop Jerry Brown's Delta Tunnels by Dan Bacher If you want to save the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas, and Pacific Coast fisheries, it's time to take action against Governor Jerry Brown's Delta Tunnels Plan. The pork barrel project, if constructed, would hasten the extinction of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River Chinook salmon, Delta and longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other fish species, as well as imperil salmon and steelhead populations on the Trinity and Klamath rivers. The last round of public comments on the California Water Fix, formerly called the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP, ends in just 65 days, October 30. That's why it is essential that you submit a public comment to go on record opposing the Delta tunnels/CA WaterFix/BDCP. This will be your last chance to submit a public comment -- federal agencies may attempt to permit this plan as early as 2016! Go to the Restore the Delta website to submit a public comment, sign their petition to send an automatic letter or create your own using their letter template: http://restorethedelta.org/take-action-oppose-the-delta-tunnels/ "Let's get our neighbors, friends and family members to submit as many public comments as we can opposing the tunnels," according to an action alert from Restore the Delta (RTD). "Together, Californians can stop this insane project. We have done it before and we can do it again!" Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, emphasized what is at stake if the tunnels are built. "I believe that the Delta should stay the same for future generations of salmon and people," said Chief Sisk. "The tunnels will kill the Delta by diverting all the Sacramento River, the tunnels are being build large enough to divert the entire river. This will be a irreversible water tragedy affecting our air and food sources and clean waters!" According to RTD, "The impact on wildlife and plant species in the Delta that depend on freshwater include the Delta smelt, chinook salmon, steelhead, San Joaquin kit fox, and tricolored blackbird, protected species already on the brink that will face decimation due to a diminishing food-web." On the ocean, the ESA-listed South Pacific Puget Sound Orca Whales depend on migrating Central Valley salmon that will be harmed by less water flowing through the Delta. The tunnels plan also appears to ignore Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, which prohibits federal agency actions that are likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or that ?result in the destruction or adverse modification of [critical] habitat of [listed] species.? The problem is that the Brown administration refuses to consider any other options to the tunnels to solve our ecosystem and water supply problems, such as the Environmental Water Caucus' responsible exports plan that sets an annual cap on Delta water exports of 3 million acre- feet. RTD said our tax and ratepayer dollars would be much better spent on: ? More aggressive water efficiency program statewide that would apply to both urban and agricultural users. ? Funding water recycling and groundwater recharging projects statewide that would be billions of dollars less expensive for rate payers than constructing a new version of the Peripheral Canal or major new surface storage dams. Meanwhile, these projects move communities towards water sustainability. ? Retiring thousands of acres of impaired and pollution generating farmlands in the southern San Joaquin Valley and using those lands for more sustainable and profitable uses, such as solar energy generation. ? Improving Delta levees in order to address potential earthquake, flooding, and future sea level rise concerns at a cost between $2 to $4 billion and is orders of-magnitude less expensive than major conveyance projects that are currently being contemplated. ? Increasing freshwater flows through the Delta to reduce pollutants so ecosystems and wildlife can be restored. ? Installing modern, state-of-the-art fish screens at the south Delta pumps to reduce the "salvage" of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River Chinook salmon, Sacrament splittail, Delta and longfin smelt, striped bass, threadfin shad, American shad and a host of other fish species. The Delta smelt, an indicator species that demonstrates the health of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, reached a new record low population level in 2014, according to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife's fall midwater trawl survey released this January. Department staff found a total of only eight smelt at a total of 100 sites sampled each month from September through December. Since then, the Delta surveys have revealed the continuing march of Delta fish species to the edge of extinction. (https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentId=92840 ) The surveys were initiated in 1967, the same year the State Water Project began exporting water from the Delta. The surveys show that population indices of Delta smelt, striped bass, longfin smelt, threadfin shad, American shad and Sacramento splittail have declined 97.80%, 99.70%, 99.98%, 97.80%, 91.90%, and 98.50%, respectively, between 1967 and 2014, according to Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA). Fortunately, people throughout California strongly oppose Jerry Brown's salmon-killing tunnels. Outside the plush Los Angeles headquarters of agribusiness tycoon Stewart Resnick on August 19, 25 protesters chanted, "Hey Hey, Ho Ho, Corporate Greed has got to go" and ?Mayor Garcetti, have some will. Don?t let Resnick raise our bills.? The protesters, including Los Angeles ratepayers, community leaders and representatives of water watchdog groups, demanded that Los Angeles Mayor Garcetti protect LA water ratepayers from funding the massive Delta tunnels project promoted by Governor Jerry Brown to export more water to corporate agribusiness interests and oil companies on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. To read the full story, go to: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/08/24/18776566.php. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 11889613_10153247269839563_4089330163670159950_n.png Type: image/png Size: 363642 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Fri Sep 4 14:07:03 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 21:07:03 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary update JWeek 35 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C57C374@057-SN2MPN1-042.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hi Folks, Please see attached for the JWeek 35 (Aug 27- Sep 2) trapping summary update. The Willow Creek Weir was installed and has begun to trap and tag fish. Trapping at Junction City Weir has been delayed due to high river flows. Release flows from Lewiston Dam are at currently at 1100 cfs and should remain there over the Labor Day Weekend. Please check http://www.trrp.net/ for any changes to scheduled release flows. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW35.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 61262 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW35.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Sep 4 17:42:09 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2015 00:42:09 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Chico ER Editorial: Klamath water grab attempt another reminder of how south state views north Message-ID: <1850067570.1938116.1441413729701.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Editorial: Klamath water grab attempt another reminder of how south state views north | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | Editorial: Klamath water grab attempt another reminder o...Apparently we see rivers differently here. In Oroville we watch the salmon leaping vainly at the fish barrier dam on the Feather. Along the Sacramento, otters play,... | | | | View on www.chicoer.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | Editorial: Klamath water grab attempt another reminder of how south state views north POSTED:?09/01/15, 3:41 PM PDT?|?UPDATED: 1 DAY AGO1 COMMENTApparently we see rivers differently here. In Oroville we watch the salmon leaping vainly at the fish barrier dam on the Feather. Along the Sacramento, otters play, and all variety of birds flock along the banks.The rivers teem with life and really are the arteries that sustain the valley. They?re the foundation of our entire ecosystem, and of our prosperity as well. Farming?s complicated dance of water and soil and sun remains the foundation of our economic system. And farming depends on the rivers.The rivers are living things, from our point of view. They ebb and flood with the seasons (usually), and resident populations of wildlife are joined by seasonal runs of fish and migrations of birds.But elsewhere the rivers are just seen as pipes. Sterile conveyances to carry water to places that need it.This was made obvious again recently by the lawsuit filed by two San Joaquin Valley water districts to try to block releases from reservoirs on the Trinity River to save the salmon population downstream along the lower Klamath River from a deadly parasite.The pest, Ichthyophthirius multifiliis, commonly known as ?ich,? was responsible for killing 70,000 fish in the Klamath in 2002, during another time of low flows due to low supplies. Ich thrives when the water moves slowly and the fish are packed together.So when ich turned up in fish tested last month, the Yurok Tribe and Humboldt County asked to have the flows increased to wash the bugger away. After some back and forth, the feds agreed.That?s when the Westlands Water District and San Luis and Delta-Mendota Water Authority sued ? in a federal court in Fresno, mind you ? to block the releases in a river hundreds of miles away.Westlands spokeswoman Gayle Holman was quoted by capitalpress.com at the time as saying, ?It?s frustrating to see water that, when others have a zero water allocation ? may be a potential opportunity for additional water resources, and it?s literally flushed out to the ocean.?See what we mean? The Trinity and Klamath are not living rivers in the eyes of some ? they?re just pipes. The water?s ?literally flushed out to the ocean? as if there was nothing in the water or along the banks that would in anyway be affected by the flow.What?s particularly obscene about this lawsuit is that the Trinity and the Klamath don?t even flow into the Central Valley. They?re North Coast rivers. The Klamath starts up in Oregon, the Trinity joins it in northern Humboldt County, and the combined flows reach the ocean between Eureka and Crescent City.The only reason Trinity River water can get to the San Joaquin Valley at all is because we?ve gouged a huge tunnel through the mountains to get it to Whiskeytown Lake.Yet two water districts, two watersheds and several hundred miles away, somehow feel crops unsuited to where they?ve been planted have a higher right to that water than the natural world that was born of the Trinity and Klamath, and depends upon their flows.Luckily, their hometown judge didn?t agree, and the water?s still flowing. For now.And we have one more reminder of how the rest of the state views the north. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bgutermuth at usbr.gov Tue Sep 8 08:01:35 2015 From: bgutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F.) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 08:01:35 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: New Press Release: Reclamation to Release Additional Water from Trinity Reservoir to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klamath River In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear River users- A preventative pulse flow of 3,300 cfs is set to start this evening from Lewiston dam for a 24 hour period. The flows are meant to protect salmon in the Lower Klamath River. Attached is Reclamation's press release. I will pass on any additional information as I am aware of it. 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 http://www.trrp.net/ ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Ponce, Fernando Date: Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 5:19 PM Subject: New Press Release: Reclamation to Release Additional Water from Trinity Reservoir to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klamath River To: BOR MP All Mid-Pacific Employees The attached news release, "Reclamation to Release Additional Water from Trinity Reservoir to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klamath River," was released today, Sept. 7, 2015. [image: Reclamation News Release Header] *Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, Calif.* MP-15-152 Media Contact: Shane Hunt, 916-978-5100, SHunt at usbr.gov For Release On: Sept. 7, 2015 *Reclamation to Release Additional Water from Trinity Reservoir to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klamath River* *REDDING, Calif. ? *The Bureau of Reclamation will provide a one-day pulse flow from Lewiston Dam to help protect returning adult fall-run Chinook salmon in the lower Klamath River as identified in the Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for this project which are available at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=22309. In addition to the current supplemental flows being released out of Lewiston Dam to protect salmon, the one-day pulse flow is scheduled to commence on Tuesday evening, September 8, as a secondary preventative measure. The pulse flow will be implemented because of the continued presence of low-level infections of adult salmon by Ich, the disease thought primarily responsible for the fish die-off in 2002. The flow from Lewiston Dam will increase from the current rate of 1,100 cubic feet per second and would peak at approximately 3,300 cfs for one day; it would then begin ramping down until reaching approximately 1,100 cfs the following day. The public is urged to take all necessary precautions on or near the river while flows are high. If you encounter problems accessing the 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. -- Fernando Ponce Public Affairs Specialist Bureau of Reclamation 2800 Cottage Way, MP-140 Sacramento, CA 95825 (916)978-5104 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: MP-15-152 Reclamation to Release Additional Water From Trinity Reservoir to Supplement Flows Preventative Pulse.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 44715 bytes Desc: not available URL: From njharris30 at gmail.com Tue Sep 8 11:12:04 2015 From: njharris30 at gmail.com (Nathan Harris) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 11:12:04 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Final 2015 in-season trapping update - Willow Creek Message-ID: Please see the attached documents for weekly catch data from the Willow Creek traps. Nathan Harris Biologist Yurok Tribal Fisheries Program Trinity River Division 3723 N. Hwy 96 Willow Creek, CA 95573 Office: (530) 629-3333 x1703 Cell: (707) 616-8742 njharris30 at gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: trapping update summary 8.21.15.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 14747 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Willow Creek RST raw catch update 2015.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 33190 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bgutermuth at usbr.gov Wed Sep 9 08:36:21 2015 From: bgutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F.) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 08:36:21 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Change Order - Trinity River In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Below is the schedule for preventative releases of water from Lewiston dam to enhance water conditoins in the Lower Klamath ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Washburn, Thuy Please make the following release change to the Trinity River. Date Time From (cfs) To (cfs) 9/8/2015 2000 1,100 1,350 9/8/2015 2200 1,350 1,600 9/9/2015 0001 1,600 1,850 9/9/2015 0200 1,850 2,100 9/9/2015 0400 2,100 2,600 9/9/2015 0600 2,600 3,100 9/9/2015 0800 3,100 3,250 9/10/2015 0800 3,250 3,050 9/10/2015 1200 3,050 2,850 9/10/2015 1600 2,850 2,650 9/10/2015 2000 2,650 2,450 9/11/2015 0001 2,450 2,250 9/11/2015 0400 2,250 2,050 9/11/2015 0800 2,050 1,950 9/11/2015 1200 1,950 1,850 9/11/2015 1600 1,850 1,750 9/11/2015 2000 1,750 1,650 9/12/2015 0001 1,650 1,550 9/12/2015 0400 1,550 1,450 9/12/2015 0800 1,450 1,350 9/12/2015 1200 1,350 1,250 9/12/2015 1600 1,250 1,100 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Preventative pulse flow for *Ich* in salmon for the lower Klamath River Best - Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Scientist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S. Main ST. Weaverville CA 96093 530.623.1806 Voice http://www.trrp.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 9 15:18:53 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2015 22:18:53 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Chronicle: Conservationist Zeke Grader, advocate for fish, dies Message-ID: <1996123830.139963.1441837133256.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Zeke was a good man. ?He will be greatly missed. ?He did a lot for the Trinity River. TS http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Conservationist-Zeke-Grader-advocate-for-fish-6491817.php Conservationist Zeke Grader, advocate for fish, dies By?Steve Rubenstein? Updated 5:25?pm, Tuesday, September 8, 2015 ?Zeke Grader, a lifelong conservationist who loved wild fish, wild rivers and the good fight necessary to protect them, has died. He was 68.?You would probably not be eating a wild California salmon today if it were not for Zeke,? said his friend?Tim Sloane, the executive director of the?Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen?s Associations. ?He was not afraid of speaking truth to power. He wasn?t afraid of anyone.?Mr. Grader, 68, died Monday night of pancreatic cancer at a San Francisco hospice.From 1976 until this summer, Mr. Grader held the executive director position for the federation, the largest trade group of commercial fishermen on the West Coast. He represented commercial fishermen in their efforts to keep streams and rivers flowing, the San Francisco Bay healthy, and wild salmon and other native fish plentiful and viable.In the constant battle over California water, Mr. Grader frequently fought with agricultural and commercial interests that he believed were laying claim to more than their fair share.He worked on such projects as dismantling dams, protecting habitat, assisting out-of-work fishermen and maintaining critical water flows. He took on timber harvesters, suction dredge miners and petroleum polluters.??You cannot overstate how much he accomplished in legislation and policy,? Sloane said. ?There would be no commercial salmon industry in California if not for his efforts.?Former Monterey congressman and Secretary of Defense?Leon Panetta?praised Mr. Grader for his ?critical leadership in the fight for strong stewardship of our ocean resources. ... His common sense, his total devotion to those he represents and his commitment to getting the job done have given all of us courage and inspiration.?His friend and fellow conservationist?Patricia Schifferle?said Mr. Grader ?wasn?t afraid to take on big agriculture and industry to protect our resources.??Because of him, we have protections in San Francisco Bay and in our estuaries,? said Schifferle, the director of Pacific Advocates in Truckee. ?He was fair-minded when he came to the table. But he was not afraid of a fight. He was a man who stood up for fish.?A lawyer by training who wound up making the king salmon his primary client, Mr. Grader was a short, blond, stocky man who loved good food, scally caps, vintage cars and strolls on Northern California beaches with family, friends or his beloved cocker spaniel, Emily.He spoke plainly and bluntly, and one friend said Mr. Grader had an unparalleled ?BS detector.? His favorite food was salmon, although, Sloane said, he would settle for petrale sole.He put in long hours, and his friends knew that he was often too busy working to be bothered. If you wanted to be sure to catch Mr. Grader on the phone, Sloane said, you had to call him around sunrise, when his workday started.Mr. Grader, the son of a fish broker, was a native of Fort Bragg in Mendocino County. He spent much of his childhood on the Fort Bragg docks, helping fishermen unload their catches. He was a graduate of?Sonoma State University?and the University of San Francisco School of Law and a veteran of the U.S. Marine Corps.?A wild fish was worth saving, Mr. Grader believed, not just for the fisherman who caught it but for its own sake, as part of the natural order.?I think part of it is standing your ground, saying what you mean,? Mr. Grader said to a friend not long before he died, in describing his way of representing fish and fishermen. ?Don?t mince your words. Know what you?re talking about. Stay firm. Don?t back down.?He is survived by his wife, Sausalito attorney?Lois Prentice. At his request, there will be no funeral. Plans for a memorial service are pending.Steve Rubenstein?is a?San Francisco Chronicle?staff writer. E-mail:?srubenstein at sfchronicle.com?Twitter: @SteveRubeSF -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ebpeterson at usbr.gov Tue Sep 8 08:58:04 2015 From: ebpeterson at usbr.gov (Peterson, Eric) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 08:58:04 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Fwd: New Press Release: Reclamation to Release Additional Water from Trinity Reservoir to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klamath River In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 5:19 PM Subject: New Press Release: Reclamation to Release Additional Water from Trinity Reservoir to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klamath River The attached news release, "Reclamation to Release Additional Water from Trinity Reservoir to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klamath River," was released today, Sept. 7, 2015. [image: Reclamation News Release Header] *Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, Calif.* MP-15-152 Media Contact: Shane Hunt, 916-978-5100, SHunt at usbr.gov For Release On: Sept. 7, 2015 *Reclamation to Release Additional Water from Trinity Reservoir to Supplement Flows in the Lower Klamath River* *REDDING, Calif. ? *The Bureau of Reclamation will provide a one-day pulse flow from Lewiston Dam to help protect returning adult fall-run Chinook salmon in the lower Klamath River as identified in the Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for this project which are available at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=22309. In addition to the current supplemental flows being released out of Lewiston Dam to protect salmon, the one-day pulse flow is scheduled to commence on Tuesday evening, September 8, as a secondary preventative measure. The pulse flow will be implemented because of the continued presence of low-level infections of adult salmon by Ich, the disease thought primarily responsible for the fish die-off in 2002. The flow from Lewiston Dam will increase from the current rate of 1,100 cubic feet per second and would peak at approximately 3,300 cfs for one day; it would then begin ramping down until reaching approximately 1,100 cfs the following day. The public is urged to take all necessary precautions on or near the river while flows are high. If you encounter problems accessing the 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. -- Fernando Ponce Public Affairs Specialist Bureau of Reclamation 2800 Cottage Way, MP-140 Sacramento, CA 95825 (916)978-5104 _______________________________________________ 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: MP-15-152 Reclamation to Release Additional Water From Trinity Reservoir to Supplement Flows Preventative Pulse.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 44715 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Fri Sep 11 16:49:49 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2015 23:49:49 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary JWeek 36 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C58520E@057-SN2MPN1-041.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hi All, Please see attached for the Jweek 36 (Sep 3-Sep 9) Trinity River trapping summary update. This week's update includes the season's first counts of fish entering the hatchery and counts from the Willow Creek weir. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW36.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 61381 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW36.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Sep 12 09:26:20 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2015 16:26:20 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fresno Bee: A San Joaquin Valley irrigation drainage settlement is reached, but questions remain Message-ID: <384817215.1607817.1442075180963.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> The Trinity River was dammed to provide water to Westlands Water District.TS http://www.fresnobee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article34987701.html WATER & DROUGHT ?SEPTEMBER 11, 2015 A San Joaquin Valley irrigation drainage settlement is reached, but questions remain WASHINGTON?A top Interior Department official next Tuesday will sign a San Joaquin Valley irrigation settlement with the Westlands Water District, signaling the end of a long-running legal battle, but marking the start of a hot new political fight.After years of wrangling, negotiators agreed to a deal that absolves the federal government of the responsibility to provide irrigation drainage to farms in the Westlands district. The government?s failure to provide the drainage as part of building the Central Valley Project led to tainted soil and serious environmental problems.In return, according to lawmakers briefed on the deal Friday, the 600,000-acre Westlands district will retire at least 100,000 acres of farmland. The nation?s largest water district will also receive a potentially n advantageous new type of contract and have its own remaining debt to the government forgiven, among other changes.?The settlement agreement means that there is finally a reasonable solution to a long festering problem that began when the U.S. government determined that it was not going to complete drainage service to the San Luis Unit of the Central Valley Project,? said Rep. Jim Costa, D-Fresno.Westlands officials will sign the agreement after the Interior Department, in advance of a court hearing scheduled for Wednesday, according to lawmakers briefed Friday.THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, NEGOTIATED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR, ON BEHALF OF THE U.S. TAXPAYER, AND WESTLANDS WATER DISTRICT, IS A REASONABLE COMPROMISE CONSIDERING THE SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL OBLIGATION THAT NOW FACES THE U.S. TAXPAYER.?Rep. Jim Costa, D-Fresno?The Department of Interior, the Department of Justice and Westlands have been working diligently,? Westlands General Manager Thomas W. Birmingham said in an interview Friday, adding that he was ?hopeful? that the settlement will be finalized.But while Costa called the settlement agreement a ?a reasonable compromise considering the significant financial obligation that now faces the U.S. taxpayer,? lawmakers from Northern California who represent portions of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta decried both the deal and what they call the secrecy surrounding it.?It doesn?t look good,? Rep. Jerry McNerney, D-Stockton, said in an interview Friday. ?Westlands is getting another sweetheart deal.?With rumors of an impending settlement swirling for many months, McNerney in late July led other Northern California Democrats in asking the Interior Department for more information. On Friday, Interior Department officials responded with an hour-long briefing for three House members. The congressmen could ask questions, but were not given copies of the settlement.?It was totally unsatisfactory,? Rep. John Garamendi, D-Davis, said in an interview. ?The information they gave us was four years old.?The third House member in the Friday briefing, Rep. Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, added that he was ?disappointed? that Interior Department officials ?apparently want to shield this from public disclosure for as long as possible.?The Interior Department could not be reached to comment Friday.The federal Bureau of Reclamation began delivering water to Westlands in 1967, and up until the mid-1970s constructed some 70 miles of a planned 207-mile drain. Instead of reaching all the way to the Delta, it ended prematurely at Kesterson Reservoir.?The cost of completing a drainage solution has now been pegged at upwards of $2.7 billion.General terms of the settlement have been circulating for some time. These previously public draft proposals include Westlands assuming responsibility for drainage, exempting Westlands from acreage limitations and relieving the water district from its obligation to repay the rest of the capital costs for construction.The settlement will need to be enacted through legislation approved by Congress, adding another wrinkle to what?s already been a complicated journey. Separately, the House and Senate are considering California water legislation responding to the Western drought, although the drainage settlement could end up being tacked on to some other bill.Michael Doyle:?202-383-0006,?@MichaelDoyle10 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Sep 12 10:33:13 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2015 17:33:13 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] LA Times: U.S. ready to resolve Westlands water dispute in San Joaquin Valley Message-ID: <83121185.1635510.1442079193342.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-westlands-drainage-20150912-story.htmlLOS ANGELES TIMES U.S. ready to resolve Westlands water dispute in San Joaquin Valley By?Bettina BoxallThe federal government is poised to sign a settlement with the Westlands Water District that would resolve a decades-long legal fight over badly drained, tainted farmland on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley.U.S. Interior Department officials on Friday told three Northern California congressmen that the department could sign the agreement as early as Tuesday."The deal is done. There is no more negotiation," said Rep. Jared Huffman, (D-San Rafael), who was briefed on the settlement along with Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Stockton) and Rep. John Garamendi (D-Walnut Grove).McNerney and Huffman said Interior representatives did not show them a copy of the proposed settlement, but informed the three legislators that it was similar to a 2013 draft agreement.Under the draft, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation would be relieved of its obligation to provide drainage to several hundred thousands of acres of Westlands cropland. The district would permanently retire 100,000 acres of ill-drained fields and agree to a cap on water deliveries that amounts to 75% of its current contract amount.In return, the reclamation bureau would let Westlands off the hook for the roughly $350 million the irrigation district owes federal taxpayers for construction of a portion of Central Valley Project facilities. The government would also lift limits on the size of Westlands farms eligible for subsidized water deliveries and give the district an open-ended water contract that did not require periodic renewal.The Interior Department declined to discuss the matter. "No settlement has been finalized at this point in time and therefore we are unable to comment in greater detail," Kevin Thompson, the agency's deputy director of communications, said in an email.In an interview, Tom Birmingham, Westlands general manager, said he did not know when Interior would sign the agreement, but added "I'm hopeful it will be very, very soon."Birmingham said he expects the district board to approve the settlement. Once signed by Interior and Westlands, the agreement would go to Congress for approval.Westlands is the biggest ? and most contentious ? contractor in California's sprawling federal irrigation system. So a deal that changes the terms of its water contract and forgives its substantial debt will be heavily scrutinized."Westlands is going to get away with a lot here," McNerney contended.Thanks to local geology and a high water table, the soil in a good portion of Westlands is loaded with mineral salts and selenium, a natural trace element. The salts are harmful to crops and when concentrated in field drainage, the selenium reaches levels that are toxic to wildlife.After waterfowl in a wildlife refuge were poisoned by Westlands drain water in the 1980s, the reclamation bureau shut down the region's master drain. That led to decades of legal wrangling and ultimately a court order that the federal government was under legal obligation to provide drainage.In 2007, the reclamation bureau proposed a $2.7-billion project that would have permanently retired 200,000 acres of badly drained cropland and also called for treatment facilities to cleanse tainted drain water from other fields.The high price tag doomed the proposal, spurring continued negotiations to settle the issue.Under the pending settlement, Birmingham said "the government will save in excess of $2 billion ? will be indemnified against any liability resulting from the failure to provide drainage" and the district will assume responsibility to treat the drain water.But environmentalists and others worry that changing Westlands' contract terms could give the district a firmer hold on water deliveries from the environmentally troubled Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. They also say the agreement won't end the vexing problem of tainted drainage that has long plagued the San Joaquin Valley's west side."They're clearly not solving the drainage problem and the broader impacts that have made that such a big deal for so long," Huffman said. "Westlands is not going to retire enough land. They're not going to commit to the kind of irrigation practices" outlined in the 2007 proposal."We're going to ask hard questions," he added.bettina.boxall at latimes.comTwitter:?@boxallCopyright ? 2015,?Los Angeles Times -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Sep 14 15:57:41 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 22:57:41 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] C-WIN Media Release: SWEETHEART SETTLEMENT FOR WESTLANDS WATER DISTRICT EXPECTED TUESDAY In-Reply-To: <1081108824.2679633.1442271421331.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1081108824.2679633.1442271421331.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1329324842.2624862.1442271461785.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> https://www.c-win.org/content/c-win-media-release-sweetheart-settlement-westlands-water-district-expected-tuesday.html C-WIN Media Release: SWEETHEART SETTLEMENT FOR WESTLANDS WATER DISTRICT EXPECTED TUESDAY? For Immediate Release September 14, 2015?Contacts: Tom Stokely, California Water Impact Network, 530-926-9727,?tstokely at att.net Sandra Lupien, Food & Water Watch, 510-681-3171,?slupien at fwwatch.org Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Restore the Delta, 209-479-2053,?barbara at restorethedelta.org?SWEETHEART SETTLEMENT FOR WESTLANDS WATER DISTRICT EXPECTED TUESDAY Horrendous Deal for Taxpayers and California?Washington, DC - The Obama Administration is expected to sign a binding agreement on Tuesday (9/15/15) with the powerful Westlands Water District in the Western San Joaquin Valley that would guarantee the district vast amounts of California?s water to sustain the irrigation of toxic soils filled with selenium. The agreement would settle litigation over an unfulfilled federal requirement to provide drainage while forgiving Westlands? debt to U.S. taxpayers with an unconscionable sweetheart deal.??The agreement would increase the federal deficit by $340 million through forgiving Westland?s interest-free repayment obligations to the taxpayers for construction of the federal Central Valley Project. Westland?s current two-year water contract will be converted to a permanent contract for?890,000 acre-feet of water annually, further draining the Sacramento River watershed and Delta.?Under the agreement, water would be provided at lower prices, without acreage limits, and with permanent entitlements. These terms will lead to ever-increasing water deficits for California?s communities, economy, and environment. Congress must approve the agreement before it can be implemented.??We are outraged that the Obama Administration has sold out California taxpayers and their water,? said Adam Scow, California Director of Food & Water Watch said. ?This bad deal will allow corporate agribusinesses in Westlands to keep irrigating water-intensive almonds and pistachios on toxic land in the desert, mostly for export to China. We will work to defeat this taxpayer giveaway in Congress.??In negotiating the deal, the Obama Administration has ignored previous calls by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey and many others to retire over 300,000 acres of poisoned lands; instead, the deal will require only 100,000 acres of land retirement -- less than Westlands has already retired voluntarily. The Environmental Working Group estimated that annual?subsidies to Westlands range from $24 million to $110?million a year.??A better plan, outlined recently?by EcoNorthwest, an independent economic analysis firm, found 300,000 acres of toxic land in the Westlands Water District and three adjacent water districts could be retired at a cost of $580 million to $1 billion. Retiring this land and curbing the water rights associated with it would result in a savings to California of up to 455,000 acre-feet of water ? for reference, the?City of Los Angeles uses 587,000 acre-feet in a typical year. This course of action would cost significantly less than Governor Jerry Brown?s plan to build a massive tunnel system to divert water from the Sacramento River that is also for the benefit of Westlands and other corporate agribusinesses.?Because most of the poisoned lands will remain available for irrigation, the salt and selenium drainage problem will continue but the U.S. Government will no longer have any role in its management. Tom Stokely from the California Water Impact Network said, ?Unlike the earlier proposals from the Bush Administration, the Obama Administration is making no demands of any kind as to how that drainage is managed, including no monitoring requirements, no performance standards, no ?drainage plan? for review or approval by state authorities, etc.? The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board does not require any monitoring for selenium discharges to groundwater, so desert growers in Westlands have been given a free pass to expand the pollution in the aquifers of the Western San Joaquin Valley in perpetuity with cheap water that is desperately needed by people in the source watershed.??The disastrous consequences of industrial-scale cultivation of seleniferous lands became obvious in 1983, when thousands of migratory waterfowl were deformed or killed outright at Kesterson Wildlife Refuge due to deliveries of toxic drain water from Westlands Water District megafarms. ????The diversion of water from the Delta for Westlands Water District has significantly contributed to the destruction of the Delta?s fisheries and water quality for agriculture,? said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla of Restore the Delta. ?Leaving this land in production will ensure perpetual taxpayer subsidy to agriculture?s wealthiest 1% and continued environmental destruction of fish, wildlife, water quality and air quality from desertification of salty lands. The Obama Administration is making a terrible mistake that will haunt us for generations to come.??Read the EcoNorthwest Report?####?The?California Water Impact Network?(C-WIN, online at?www.c-win.org) promotes the just and environmentally sustainable use of California's water, including instream flows and groundwater reserves, through research, planning, media outreach, and litigation.?www.c-win.org?Restore the Delta?is a 20,000-member grassroots organization committed to making the?Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta fishable, swimmable, drinkable, and farmable to?benefit all of California. Restore the Delta's mission is to save and restore the?San Francisco Bay-Delta estuary for our children and future generations.?www.restorethedelta.org???Food & Water Watch?works to ensure the food and water we consume is safe, accessible and sustainable. So we can all enjoy and trust in what we eat and drink, we help people take charge of where their food comes from, keep clean, affordable, public tap water flowing freely to our homes, protect the environmental quality of oceans, force government to do its job protecting citizens, and educate about the importance of keeping shared resources under public control.?www.foodandwaterwatch.org?Tom Stokely?Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact?California Water Impact Network?V 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 Tue Sep 15 08:31:40 2015 From: twashburn at usbr.gov (Washburn, Thuy) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 08:31:40 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Change Order - Trinity River Message-ID: Please make the following release change to the Trinity River. *Date* *Time* *From (cfs)* *To (cfs)* *9/18/2015* 0800 1,100 1,000 1200 1,000 900 1600 900 800 2000 800 700 *9/19/2015* 0001 700 600 0400 600 500 0800 500 450 Issued by: Thuy Washburn Comment: Ramp Down from the Supplemental Flows for the Lower Klamath River -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Sep 15 09:32:33 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 16:32:33 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] 9/16/15 Lessons Learned Workshop on The Evolution of Gravel and Fine Sediment Management on the Trinity River Message-ID: <1371579981.255873.1442334753918.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> The workshop is in Weaverville.http://www.trrp.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/LLWorkshopFlyer.pdf -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: LLWorkshopFlyer.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 616463 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Sep 15 09:38:10 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 16:38:10 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Management Council Agenda September 17, 2015 Message-ID: <766550748.263850.1442335090481.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> TRINITY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL Trinity County Library Weaverville, CA Agenda for September 17, 2015 ? Call in number: 866-721-5952 Passcode: 4702048 ? Time ????????????? Topic,Purpose and/or Decision to be Made?????????? ?????????????????????? DiscussionLeader ? RegularBusiness: ? 9:00???????????????? Introductions:?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? SethNaman, Chair ??Welcome ??Approval of Agenda ? 9:15???????????????? Open Forum:? Comments from the public????????????????????????????? Seth Naman ? 9:30???????????????? Report fromTAMWG ????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????? ElizabethHadley ? Decision Items: ? 9:45???????????????? 2016 Budget?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? SethNaman/TMC ? 10:30?????????????? Break ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? All ? 10:45?????????????? 2016 BudgetCont. ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? SethNaman/TMC ? 12:00?? ??????????? Lunch???????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????????????????????????????????? All ? 1:00???????????????? 2016 Budget Cont.??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? SethNaman/TMC ?? Decision-approval of 2016 budget ? Information / Decision Items: ? 2:30???? ???????????? TRRP Efficiencies Subcommittee ???????????????????????????????????? DaveHillemeier ?? Membership ?? Tasks ??????? Permitting efficiencies ??????? Outside sources of funding ??????? Other ? 3:00???? ??????????? Sediment Lesson Learned Workshop??????????????????????????????????????????? RobertStewart/TMC ?? TAMWG perspective ??????? Trends in pool depth ?? TMC Reps perspective ?? Future gravel augmentation volumes ?? Changes to future TRRP restoration strategies ?? River corridor map ?? Conclusions, action items and next steps 3:30 ??????????????? ImplementationUpdate?????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????? Brandt Gutermuth ?? 2015?Rehabilitation projects updates ??????? Upper Douglas City ??????? Limekiln ?? Permitting-TRRP Biological Assessment update ? 4:00???????????????? Report fromActing Science Coordinator????????????????????????? JoePolos ?? Work Group updates ?? Fish production model status ?? Temperature model status ? 4:15 ??????????????? Report from ExecutiveDirector ???? ??????????????????????????????????? Robin Schrock ?? Watershed FOA status ?? SAB nominations ? 4:30???????????????? Public forum???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? SethNaman ? 4:45 ??????????????? Wrap up andaction items?????????????????????????????????????????????????? SethNaman ? 5:00???????????????? Adjourn ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From magallagher at usbr.gov Tue Sep 15 10:24:41 2015 From: magallagher at usbr.gov (Gallagher, Michele) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 10:24:41 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Lessons Learned Workshop In-Reply-To: References: <887A5C74BD7AB6499B49E1DEADD72339050BF0CAE4E4@FLATIRON.burleson.local> Message-ID: Please see attached agenda for upcoming Lesson Learned Programmatic Workshop--thank you. Michele Gallagher Project Coordination Specialist Trinity River Restoration Program Tel (530) 623-1804 Fax (530)623-5944 magallagher at usbr.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Leasons learned agenda150902.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 31868 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Sep 15 14:17:58 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 21:17:58 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] STATEMENT OF WESTLANDS WATER DISTRICT ON SETTLEMENT OF DRAINAGE LAWSUIT Message-ID: <1219848713.442279.1442351878470.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> PRESS RELEASE For Immediate ReleaseSeptember 15, 2015 Contact: Gayle Holman(559) 241-6233STATEMENT OF WESTLANDS WATER DISTRICT ONSETTLEMENT OF DRAINAGE LAWSUITFRESNO -?The United States Department of Justice and Westlands Water District haveapproved a settlement, which, if approved by Congress, would end a decades-longdispute over the Bureau of Reclamation?s responsibility to provide drainage for thefarmland within Westlands. It provides a fair and equitable solution for Westlands?landowners who lost the productive use of their land caused by Reclamation?s failure toprovide drainage services to those lands, while at the same time providing a costsavings of approximately $3.5 billion to the United States.The settlement has been the subject of comprehensive review by the Department ofJustice, Department of the Interior and Westlands. After this extensive review, theparties determined the settlement to be the best path forward for the federalgovernment and Westlands and its landowners. Congress must approve the settlementbefore it becomes effective.In the 1960s, the San Luis Act mandated the construction of agricultural drainagefacilities to serve lands covered by the expansion of the Central Valley Project.Construction on the drainage facilities was never completed, and in 1985, the San LuisDrain was closed and drainage service to Westlands was terminated.After years of inaction by Reclamation, Westlands filed a claim against the Secretary ofthe Interior and Bureau of Reclamation to compel Reclamation to provide drainageservice. In 2000, the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmeda decision in favor of Westlands and determined that the Secretary had a mandatoryduty to provide drainage service under the San Luis Act. The settlement approved byJustice and Westlands acts as a global resolution, concluding decades of disputes andlitigation over an environmental problem that has gone unaddressed.The drainage settlement requires Westlands to assume full responsibility for drainagemanagement within its boundaries. Westlands will be required to retire a minimum of100,000 acres of land and to repurpose the non-irrigated lands for environmentallyfriendly uses. The settlement relieves Westlands of repayment obligation for priorexpenditures by the United States for construction of the Central Valley Project.Under the terms of the settlement, the Department of the Interior will overseeWestlands? management of drainage. The settlement relieves taxpayers of a liability ofapproximately $3.5 billion dollars and caps water deliveries to the District at seventy-fivepercent of its contract amount.Westlands and the United States have agreed to work cooperatively to seek settlementof drainage claims brought by landowners against the United States in Etchegoinberryv. United States, a separate case pending in the United States Court of Federal Claims.However, Westlands will pay any compensation to landowners as a result of asettlement in the Etchegoinberry case, and Westlands will indemnify the United Statesagainst any future landowner claim.The Westlands Water District is the most productive agricultural land in the U.S.,generating $3.5 billion in farm-related economic activities and more than one billiondollars? worth of food and fiber. Westlands? 700 family-owned farms feed localcommunities, California and the nation. Agriculture is the bedrock of life and thisagricultural region is a critical asset for California.# # # -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kierassociates at att.net Tue Sep 15 17:03:18 2015 From: kierassociates at att.net (Kier Associates) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 17:03:18 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] STATEMENT OF WESTLANDS WATER DISTRICT ON SETTLEMENT OF DRAINAGE LAWSUIT In-Reply-To: <1219848713.442279.1442351878470.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1219848713.442279.1442351878470.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001501d0f013$187f38a0$497da9e0$@att.net> All of which simply confirms the thesis of Lloyd Carter?s Golden Gate Univ environmental law journal article ? Reaping Riches in a Wretched Region: Subsidized Industrial Farming and Its Link to Perpetual Poverty? : that the CVP?s San Luis Unit as authorized by Congress was a tragic mistake ? and not an honest one, but a canard. There was enough water to be had from the Trinity River to serve its long-intended service area, that dry patch between Williams and Dunnigan/Zamora ? maybe. But there sure as heck wasn?t enough to turn the San Joaquin Valley?s west-side Oil Patch, much of it owned by Standard Oil of CA, into a sustainable garden (see Dane Durham?s How the Trinity Lost Its Water) Bill Kier From: env-trinity [mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Tom Stokely Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 2:18 PM To: Env-trinity Subject: [env-trinity] STATEMENT OF WESTLANDS WATER DISTRICT ON SETTLEMENT OF DRAINAGE LAWSUIT PRESS RELEASE For Immediate Release September 15, 2015 Contact: Gayle Holman (559) 241-6233 STATEMENT OF WESTLANDS WATER DISTRICT ON SETTLEMENT OF DRAINAGE LAWSUIT FRESNO - The United States Department of Justice and Westlands Water District have approved a settlement, which, if approved by Congress, would end a decades-long dispute over the Bureau of Reclamation?s responsibility to provide drainage for the farmland within Westlands. It provides a fair and equitable solution for Westlands? landowners who lost the productive use of their land caused by Reclamation?s failure to provide drainage services to those lands, while at the same time providing a cost savings of approximately $3.5 billion to the United States. The settlement has been the subject of comprehensive review by the Department of Justice, Department of the Interior and Westlands. After this extensive review, the parties determined the settlement to be the best path forward for the federal government and Westlands and its landowners. Congress must approve the settlement before it becomes effective. In the 1960s, the San Luis Act mandated the construction of agricultural drainage facilities to serve lands covered by the expansion of the Central Valley Project. Construction on the drainage facilities was never completed, and in 1985, the San Luis Drain was closed and drainage service to Westlands was terminated. After years of inaction by Reclamation, Westlands filed a claim against the Secretary of the Interior and Bureau of Reclamation to compel Reclamation to provide drainage service. In 2000, the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a decision in favor of Westlands and determined that the Secretary had a mandatory duty to provide drainage service under the San Luis Act. The settlement approved by Justice and Westlands acts as a global resolution, concluding decades of disputes and litigation over an environmental problem that has gone unaddressed. The drainage settlement requires Westlands to assume full responsibility for drainage management within its boundaries. Westlands will be required to retire a minimum of 100,000 acres of land and to repurpose the non-irrigated lands for environmentally friendly uses. The settlement relieves Westlands of repayment obligation for prior expenditures by the United States for construction of the Central Valley Project. Under the terms of the settlement, the Department of the Interior will oversee Westlands? management of drainage. The settlement relieves taxpayers of a liability of approximately $3.5 billion dollars and caps water deliveries to the District at seventy-five percent of its contract amount. Westlands and the United States have agreed to work cooperatively to seek settlement of drainage claims brought by landowners against the United States in Etchegoinberry v. United States, a separate case pending in the United States Court of Federal Claims. However, Westlands will pay any compensation to landowners as a result of a settlement in the Etchegoinberry case, and Westlands will indemnify the United States against any future landowner claim. The Westlands Water District is the most productive agricultural land in the U.S., generating $3.5 billion in farm-related economic activities and more than one billion dollars? worth of food and fiber. Westlands? 700 family-owned farms feed local communities, California and the nation. Agriculture is the bedrock of life and this agricultural region is a critical asset for California. # # # -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Sep 15 23:08:42 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 06:08:42 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Breaking News: Yurok Tribe withdraws from Klamath Basin agreements In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1169455173.191594.1442383722112.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> ?http://www.times-standard.com/general-news/20150915/yurok-tribe-withdraws-from-klamath-basin-agreements Yurok Tribe withdraws from Klamath Basin agreements By The Times-StandardPOSTED:? 09/15/15, 1:56 PM PDT ?|? UPDATED: 2 HRS AGO0 COMMENTS The following was issued by the Yurok Tribe:Over the past decade, the Yurok Tribe has worked diligently to bring together diverse irrigation, environmental, tribal, power industry, federal, and state parties to develop a workable solution for the Klamath River that would remove the Klamath River dams, restore the fishery, and protect tribal water rights. These efforts, along with the efforts of others, resulted in the historic Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) and related Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA), collectively called the Klamath Agreements. The KBRA, which was signed in February 2010 and amended in 2012, was carefully negotiated to provide fish and tribal water rights protections for the entire river system while also accounting for irrigation, power, and other interests. The KHSA complemented these benefits by orchestrating dam removal in a timely manner. Unfortunately, Congress has failed to pass legislation authorizing the agreements, and over time the bargained for benefits of the agreements have become unachievable. The Tribe is left with no choice other than to withdraw from the Klamath Agreements. ?The Klamath Agreements were reached by thoughtful negotiation that resulted in a delicate balance of bargained for benefits for each party. The Yurok Tribe played a leadership role and invested extensive financial, technical, and human resources in the process. The bargained for benefits of the Klamath Agreements, however, have drastically changed since their passage in 2010. The Tribe has been working diligently over the past year and a half to try to restore this balance.In 2013, the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI), State of Oregon, Klamath Tribes and others began negotiating an agreement to address water rights claims in the Upper Klamath Basin. This water agreement, involving private water users not on the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Klamath Project, was contemplated by the KBRA. The Upper Klamath Basin parties during negotiations of the KBRA had assured the Yurok Tribe that they would address how the Tribe would be involved in governance and technical forums in the Upper Klamath Basin. The Tribe reminded various parties of this and requested to be involved in the Upper Klamath Basin negotiations. The Tribe was not invited to participate in the negotiation of this agreement. This represented a return to the old Oregon-California/Upper Klamath-Lower Klamath division of the Klamath River system rather than the comprehensive approach taken by the Klamath Agreements. The Upper Klamath Basin Comprehensive Agreement was finalized in March 2014 without the participation of the Yurok Tribe. It provides additional benefits to member parties that upset the bargained for benefits of the KBRA and KHSA.?The Tribe was prepared to withdraw from the KBRA in April 2014. The Tribe and DOI, however, began negotiations to try to restore the bargained for benefits of the Klamath Agreements to the Tribe. The Tribe and DOI reached principles of agreement in November 2014 and the Tribe remained a party to the Klamath Agreements pending a final signed agreement. In January 2015, the Tribe filed a Dispute Initiation Notice pursuant to the KBRA section 6.5, specifying that a signed agreement between DOI and the Tribe was critical to restoring the bargained for benefits of the KBRA. ?Despite numerous discussions, informal and formal meetings, and the best efforts of the disputing parties, DOI and the Tribe were not able to develop mutually acceptable language. It has become apparent that a signed agreement restoring the KBRA balance is no longer possible. As a result, the Yurok Tribe is withdrawing from the Klamath Agreements.The Tribe and DOI have invested countless hours discussing issues, exploring ways to restore the bargained for benefits in the KBRA, and attempting to develop mutually acceptable language for an agreement. Despite these diligent efforts and numerous concessions by the Tribe, the dispute was not resolved. In the absence of resolution, the Tribe is referring the dispute to the Klamath Basin Coordinating Council pursuant to KBRA section 6.5.3. The Tribe requests the Klamath Basin Coordinating Council expedite any attempt to resolve the dispute. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 16 07:43:24 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 14:43:24 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal: Stokely offers BOS some advice on safeguarding river rights Message-ID: <2051129707.399488.1442414604574.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_44ca12ee-5c0c-11e5-92c7-6fa9e954a5de.html Stokely offers BOS some advice on safeguarding river rights By Sally Morris The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 6:15 amAs the water level in Trinity Lake continues to drop toward a historic low and area residents pray for a drought-busting winter, longtime Trinity River advocate and former Trinity County Resource Planner Tom Stokely offered some free advice during a recent presentation to the Trinity County Board of Supervisors.Retired from Trinity County in 2008 and currently employed as a consultant to the California Water Impact Network, Stokely provided some newer board members with a history of the Trinity River Division of the Central Valley Project, describing a long list of events that left Trinity County at times hopeful of protecting its water rights as a county of origin, but often deceived.He said drought has brought a number of long-simmering issues to the boiling point, but also created a couple of opportunities for Trinity County to weigh in on future operations.?The Trinity River is some of the most valuable water in California because it can serve both the Klamath and Trinity basins and is also the largest ?tributary? to Clear Creek, producing more electricity than Lake Shasta,? he said, arguing the Trinity River Division?s most significant benefit to the people of Trinity County was the availability of low-cost power.?Though most of what was promised in the 1950s did not come true and the people here were hoodwinked by Westlands and its agents through lies and deliberate deception, the power was left wiggly and administratively dealt with later,? Stokely said.In the early 1990s, he said Trinity County led the charge to get cold water temperature objectives adopted to keep fish from dying in the Trinity River as diversions to the Central Valley reduced the flow.?It is very significant in terms of minimum cold water carryover storage at Trinity Lake. It is key to keeping the reservoir high. If you don?t have the water, you can?t meet the temperature objectives,? he said.In 1989, the State Water Resources Control Board held a hearing on temperature control in the Sacramento River, promising there would also be a Trinity-specific water hearing to consider whether the Bureau of Reclamation?s permits should be modified to set conditions relating to temperatures in the Trinity River.?We were hopeful,? Stokely said, adding ?we made the case that the Trinity River has priority for Trinity River water. It is supposed to be surplus water that goes over the hill and the state water board essentially agreed with us.?Then in 1990 he said, ?They turned it into a water right order to protect the Sacramento River. It?s a huge lie that Trinity River water is needed to cool the Sacramento River. The water coming out of Shasta Dam is much colder than the Trinity water that really heats up going through the Lewiston and Whiskeytown reservoirs. They are using Trinity River water to meet contractual water obligations in the Sacramento River basin. I call it ?paper water.? They promised 26 years ago there would be a Trinity-specific water rights hearing and we have yet to see it.?Stokely said the Trinity River remains ?largely unprotected. We have the 2000 Record of Decision that increased flows down the river and we have the water contracts. It?s like a bank account with two people signing checks and nobody watching the account itself so the issue of carryover storage is very important.?He described how much longer it takes for Trinity Lake to refill than Shasta or Folsom and with the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN) he has continued to pursue a long history of trying to secure a carryover storage mandate for Trinity.Amounts studied to ensure cold water releases are available for Trinity River fish have ranged all the way from a minimum pool of just 400,000 acre-feet of water if the power plant is bypassed up to 750,000 or 900,000 ?which isn?t a lot, but it?s more than we?ve got now, would be better for recreation and doesn?t require power plant bypasses,? Stokely said.The reservoir?s capacity is 2,447,650 acre-feet and he said a Bureau of Reclamation study determined that 1.25 million acre-feet of storage is needed at the beginning of a seven-year drought to ensure that cold water temperature objectives could be met at the end. The reservoir level is currently nearing 600,000 acre-feet and continuing to drop. The lowest level on record was in November 1977 at 222,350 acre-feet.Stokely?s recommendations for the Board of Supervisors include filing a protest with the State Water Resources Control Board on the California Water Fix water right change petition. The Department of Water Resources and Bureau of Reclamation have filed the petition to allow changing the point of diversion from south of the Delta to north of the Delta through the proposed twin tunnels project ?so they have to amend all eight permits for the Trinity River. That?s a door that allows you to file a protest and gain standing,? Stokely said.He said C-WIN intends to protest regarding amendment of the Sacramento River permits, but not so much Trinity.?I would suggest you ask for minimum carryover storage; put temperature plans in the water rights; get a definition of ?county of origin? rights; and physical solutions to the Lewiston Reservoir heating problem,? Stokely said, adding the standard the state water board has to consider is whether a proposed amendment will adversely affect any legal use of water, fish or wildlife.?And you have a very good case to make that it will if the reservoir gets too low. In 1977 it was a real disaster. There was significant mortality. If the lake reaches a dead pool, which is a real possibility if drought continues, all benefits would be rendered useless, resulting in severe economic and environmental harm,? he said, adding ?you haven?t had the resources to weigh in, but the Trinity River gets lost in all of this.?He also suggested the county seek support for scientific modeling to show the benefits and impacts of increasing carryover storage levels required in Trinity Lake and request funding to participate in drought legislation or hire staffing to look out for the county?s interests.?Chances are you won?t get it, but it?s important to ask for it. You can argue you are a poor county of less than 14,000 people whose water and timber are gone, and you aren?t getting any money to defend it,? he said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 16 10:20:59 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:20:59 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] DWR Damage Control/Scientists renew criticism of tunnels documents In-Reply-To: <5e371813b4f6783ed8cdddcab6a3759ac33.20150916164548@mail161.atl121.mcsv.net> References: <5e371813b4f6783ed8cdddcab6a3759ac33.20150916164548@mail161.atl121.mcsv.net> Message-ID: <983247449.504603.1442424059443.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> The Twin Tunnels Revised Draft EIS/EIR continues to fail to justify and adequately analyze this boondoggle. ?The main points of criticism are in the Stockton Record article below along with the incredibly pathetic response by the California Resources Agency. TS http://blogs.esanjoaquin.com/san-joaquin-river-delta/2015/09/15/scientists-renew-criticism-of-tunnels-documents/ Scientists renew criticism of tunnels documents By?ALEX BREITLER?|?Published:?SEPTEMBER 15, 2015?|?Leave a commentUpdate: The Department of Water Resources?has issued a statement?in response to the Independent Science Board?s comments.Remember that pesky math teacher who kept insisting that you ?show your work??That?s essentially what the Delta Independent Science Board is?telling proponents of Gov. Jerry Brown?s twin tunnels plan,?in the scientists? latest?strong criticism?of that effort.The scientists are not so much critiquing the project itself as they are the way in which the project is presented in?complex environmental documents.A revised environmental impact report out for public comment right now is supposed to explain the rationale for building the tunnels, justify the proposal and outline the environmental impacts; instead, it ?falls short as a basis for weighty decisions about natural resources,? the scientists found.They noted some improvement from a previous draft, but also quite a few problems, including:? The report is ?marred by key gaps in information, analyses and summaries? The various gaps impede evaluation of the science that underpins the proposed project.? In other words, as my math teacher might?ve said, ?Show your work.?? Details are lacking on how officials would adjust or change course if unexpected results occur (so-called ?adaptive management?).? And on a related note, conclusions in the report contain an ?exuberant display of optimism,? even though the 50-year timeframe for the project has been shortened considerably. There aren?t enough details on what actions will be taken in the ?likely event that such optimism is unfulfilled.?? The report ?offers no analysis of how levee failures would affect the short-term and long-term water operations?? Nor does the report give adequate consideration to climate change, sea level rise, future groundwater availability, the impacts of construction noise on sensitive birds like sandhill cranes, and the loss of Delta wetlands.? It is ?unclear how (and how well) the fish screens would work.? This is a reference to the fish screens that would be built along the intakes at the northern end of the tunnels, to protect Sacramento River fish from the new diversions there. ?Despite the lack of specific data on how well screens function, the conclusion that there will be no significant impact is stated as certain? Here, as in many other places, measures are assumed to function as planned, with no evidence to support the assumptions.?? The report lacks helpful summaries and graphics. ?Far-reaching decisions about (the tunnels) should not hinge on environmental documents that few can grasp,? the scientists found.And, I might editorialize, if the Ph.D.s on the Delta Independent Science Board have difficulty understanding the environmental impact report, what chance do the rest of us have?- See more at: Scientists renew criticism of tunnels documents | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | Scientists renew criticism of tunnels documentsUpdate: The Department of Water Resources?has issued a statement in response to the Independent Science Board?s comments. Remember that pesky math teacher w... | | | | View on blogs.esanjoaquin.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | On Wednesday, September 16, 2015 9:46 AM, CALIFORNIA NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY wrote: DWR Statement Regarding Delta Independent Science Board Comments on RDEIR/SDEIS#yiv2059953137 body, #yiv2059953137 #yiv2059953137bodyTable, #yiv2059953137 #yiv2059953137bodyCell{height:100% !important;margin:0;padding:0;width:100% !important;}#yiv2059953137 table{border-collapse:collapse;}#yiv2059953137 img, #yiv2059953137 a img{border:0;outline:none;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2059953137 h1, #yiv2059953137 h2, #yiv2059953137 h3, #yiv2059953137 h4, #yiv2059953137 h5, #yiv2059953137 h6{margin:0;padding:0;}#yiv2059953137 p{margin:1em 0;padding:0;}#yiv2059953137 a{word-wrap:break-word;}#yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137ReadMsgBody{width:100%;}#yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137ExternalClass{width:100%;}#yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137ExternalClass, #yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137ExternalClass p, #yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137ExternalClass span, #yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137ExternalClass font, #yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137ExternalClass td, #yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137ExternalClass div{line-height:100%;}#yiv2059953137 table, #yiv2059953137 td{}#yiv2059953137 #yiv2059953137outlook a{padding:0;}#yiv2059953137 img{}#yiv2059953137 body, #yiv2059953137 table, #yiv2059953137 td, #yiv2059953137 p, #yiv2059953137 a, #yiv2059953137 li, #yiv2059953137 blockquote{}#yiv2059953137 #yiv2059953137bodyCell{padding:20px;}#yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137mcnImage{vertical-align:bottom;}#yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137mcnTextContent img{height:auto !important;}#yiv2059953137 body, #yiv2059953137 #yiv2059953137bodyTable{background-color:#e7e7e6;}#yiv2059953137 #yiv2059953137bodyCell{border-top:0;}#yiv2059953137 #yiv2059953137templateContainer{border:0;}#yiv2059953137 h1{color:#606060;display:block;font-family:'Lucida Sans Unicode', 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif;font-size:30px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:125%;letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;text-align:center;}#yiv2059953137 h2{color:#606060;display:block;font-family:'Lucida Sans Unicode', 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif;font-size:26px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:125%;letter-spacing:-.75px;margin:0;text-align:center;}#yiv2059953137 h3{color:#46afd6;display:block;font-family:'Lucida Sans Unicode', 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif;font-size:18px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:200%;letter-spacing:-1px;margin:0;text-align:center;}#yiv2059953137 h4{color:#808080;display:block;font-family:'Lucida Sans Unicode', 'Lucida Grande', sans-serif;font-size:16px;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:125%;letter-spacing:normal;margin:0;text-align:center;}#yiv2059953137 #yiv2059953137templatePreheader{background-color:#e7e7e6;border-top:0;border-bottom:0;}#yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137preheaderContainer .yiv2059953137mcnTextContent, #yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137preheaderContainer .yiv2059953137mcnTextContent p{color:#606060;font-family:Helvetica;font-size:11px;line-height:125%;text-align:left;}#yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137preheaderContainer .yiv2059953137mcnTextContent a{color:#606060;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv2059953137 #yiv2059953137templateHeader{background-color:#f4f3f2;border-top:0;border-bottom:0;}#yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137headerContainer .yiv2059953137mcnTextContent, #yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137headerContainer .yiv2059953137mcnTextContent p{color:#606060;font-family:Helvetica;font-size:9px;line-height:150%;text-align:left;}#yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137headerContainer .yiv2059953137mcnTextContent a{color:#6DC6DD;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv2059953137 #yiv2059953137templateBody{background-color:#f4f3f2;border-top:0;border-bottom:0;}#yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137bodyContainer .yiv2059953137mcnTextContent, #yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137bodyContainer .yiv2059953137mcnTextContent p{color:#606060;font-family:Arial, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:13px;line-height:150%;text-align:left;}#yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137bodyContainer .yiv2059953137mcnTextContent a{color:#24647f;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv2059953137 #yiv2059953137templateFooter{background-color:#2d2d2d;border-top:0;border-bottom:0;}#yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137footerContainer .yiv2059953137mcnTextContent, #yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137footerContainer .yiv2059953137mcnTextContent p{color:#606060;font-family:Helvetica;font-size:10px;line-height:125%;text-align:center;}#yiv2059953137 .yiv2059953137footerContainer .yiv2059953137mcnTextContent a{color:#606060;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 body, #yiv2059953137 table, #yiv2059953137 td, #yiv2059953137 p, #yiv2059953137 a, #yiv2059953137 li, #yiv2059953137 blockquote{}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 body{width:100% !important;min-width:100% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td[id=yiv2059953137bodyCell]{padding:10px !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 table[class=yiv2059953137mcnTextContentContainer]{width:100% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 table[class=yiv2059953137mcnBoxedTextContentContainer]{width:100% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 table[class=yiv2059953137mcpreview-image-uploader]{width:100% !important;display:none;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 img[class=yiv2059953137mcnImage]{width:100% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 table[class=yiv2059953137mcnImageGroupContentContainer]{width:100% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137mcnImageGroupContent]{padding:9px !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137mcnImageGroupBlockInner]{padding-bottom:0 !important;padding-top:0 !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 tbody[class=yiv2059953137mcnImageGroupBlockOuter]{padding-bottom:9px !important;padding-top:9px !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 table .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 table[class=yiv2059953137mcnCaptionBottomContent]{width:100% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 table .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 table .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 table .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 table .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 table .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 table[class=yiv2059953137mcnImageCardRightTextContentContainer]{width:100% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137mcnImageCardRightImageContent]{padding-right:18px !important;padding-left:18px !important;padding-bottom:0 !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137mcnImageCardBottomImageContent]{padding-bottom:9px !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137mcnImageCardTopImageContent]{padding-top:18px !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137mcnImageCardRightImageContent]{padding-right:18px !important;padding-left:18px !important;padding-bottom:0 !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137mcnImageCardBottomImageContent]{padding-bottom:9px !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137mcnImageCardTopImageContent]{padding-top:18px !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 table .filtered99999 td .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 table[class=yiv2059953137mcnCaptionRightContentOuter] td[class=yiv2059953137mcnTextContent]{padding-top:9px !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137mcnCaptionBlockInner] table[class=yiv2059953137mcnCaptionTopContent]:last-child td[class=yiv2059953137mcnTextContent]{padding-top:18px !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137mcnBoxedTextContentColumn]{padding-left:18px !important;padding-right:18px !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137mcnTextContent]{padding-right:18px !important;padding-left:18px !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 table .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 table .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 table .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 table .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 table[id=yiv2059953137templateFooter]{max-width:600px !important;width:100% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 h1{font-size:24px !important;line-height:125% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 h2{font-size:20px !important;line-height:125% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 h3{font-size:18px !important;line-height:125% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 h4{font-size:16px !important;line-height:125% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 table .filtered99999 td .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137mcnBoxedTextContentContainer] td[class=yiv2059953137mcnTextContent] p{font-size:18px !important;line-height:125% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 table[id=yiv2059953137templatePreheader]{display:block;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td .filtered99999 td .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137preheaderContainer] td[class=yiv2059953137mcnTextContent] p{font-size:14px !important;line-height:115% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td .filtered99999 td .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137headerContainer] td[class=yiv2059953137mcnTextContent] p{font-size:18px !important;line-height:125% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td .filtered99999 td .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137bodyContainer] td[class=yiv2059953137mcnTextContent] p{font-size:18px !important;line-height:125% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td .filtered99999 td .filtered99999 , #yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137footerContainer] td[class=yiv2059953137mcnTextContent] p{font-size:14px !important;line-height:115% !important;}}@media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv2059953137 td[class=yiv2059953137footerContainer] a[class=yiv2059953137utilityLink]{display:block;}} | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | September 16, 2015 DWR Statement Regarding Delta Independent Science Board Comments on RDEIR/SDEIS ___________________________________Statement from Cassandra Enos-Nobriga, program manager for the California Department of Water Resources, about the Delta Independent Science Board comments on the Partially Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report/Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (RDEIR/SDEIS) for California WaterFix: ? The Department of Water Resources is grateful for the Independent Science Board (ISB) review of the California WaterFix/Bay Delta Conservation Plan RDEIR/SDEIS.? The ISB?s comments will help ensure the state's approach to protecting the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta uses the best possible scientific methods, coordination and inquiry.? The ISB?s specific comments on various resource chapters of the RDEIR/SDEIS will enhance analysis of the proposed project by DWR and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and improve the final environmental impact documents. ? The ISB found much to laud in the new documents, including for example that: - The new Sections 1 through 4 are well-written; - Section 2 provides the great service of summarizing how the previous draft was revised in response to project changes and public input; - Section 4 presents an impressive amount of detailed information; and - if the comprehensive "Resource Restoration and Performance Principles" listed in the environmental documents are adhered to, the project should have minimal impacts on biological resources that might be affected by construction or operations. Several of the ISB?s comments warrant clarification. - In developing California WaterFix, three new alternatives were added to the existing 15 already being considered to meet the project objectives and purpose and need. The primary change with the RDEIR/SDEIS is that there is a different proposed project (preferred alternative). The California WaterFix does not have a 15-year time period as stated in the ISB comments.? ? - The 21 other conservation measures in the Bay Delta Conservation Plan are part of the alternatives that include a Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan (HCP/NCCP).? A portion of many of the conservation measures also would serve as mitigation to offset construction related impacts, including construction of the conveyance project. ?Elements of the conservation measures, including restoration, that offset construction related impacts remain as part of the proposed California WaterFix project and non-HCP/NCCP alternatives.? Other conservation measures that make up the HCP/NCCP alternatives will be or are being pursued through other projects and programs at the state, federal or local level.? ? - Some comments of the Delta ISB relate to issues beyond the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and beyond the scope of an EIR/EIS.? The purpose of an EIR/EIS is to identify and evaluate the potential impacts of a project on the existing environment.? The major focus of the CEQA/NEPA environmental review requirement directs the lead agency to focus on how construction and operation of the proposed project would adversely impact existing resources. CEQA and NEPA do not direct an agency, beyond a cumulative impact analysis, to specifically analyze how other future actions, unrelated to the proposed project, also could affect the environment.? So, for example, while DWR appreciates the importance of understanding the viability of future levee programs and the environmental effect of levee failure, such an assessment falls outside the scope of CEQA and NEPA requirements and instead would occur as a part of a feasibility study related to engineering design. ? - An EIR/EIS should not be speculative.? CEQA specifically directs an agency not to speculate and to terminate discussion of an impact where it is too speculative for evaluation.? However, for example, the ISB reviewers state that they would like to see in the draft environmental review documents greater detail about the effects of changed water availability on agricultural practices in the San Joaquin Valley.? Although some degree of forecasting may be appropriate in certain situations where the indirect actions are reasonably certain to occur, such speculation in this instance would not be reasonably foreseeable and therefore inappropriate in an EIR/EIS. ? - To a large extent, CEQA and NEPA direct that an EIR/EIS follow a certain format related to defining the environmental setting/affected environment and then sequentially analyzing impacts of how the proposed action would cause potentially significant impacts to that existing environment.? The environmental setting should be focused on the physical conditions which exist within the area and will be affected by the project.? This area is limited to only that where significant impacts would occur.? While the ISB reviewers state that they would like to see greater detail on a ?landscape? level, an EIR/EIS does not call for such an analysis. The state, however, is working to improve its landscape-level understanding of resource management.? Similarly, efforts are underway to better articulate how the California EcoRestore program will be properly and effectively coordinated with other restoration programs. ? - The ISB reviewers state that they would like to see more detail on adaptive management.? An EIR/EIS is required to present all feasible mitigation to avoid or substantially reduce potentially significant impacts and develop a monitoring program for the implementation of the mitigation that is required.? Where the mitigation relies on the future development of a detailed plan, performance standards must be included within the measure?s description; however, comprehensive adaptive management programs are not necessarily a specific element of that mitigation plan.? An EIR/EIS does not call for a comprehensive summary of adaptive management principles.? Nonetheless, DWR puts adaptive management into practice on a regular basis and will continue to do so for any future project.? ? - The ISB expresses interest in greater detail.? But an EIR/EIS should not be judged as a comprehensive treatise on Delta challenges or even a primer for policy makers.? It is one piece of the overall panoply of information to be utilized in decision-making, and its boundaries are narrowly prescribed by law. We welcome the Delta ISB's interest in how the State intends to manage water supplies and protect invaluable natural resources in the Delta, and we hope to continue working collaboratively with both the ISB and the Delta Stewardship Council toward that goal. ? ? | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | CALIFORNIA NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY CONTACT US?| 866.924.9955 | CALIFORNIAWATERFIX.COM CALIFORNIA WATER FIX IS?ALTERNATIVE 4A?|?? 2010-2015?ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. unsubscribe from this list??? update subscription preferences? | | | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 16 10:41:05 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 10:41:05 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Fwd=3A_This_just_in_=E2=80=A6_Westlands_d?= =?utf-8?q?rainage_settlement_legal_documents?= References: <88af2b23c65f1c863838dd9a5ee51fcf060.20150916173139@mail89.atl51.rsgsv.net> Message-ID: <03FCF348-3611-4D88-8C61-8311498858FF@att.net> Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: Maven > Date: September 16, 2015 at 10:31:49 AM PDT > To: > Subject: This just in ? Westlands drainage settlement legal documents > Reply-To: Maven > > > Breaking News from Maven's Notebook > Is this email not displaying correctly? > View it in your browser. > > Just posted at Maven's Notebook: > > This just in ? Westlands drainage settlement legal documents > follow on Twitter | friend on Facebook | forward to a friend > Copyright ? 2015 Maven's Notebook, All rights reserved. > You are receiving this email because you opted in at Maven's Notebook. > Our mailing address is: > Maven's Notebook > P. O. Box 2342 > Canyon Country,, CA 91386 > > Add us to your address book > > > > > > > > This email was sent to tstokely at att.net > why did I get this? unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences > Maven's Notebook ? P. O. Box 2342 ? Canyon Country,, CA 91386 ? USA > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Sep 17 16:44:05 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 23:44:05 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] California farm drainage deal faces Capitol Hill currents Message-ID: <1485784025.1306668.1442533445647.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article35488728.html California farm drainage deal faces Capitol Hill currents Settlement relieves federal government of irrigation drainage obligationCongressional approval required for deal to take effectAgreement gives Congress until January 2017 to actBY MICHAEL DOYLEmdoyle at mcclatchydc.comWASHINGTON?A Congress that has?stumbled over a California?water bill amid record drought now faces a challenging new fight over irrigation drainage.But this time, some of the state?s most politically powerful farmers have the Obama administration explicitly on their side. Together, they will be seeking approval of a far-reaching settlement that satisfies the Justice Department and Westlands Water District but alarms critics.?I think after years of frustration, we?ve finally got something done,? Rep. Jim Costa, D-Calif., said in an interview Wednesday. ?It?s a compromise and, like any, there was give and take on both sides.?In a federal court filing Wednesday, the Justice Department provided both details and a roadmap for the irrigation drainage settlement formally agreed to by federal and Westlands officials the day before.Years in the making, the settlement relieves the federal government of its obligation to provide drainage for Westlands? farms. Federal officials now peg the constantly escalating overall cost of that drainage at upward of $3.5 billion.?The 600,000-acre Westlands district will assume responsibility for providing the drainage that takes away tainted irrigation water.WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH CONGRESS AND ALL INTERESTED PARTIES AS THE SETTLEMENT IS REVIEWED IN THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS.?Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Estevan L?pezIn turn, Westlands will be forgiven the rest of its capital cost debt owed for construction of Central Valley Project irrigation facilities. Interior Department officials now estimate the debt to be forgiven at upward of $375 million.Myriad other provisions are included in the 10-page settlement plus attachments made public Wednesday, including Westlands agreeing to pay Michael Etchegoinberry and other farmers who?filed a class-action lawsuit?against the Interior Department. The farmers argued the failure to provide drainage so damaged the land that it amounted to a government taking.Westlands also agreed to retire at least 100,000 acres of farmland, although the district can count toward the total some land already taken out of production. Westlands would gain ownership of the federal pipes, canals and pumping plants serving the district.Congress should pass the necessary legislation by January 2017, according to the settlement. If it doesn?t, either the government or Westlands can nullify the deal unless they agree to an extension. As part of the legal package submitted Wednesday, officials included a six-page draft of the proposed bill.In a statement, Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Estevan L?pez said the settlement avoids a ?court-imposed obligation (that) would jeopardize important investments in conservation, environmental restoration and water infrastructure.??THE NEXT STOP FOR THIS SETTLEMENT IS CONGRESS, WHERE I WILL STRONGLY OPPOSE IT AND ASK THE TOUGH QUESTIONS NECESSARY.?Rep. Jerry McNerney, D-Calif.The Capitol Hill undercurrents, though, could get tricky.?The best thing that could happen would be for us to take the time to understand the implications of this,? Rep. John Garamendi, D-Calif., said in an interview Wednesday, ?but my guess is that they will try to ram it into must-pass legislation, and that would be a mistake.?Another lawmaker who represents part of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, Rep. Jerry McNerney, D-Calif., called the settlement an ?outrageous windfall for Westlands? and vowed to ?ask the tough questions necessary when California's largest and very profitable water district is absolved of its obligations at the expense of taxpayers and the environment."?Westlands will enter the arena with certain advantages, including a Washington, D.C. advance team that includes, records show, four separate lobbying firms and several former members of Congress.A potentially crucial player, Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, has not yet publicly committed herself, though she noted Wednesday that the drainage issue ?has lingered for decades and needs to be resolved.??From what I?ve seen, the settlement agreed to by Westlands and the Department of the Interior is very complex and my staff and I are reviewing all the details and ramifications,? Feinstein said in a statement.Feinstein?s Democratic colleague, Sen. Barbar Boxer, is also still reviewing the proposal, Boxer?s spokesman Zachary Coile said.In the House, Costa anticipates introducing the settlement bill along with Rep. David Valadao, R-Calif.Any action might take a while.After an 18-year legal battle, negotiators in September 2006 reached a deal to restore salmon to the San Joaquin River below Friant Dam. Legislation implementing the settlement was first introduced in December 2007.In March 2009, the?San Joaquin River legislation?finally reached the White House as part of a larger package.Since then, the San Joaquin River restoration?costs have risen?and the performance fallen short of what lawmakers had envisioned.Michael Doyle:?202-383-0006,?@MichaelDoyle10 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Thu Sep 17 16:50:23 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 16:50:23 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] YubaNet: Groups Slam Sweetheart Settlement for Westlands Water District In-Reply-To: <1485784025.1306668.1442533445647.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1485784025.1306668.1442533445647.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <89BB7D0C-17E5-4693-827B-9C81FB52D011@fishsniffer.com> http://yubanet.com/california/Groups-Slam-Sweetheart-Settlement-for-Westlands-Water-District.php#.VftRM93DyRo Groups Slam Sweetheart Settlement for Westlands Water District Published on Sep 17, 2015 - 8:05:51 AM Tweet By: Dan Bacher September 17, 2015 - Remember the powerful Westlands Water District, the organization that has sued the federal government every summer over the past three years in unsuccessful attempts to stop supplemental releases from Trinity Reservoir to prevent a massive fish kill on the lower Klamath River? Well, the same Obama Administration that Westlands sued to block desperately needed flows for salmon and steelhead signed a binding agreement today with the powerful water district, located on the arid and dusty west side of the San Joaquin Valley. Conservation groups blasted the settlement for guaranteeing the district vast amounts of Sacramento and Trinity River water to keep irrigating toxic, drainage-impaired soils filled with selenium and other toxic salts. In a statement, Gayle Holman of the Westlands Water District announced that the U.S. Department of Justice and Westlands Water District have approved a legal settlement, that, if approved by Congress, would "end a decades-long dispute over the Bureau of Reclamation?s responsibility to provide drainage for the farmland within Westlands." (http://mavensnotebook.com/2015/09/15/this-just-in-westlands-water-district-statement-on-settlement-of-drainage-lawsuit/ ) "It provides a fair and equitable solution for Westlands? landowners who lost the productive use of their land caused by Reclamation?s failure to provide drainage services to those lands, while at the same time providing a cost savings of approximately $3.5 billion to the United States," according to Holman. She said the drainage settlement requires Westlands to "assume full responsibility for drainage management within its boundaries." Under the agreement: ? Westlands will be required to retire a minimum of 100,000 acres of land and to repurpose the non-irrigated lands for "environmentally friendly" uses. ? Westlands will be relieved of repayment obligation for prior expenditures by the United States for construction of the Central Valley Project (CVP). ? The Department of the Interior will oversee Westlands? management of drainage. Finally, "The settlement relieves taxpayers of a liability of approximately $3.5 billion dollars and caps water deliveries to the District at seventy-five percent of its contract amount," said Holman. Holman also claimed, "The Westlands Water District is"the most productive agricultural land in the U.S., generating $3.5 billion in farm-related economic activities and more than one billion dollars? worth of food and fiber. Westlands? 700 family-owned farms feed local communities, California and the nation." In response, the California Water Impact Network (C-WIN), Food and Water Watch and Restore the Delta issued a joint statement blasting the agreement for settling litigation "over an unfulfilled federal requirement to provide drainage while forgiving Westlands? debt to U.S. taxpayers with an unconscionable sweetheart deal." Rather than relieving the taxpayers of liability, the conservationists said the agreement would in fact increase the federal deficit by $340 million through forgiving Westland?s interest-free repayment obligations to the taxpayers for construction of the federal Central Valley Project. "Westland?s current two-year water contract will be converted to a permanent contract for 890,000 acre-feet of water annually, further draining the Sacramento River watershed and Delta," they said. The groups noted that under the agreement, "water would be provided at lower prices, without acreage limits, and with permanent entitlements. These terms will lead to ever-increasing water deficits for California?s communities, economy, and environment." ?We are outraged that the Obama Administration has sold out California taxpayers and their water,? said Adam Scow, California Director of Food & Water Watch. ?This bad deal will allow corporate agribusinesses in Westlands to keep irrigating water-intensive almonds and pistachios on toxic land in the desert, mostly for export to China. We will work to defeat this taxpayer giveaway in Congress.? They also criticized the Obama Administration for ignoring previous calls by the U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and many others to retire over 300,000 acres of poisoned lands. Instead, they said the deal will require only 100,000 acres of land retirement - less than Westlands has already retired voluntarily. Environmental groups, Indian Tribes and fishing organizations have frequently slammed Westlands and other corporate agribusiness interests for being big beneficiaries of "corporate welfare" through massive subsidies from the federal and state governments. Annual subsidies to Westlands range from $24 million to $110 million a year, the Environmental Working Group (EWG), an independent economic analysis firm, estimated. "A better plan, outlined recently by EcoNorthwest, found 300,000 acres of toxic land in the Westlands Water District and three adjacent water districts could be retired at a cost of $580 million to $1 billion," said Scow. "Retiring this land and curbing the water rights associated with it would result in a savings to California of up to 455,000 acre- feet of water. For reference, the City of Los Angeles uses 587,000 acre-feet in a typical year." Read the EcoNorthwest Report at: http://www.econw.com/our-work/publications/estimated-costs-to-retire-drainage-impaired-lands-in-the-san-luis-unit Scow also said this course of action would "cost significantly less" than Governor Jerry Brown?s plan to build two massive Delta Tunnels to divert water from the Sacramento River for the benefit of Westlands and other corporate agribusiness interests on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. The state and federal governments recently renamed this plan, formerly the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, the "California Water Fix." Estimates for the real cost of the project range up to $67 billion. "Because most of the poisoned lands will remain available for irrigation, the salt and selenium drainage problem will continue, but the U.S. Government will no longer have any role in its management," Scow noted. In fact, critics said the current agreement is worse for the environment and taxpayers than earlier agreements proposed under the Bush administration. ?Unlike the earlier proposals from the Bush Administration, the Obama Administration is making no demands of any kind as to how that drainage is managed, including no monitoring requirements, no performance standards, no ?drainage plan? for review or approval by state authorities, etc.," said Tom Stokely from the California Water Impact Network. "The Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board does not require any monitoring for selenium discharges to groundwater, so desert growers in Westlands have been given a free pass to expand the pollution in the aquifers of the Western San Joaquin Valley in perpetuity with cheap water that is desperately needed by people in the source watershed.? Stokely said the "disastrous consequences" of industrial-scale cultivation of seleniferous lands became obvious in 1983, when thousands of migratory waterfowl, including ducks and geese, were deformed or killed outright at Kesterson Wildlife Refuge due to deliveries of toxic drain water from Westlands Water District corporate farms. That huge environmental scandal was exposed by Felix Smith, a brave U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologist at the time who now serves on the Board of the Save the American River Association (SARA). ?The diversion of water from the Delta for Westlands Water District has significantly contributed to the destruction of the Delta?s fisheries and water quality for agriculture,? said Barbara Barrigan- Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta. ?Leaving this land in production will ensure perpetual taxpayer subsidy to agriculture?s wealthiest 1% and continued environmental destruction of fish, wildlife, water quality and air quality from desertification of salty lands. The Obama Administration is making a terrible mistake that will haunt us for generations to come." Congressman Jerry McNerney (CA-09) also slammed the drainage settlement between Westlands and the federal government that was approved today, calling it a "sweetheart deal." (https://mcnerney.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/rep-mcnerney-issues-statement-in-response-to-westlands-settlement ) ?This settlement between Westlands Water District and the Department of the Interior is nothing short of alarming," said McNerney. It?s a ?sweetheart deal? negotiated without transparency ? resulting in an outrageous windfall for Westlands regardless of how much affected land is ultimately retired. The settlement forgives Westlands? massive $350 million debt owed to the government and taxpayers while giving them an advantageous, no-need-to-review contract that could improve the water deliveries they receive from the San Joaquin-Sacramento Delta and further devastate the Delta?s fragile ecosystem." Since the drainage agreement between Westlands and the federal government must be approved by Congress, you can expect a big battle by fishing groups, Indian Tribes and environmental organizations and their political allies to block the approval of this settlement. Westlands has acquired a reputation among public trust advocates as the "Darth Vader" of California water politics because of the water district's frequent attacks on efforts to save and restore salmon, steelhead, Delta smelt and other imperiled fish populations. The Hoopa Valley Tribe, Yurok Tribe, Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman's Associations, Institute for Fisheries Resources and Department of Interior won a legal victory on August 26 when a federal judge denied a request by Westlands and the San Luis Delta Mendota Water Authority for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against the higher supplemental flows from Trinity Reservoir released in August and September to stop a fish kill on the lower Klamath River. (https://intercontinentalcry.org/judge-sides-with-hoopa-valley-and-yurok-tribe-scientists-preventing-a-fish-kill-on-the-klamath/ ) For more information on the history of Westlands Water District, please read Lloyd Carter?s superb Golden Gate University Environmental Law Journal article, "Reaping Riches in a Wretched Region: Subsidized Industrial Farming and Its Link to Perpetual Poverty," at: http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1033&context=gguelj Background on the Groups: The California Water Impact Network (C-WIN, online at http://www.c-win.org ) promotes the just and environmentally sustainable use of California's water, including instream flows and groundwater reserves, through research, planning, media outreach, and litigation. http://www.c-win.org Restore the Delta is a 20,000-member grassroots organization committed to making the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta fishable, swimmable, drinkable, and farmable to benefit all of California. Restore the Delta's mission is to save and restore the San Francisco Bay-Delta estuary for our children and future generations. http://www.restorethedelta.org Food & Water Watch works to ensure the food and water we consume is safe, accessible and sustainable. So we can all enjoy and trust in what we eat and drink, we help people take charge of where their food comes from, keep clean, affordable, public tap water flowing freely to our homes, protect the environmental quality of oceans, force government to do its job protecting citizens, and educate about the importance of keeping shared resources under public control. http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: support.png Type: image/png Size: 3347 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: gplus-32.png Type: image/png Size: 968 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Sep 17 19:40:59 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 02:40:59 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Times Standard: Tribes eye leaving Klamath Basin deals Message-ID: <804463685.1373608.1442544059919.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.times-standard.com/environment-and-nature/20150915/tribes-eye-leaving-klamath-basin-deals Tribes eye leaving Klamath Basin deals By Will Houston, Eureka Times-Standardend small ArticleByline1.pboPOSTED: 09/15/15, 10:58 PM PDT | UPDATED: 1 DAY AGO2 COMMENTSFive years of negotiations that went into the Klamath Basin agreements between tribes, irrigators, farmers and governments are starting to unravel as the bill that encapsulates the accord remains stalled in Congress.The Yurok Tribe announced its notice to withdraw from the agreement on Tuesday, with the Karuk Tribe set to withdraw at the end of the year if Congress does not act, according to Karuk Tribe Klamath Coordinator Craig Tucker.?We are continuing to have conversations with congressional offices,? he said, stating that he had traveled to Washington, D.C., last week to address these issues. ?I do think it?s possible that we could pull this thing off in the end. But time is growing very short.? In its notice, the Yurok Tribe states that since the first draft of the agreement was approved in 2010, many of the agreed upon conditions have been altered and had, in some instances, caused the tribe to consider withdrawing from the agreements.?Unfortunately, Congress has failed to pass legislation authorizing the agreements, and over time the bargained for benefits of the agreements have become unachievable,? the notice states. ?The tribe is left with no choice other than to withdraw from the Klamath Agreements.? Tucker said that the Klamath Tribes of Oregon ? the tribal government made up of the Klamath and Modoc tribes and Yahooskin Band of Snake Indians ? also plan to withdraw from the agreements if no action is taken. Calls to the Klamath Tribes of Oregon for comment were not immediately returned Tuesday afternoon.The status of the Klamath, Modoc and Yahooskin Band of Snake Indians had been terminated by Congress in 1954, and their 1,400 square mile reservation sold off, becoming ranches, rural subdivisions, private timberlands, and parts of two national forests. Since tribal status was restored in 1986, the tribes have been working to regain some of the reservation as an economic base. The Klamath Basin agreements contain three major compromises that were made as recently as April 2014. Under the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement and Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA), four hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River would be removed to help salmon, promote water quality restoration and to provide farmers more concrete assurances on irrigation expectations. Both agreements require approval by Congress, but were stalled by opposition among House Republicans.Last year, a third agreement known as the Upper Klamath Basin Agreement was made between Klamath Basin irrigators and the tribes. Under that agreement, ranchers and farmers on the upper basin would reduce water withdrawals to increase flows into Upper Klamath Lake by 30,000 acre feet, benefiting both endangered sucker fish, salmon and downstream tribes. The agreement was signed on April 18, after 30 years of a process known as adjudication, to settle water rights in the Sycan, Wood and Williamson rivers, which flow through the former reservation lands of the Klamath Tribes into Upper Klamath Lake. The process ended with the tribes gaining senior water rights. But this third agreement has also been stalled in a House committee and is meeting the same opposition among House Republicans as the other two agreements, Tucker said.?We hope to solve this problem through this negotiated agreement,? he said. ?It?s like Congress would prefer to see us fight with one another instead of solve a problem. For me it?s been really depressing. I felt like we did the right thing.? Should Congress fail to act on the three bills, Tucker said, many farmers on the basin would be left ?high and dry? as the Klamath Tribes of Oregon would be prone to exercise their senior water rights, putting many farmers with junior rights out of business.In California, Tucker said that the long-standing battles between tribes, governments, irrigators and farmers over water rights would likely resume with the Klamath River fish paying the price. The Karuk Tribe would also have to attempt to convince the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to not renew the dam licenses for the four Klamath River dams that would have been removed if the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement was approved. ?FERC has never ordered a dam removal successfully,? Tucker said. ?Settlement agreements are how dam removals happen. If this agreement flops, we?re letting a huge opportunity slip through our fingers.?Will Houston can be reached at 707-441-0504. The Associated Press contributed to this article. ABOUT THE AUTHORReach the author at whouston at times-standard.com@times-standard.com or follow Will on Twitter: @Will_S_Houston. - Full bio and more articles by Will Houston -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ecolaw at gmail.com Thu Sep 17 20:05:29 2015 From: ecolaw at gmail.com (Andrew Orahoske) Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 20:05:29 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Daily Triplicate: Yurok Tribe pulls out of Klamath River agreement Message-ID: http://www.triplicate.com/News/Local-News/Yurok-Tribe-pulls-out-of-Klamath-River-agreement *Yurok** Tribe pulls out of Klamath River agreement* By Adam Spencer, The Triplicate September 17, 2015 04:28 pm The historic agreement designed to end long-standing water wars between fish advocates and farmers throughout the 16,000-square-mile Klamath River Basin appears to be facing collapse. On Tuesday, the Yurok Tribe ? one of three key Klamath River Indian tribes that have signed onto the consensus ? announced it will be withdrawing from the Klamath Agreements, which have not been able to get the U.S. congressional approval needed for implementation. ?Unfortunately, Congress has failed to pass legislation authorizing the agreements, and over time the bargained-for benefits of the agreements have become unachievable. The Tribe is left with no choice other than to withdraw from the Klamath Agreements,? states the Yurok Tribe?s Notice of Withdrawal. The Karuk Tribe and the Klamath Tribes of Oregon will also pull out from the deal if the agreements continue to languish in Congress, according to Craig Trucker, Klamath Coordinator for the Karuk Tribe. Calls to the Klamath Tribes were not returned Wednesday. The Klamath Agreements refer to the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) and the politically connected Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA), which together would remove four aging hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River and invest hundreds of millions of dollars for salmon restoration into the basin while securing guaranteed water flows for farmers in the basin. Since 2014, the Klamath Agreements have also been connected to the Upper Klamath Basin Comprehensive Agreement, which was negotiated between the Klamath Tribes of Oregon ? a single tribal government representing three tribal peoples ? and irrigators. The agreement guaranteed 30,000 acre feet of in-flows to Upper Klamath Lake benefitting endangered sucker fish in the lake and downstream users as well as an economic development plan for Klamath Tribes that would create a timber industry for the tribe. That agreement was sought to bring stability to farmers and ranchers of the Upper Klamath after the Klamath Tribes won the most senior water rights above Upper Klamath Lake in March 2013. In June 2013, Klamath Tribes exercised their newly-awarded rights by making a call for water they are allocated, which during a drought year, meant less or no water for junior water rights holders. Although the 2014 agreement was heralded by Oregon?s governor and U.S. senators as a historic compromise to heal the river basin and the people that rely on it, the Yurok Tribe was left out of negotiations ? despite promises to the contrary ? causing a bitter rift. ?The Upper Klamath Basin parties during negotiations of the KBRA had assured the Yurok Tribe that they would address how the Tribe would be involved in governance and technical forums in the Upper Klamath Basin. The Tribe reminded various parties of this and requested to be involved in the Upper Klamath Basin negotiations,? the Yurok Tribe?s notice states. ?The Tribe was not invited to participate in the negotiation of this agreement. This represented a return to the old Oregon-California/Upper Klamath-Lower Klamath division of the Klamath River system rather than the comprehensive approach taken by the Klamath Agreements.? The Yurok Tribe did not respond to request for comment regarding the notice of withdrawal. U.S. Rep. Jared Huffman, a longtime supporter of the Klamath Agreements, issued a statement saying he still believes that the accord is the ?best way forward? but that his patience is also wearing thin. ?While I am disappointed by the Yurok Tribe?s change of heart on the Klamath agreements, I share their frustration with the lack of action in Congress over the past three years,? Huffman?s statement said. ?This historic consensus effort to remove Klamath River dams and restore one of the most important salmon rivers on the West Coast is premised on congressional authorization, and as years tick by with little action by Congress the obvious risk is that the stakeholder consensus starts to unravel.? Other parties closely involved with the Klamath Basin and its water struggles believe the Klamath Agreements? days are done. ?We consider these to be zombie agreements. They don't have a chance at life. They just keep trucking along because the most powerful interests ? Pacificorp and the irrigators ? really want them to pass, but they don't really work,? said Jim McCarthy, communications director and southern Oregon program manager for WaterWatch. WaterWatch is a conservation group that was party to the Klamath Agreements negotiations until being ?involuntarily expelled,? along with Oregon Wild, for disagreeing with the deal?s mandate of commercial farming in the National Wildlife Refuges of the Upper Klamath, according to WaterWatch. ?These agreements don't work because they're based on make-believe water and won't provide the flows that salmon need. They don't solve the fundamental problem of over-appropriation in the basin. We need basinwide water-use reduction,? said McCarthy. McCarthy said that WaterWatch believes the four PacifiCorp owned dams on the Klamath will be removed without legislation and hundreds of million in taxpayer funds because it?s the most economically feasible option for the power company, which would be required to install a costly fish ladder to continue operation of the dams otherwise. The hope of the Klamath Agreements passing has actually prevented the relicensing process that would likely end in dam removal from moving forward, McCarthy said. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has been allowing the dams to continue operation on temporary annual operating licenses since 2006, when the long-term licenses expired and negotiations for the Klamath Agreements first began. PacifiCorp, which operates as Pacific Power in Oregon and California, has already collected more than $1.1 million from Del Norte County ratepayers for the removal of the four Klamath dams. Pacific Power has collected more than $2.3 million for dam removal from ratepayers in Siskiyou County where the Klamath Agreements have been akin to political kryptonite. Some former Siskiyou County supervisors lost re-election campaigns due to their support of the agreements. In a recent statement, Tucker said the bills representing the Klamath Agreements have been stalled by Siskiyou County?s congressional representative, Congressman Doug LaMalfa. Although Tucker and the Karuk Tribe are still hoping to move forward with Klamath Agreements legislations, they realize the political realities might decide the deal?s fate for them. ?These drought years are really hard on the salmon and if Congress can't get with the program and make it happen, we're going to do it through the courts and better venues. You can't make laws with the Congress you want, you have to make laws with the Congress you have,? Tucker said, adding that the has nothing but respect for the Yurok Tribal Council and staff. ?We do respect the Yurok Tribe's decision to make a decision that they think is right for them.? Some see the Yurok Tribe's announcement as the first step in healing division among Klamath River tribes that was created from the Klamath Agreements. Felice Pace, a longtime environmental activist of the Klamath River Basin that maintains KlamBlog, a blog with Klamath River-related news, said he was hopeful that the unity needed for true basin-wide restoration will be restored. "I am encouraged that the Yurok Tribe has taken this step because in my opinion the tribe is much stronger when the three lower basin tribes are united," Pace said. Statements from the group, Honor the Treaty of 1864, a group of Klamath Tribes members voicing opposing views from the Klamath Tribes' council illustrates the divide: "Many tribal members no longer have contact with family and close friends over divisive and destructive KBRA politics. ?Others have been denied tribal employment based solely on their stance regarding the dubious Klamath Basin water agreements," the Honor the Treaty of 1864 statement says. "The KBRA does nothing to heal historical and spiritual damages for Klamath, Modoc, Yahooskin people. By securing water primarily for agricultural purposes, the KBRA and associated documents perpetuate these damages and continue to inflict pain, trauma and division amongst our people." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Sep 18 07:35:47 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 14:35:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com: Crystal Geyser agrees to do an environmental report Message-ID: <865095360.1603374.1442586947854.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/business/local-business/crystal-geyser-agrees-to-do-an-environmental-report_62286016 Crystal Geyser agrees to do an environmental report ADDRESS: Damon Arthur? 5:41 PM, Sep 17, 20157:15 PM, Sep 17, 2015MOUNT SHASTA, California - Just weeks after a group of neighbors and activists sued Crystal Geyser to force the company to do an environmental impact report on its plans to open a bottling plant near Mount Shasta, the company has agreed to do a study before opening the facility.The company was told by officials with the Siskiyou County Air Pollution Control District it would need to have a full environmental impact report to receive permits to operate boilers at the plant, said Judy Yee, vice president of marketing and business strategy for Crystal Geyser.?In an effort to be completely transparent with the community we have decided to move forward with APCD in the preparation of an environmental impact report (EIR),? the statement said.A group called We Advocate Through Environmental Review, or WATER, filed a lawsuit in August asking a judge to order the company to do an environmental report on the bottling plant.Yee said the decision to prepare a report was not related to the lawsuit.?It has absolutely no connection,? she said. An environmental report looks at issues such as traffic, water use, air pollution and noise created by the bottling plant, Yee said.The company previously said that because it is reopening a facility previously used as a bottling plant, an environmental impact report wasn?t necessary.Rosyln McCoy, a member of the group that filed the lawsuit against Crystal Geyser in Napa County Superior Court, said she was surprised the company reversed course.?I?m taking my jaw off the floor,? McCoy said. ?This is really a positive step forward.?She questioned, though, whether the air pollution control district should be the lead agency on an environmental report.Donald Mooney, a lawyer who filed the lawsuit for WATER, said other legal issues remain.?I don?t think at this point that it affects the lawsuit,? Mooney said of Crystal Geyser preparing an environmental report.The lawsuit says the zoning where the bottling plant is located on Ski Village Drive allows light industrial operations, while the bottling plant will be heavy industrial. Also, the company needs to obtain a water extraction permit from Siskiyou County, the suit says.Yee said Thursday that Siskiyou County officials told the company the plant complies with all zoning requirements for the area.Crystal Geyser had planned to begin work at the site this fall, but in light of the timeline for preparing an environmental report, Yee was unable to say when the company hopes to open the plant.The company plans to initially bottle water and then later produce Metromint, a mint-flavored drink, and Juice Squeeze, a lightly carbonated fruit juice. Eventually, the company would produce Tejava, an iced tea drink.The plant, which would employ up to 60 people, would use an average of 115,000 gallons of water a day. If a second line of production is opened, water use would jump to 217,000 gallons daily, according to Crystal Geyser.There would be an average of 50 truck trips a day going to and from the plant via Mount Shasta Boulevard to Interstate 5 north of Mount Shasta, according to a fact sheet put out by Crystal Geyser. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Fri Sep 18 18:13:42 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2015 01:13:42 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Jweek37 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C585B31@057-SN2MPN1-041.057d.mgd.msft.net> Greetings, Please see attached for the Jweek 37 (Sep 10 - 16) Trinity River trapping summary update. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW37.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 61524 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW37.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Sep 20 07:32:05 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2015 14:32:05 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] LA Times: How a rich water district beat the federal government in a secret deal Message-ID: <1548101046.454310.1442759526015.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-20150920-column.html How a rich water district beat the federal government in a secret deal - Business ? - Environmental Science - Jared Huffman ? - Jerry McNerney ADDRESS: Michael Hiltzik LOS ANGELES TIMESmichael.hiltzik?@latimes.comClout can be defined in many ways. In California's parched Central Valley farmlands, it's the ability to secure water.By that measure, the giant Westlands Water District has just set a whole new standard. In?a legal settlementsigned Wednesday with federal officials following lengthy negotiations, the 600,000-acre district secured a water supply for its members' almond and pistachio trees and other crops in perpetuity, immunizing it from many of the cutbacks that may afflict other water users as climate change and other conditions reduce the reliability of California's overall water supply. And it was all done in secret.Although outlines of the settlement have circulated in Washington for months, environmental advocates and several Northern California members of Congress say the details were kept confidential until the deal was signed by Westlands and the Department of Justice, and filed as a?fait accompli?in federal court ? including draft legislation shortly to be submitted to Congress."This was all done without any visibility or transparency," says Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Stockton), whose district includes part of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, which is heavily affected by water deliveries to Westlands.Many of the deal's elements are "contrary to what we should be doing in the delta," and it is "inexplicable" that they would be reached in secret, says?Kate Poole, senior attorney?for the water program of the Natural Resources Defense Council in San Francisco.They're right. The deal is extraordinarily advantageous for Westlands.It extinguishes a debt of roughly $350 million owed to the federal government, covering the district's share of the cost of the Central Valley Project, which brings irrigation water to its landholders.?It transfers the responsibility for building a system to safely dispose of toxic agricultural waste from the government to the district, though without imposing explicit anti-pollution benchmarks. It transfers what could be hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of federally funded water infrastructure to the district, without compensation or even a formal appraisal.That handover is "a disturbing dismemberment of our ... federal patrimony," says Antonio Rossmann, a Berkeley water law expert.To many critics, what's worst about the deal is that it transforms Westlands' 25-year contract for federal water into a permanent, non-reviewable right to as much as 895,000 acre-feet a year. That's 150% of the annual usage of the city of Los Angeles. The deal prevents federal or state officials from ever diverting Westlands' water to what might emerge as more beneficial uses in the future.Any effort to craft a statewide water policy in an era of increasing demand and shrinking supply will run into the roadblock of Westlands' enormous perpetual entitlement. "Obviously our hydrology is changing considerably," says Poole. "Who knows what competing uses might look like in 20 or 25 years?"How did Westlands, the nation's largest public water district, achieve its ends? "It's money and lawyers," says Rep. Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael), a Westlands critic. Westlands spends heavily on lobbyists ? $2.3 million in Washington since 2012, and $576,000 in Sacramento. Lawyers for the district or its landholders have tied up federal officials in court for decades over their contention that the government is obligated to provide drainage for farm runoff.Westlands General Manager Tom Birmingham calls the new deal a "reasonable solution" to the intricate dispute. He says taxpayers gain by being relieved of a court-mandated obligation to build the drainage system, estimated by Westlands at $3.5 billion.The roots of the dispute date back to the original 1960 plan to bring water to the west valley via the federal Central Valley Project. The lack of drainage was glossed over in the rush to develop the land with irrigation. A project was launched in the 1970s to build a drain carrying contaminated runoff to the delta and thence to San Francisco Bay. But it was built only as far as the Kesterson National Wildlife Refuge, where in 1983 scientists discovered that the toxic selenium-laced wastewater was producing grotesque deformities in nesting waterfowl. The drain was plugged, but the irrigation continued.Environmentalists and Interior Department scientists eventually concluded that the only truly certain way to eliminate the pollution was to shut down its source, by removing as much as two-thirds of Westlands' 600,000 acres from cultivation. But in 2007 the Reclamation Bureau settled on a multibillion-dollar plan to retire only about 200,000 acres and treat the effluent with evaporation ponds and other technologies.Although the cost would be repaid over decades by Westlands, interest-free, Reclamation didn't have the money to front for construction. The new settlement lets Westlands take over the task, but requires the district to retire only 100,000 acres, most of which has already been retired or is lying fallow.Another aspect of the settlement that alarms critics is that it relieves Westlands farms from the federal limit of 960 acres for farms eligible to receive federal water at subsidized prices. Allowing Westland farms to consolidate would carry the district further from the ideal of small family farm agriculture that was used to justify the federal irrigation project in the 1950s and 1960s.Westlands still promotes itself as a haven of mom-and-pop family farms. The business structure "for today's family farmers in Westlands is likely to have a mom as its vice president and her child as its treasurer," the district declared in?a full-page ad in The Times last year,?placed in response to a critical news article.But many of the family farms in Westlands are in fact huge enterprises, including such leading California agribusinesses as Woolf Enterprises and Harris Farms. Although Westlands has claimed to encompass about 700 farms averaging 710 acres,?a 2011 study?by researchers from the University of California and the Colorado School of Mines concluded that many were grouped via family trusts and other "common ownership" into about 350 networked operations."There isn't any question that there are large farms in Westlands," Birmingham acknowledges, though he adds: "Even the large farms are family farms in every sense of the word."Westlands' critics link the mega-farms to the failure of the Central Valley Project to bring true prosperity to the farm region. Fresno County, where most of the district lies, is one of the poorest in the nation, arguably because the bounty of agricultural profits has been concentrated among a small number of farm-owning families. Removing the acreage limitation will allow those big farms to get bigger.The Westlands settlement is exactly the wrong approach to the West's water issues at the wrong time. It's a narrow response to litigation, benefiting a few thousand farmers at most, when what the water crisis requires are comprehensive solutions serving all stakeholders and the public at large.The secrecy of the deal-making sets an appalling precedent. Huffman and McNerney say they'll challenge the deal when the enabling legislation reaches Capitol Hill, and everyone with an interest in sane water policy ? and that's everyone in California, the West, indeed the country ? should be on their side. Congress should kill this deal and send negotiators back to the table ? to do their work in public view.Michael Hiltzik's column appears every Sunday. His new book is "Big Science: Ernest Lawrence and the Invention that Launched the Military-Industrial Complex." Read his blog, the Economy Hub, at?latimes.com/business/hiltzik,?reach him at?mhiltzik at latimes.com, check out?facebook.com/hiltzik?and follow?@hiltzikm?on Twitter.?Copyright ? 2015,?Los Angeles Times -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Sep 21 20:54:03 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 03:54:03 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] WWD and MWD consider buying Delta islands In-Reply-To: <204C435B-FB22-44F7-B140-F758A2A360B9@icloud.com> References: <204C435B-FB22-44F7-B140-F758A2A360B9@icloud.com> Message-ID: <2111591854.1369339.1442894043810.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article36068055.html Two major water agencies consider buying Delta islands Environmentalists say ?water grab? could result from land dealsDistricts ? one in L.A., one in Fresno ? have discussed four Delta islandsOwning land also could expedite tunnels projectA view of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta looking north at Bradford Island with Jersey Island in the foreground separated by the San Joaquin River.?Manny Crisosotomo?Sacramento Bee fileBY DALE KASLER AND RYAN SABALOWdkasler at sacbee.comTwo of California?s largest and most aggressive water agencies have discussed buying four islands in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, prompting accusations by environmentalists and Delta farmers that the land purchases could be used to engineer a south state water grab.Westlands Water District and Metropolitan Water District of Southern California have considered buying a collection of islands known as the Delta Wetlands Properties, according to recent meeting agendas for the two agencies. However, a Westlands spokesman said Monday the big Fresno-area agricultural district doesn?t expect to make a purchase offer.Control of the islands could yield significant advantages as water agencies both south and north of the Delta continue to wrestle over limited water supplies in the fourth year of drought. Buying the islands would not automatically give the new owners control of the associated water rights. But they could apply to the state for the right to take more water in wet years.In normal years, enough water is pumped out of the Delta to serve 3 million acres of farmland and 25 million urban Southern Californians.The four Delta islands, now used for farming, are controlled by Zurich American Corp., the U.S. subsidiary of a Swiss insurer. Zurich has been trying for 20 years to convert the islands into giant for-profit reservoirs that could be used to store and ship water to big customers south of the Delta.Purchase of the islands also could play into ongoing negotiations over the Delta tunnels project, a controversial $16 billion plan to channel water from the north part of the Delta to existing pumping stations in the south. By purchasing the islands, Metropolitan and Westlands would eliminate the need for contentious eminent domain proceedings in that part of the project, said Craig Wilson, a former staff attorney with the State Water Resources Control Board.The project, championed by Gov. Jerry Brown, has been touted as a way to improve the reliability of water deliveries to Metropolitan, Westlands and other agencies south of the Delta. The four islands are adjacent to the path of the proposed tunnels.?Michael George, the state?s Delta watermaster, said one of the islands could be used to stockpile fill dirt unearthed by the twin 30-mile-long tunnels, at least temporarily. George said he wasn?t aware of possible interest in the islands by Metropolitan and Westlands.Two of California?s largest and most aggressive water agencies have discussed buying four islands in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, prompting accusations by environmentalists and Delta farmers that the land purchases could be used to engineer a south state water grab.Westlands Water District and Metropolitan Water District of Southern California have considered buying a collection of islands known as the Delta Wetlands Properties, according to recent meeting agendas for the two agencies. However, a Westlands spokesman said Monday the big Fresno-area agricultural district doesn?t expect to make a purchase offer.Control of the islands could yield significant advantages as water agencies both south and north of the Delta continue to wrestle over limited water supplies in the fourth year of drought. Buying the islands would not automatically give the new owners control of the associated water rights. But they could apply to the state for the right to take more water in wet years.In normal years, enough water is pumped out of the Delta to serve 3 million acres of farmland and 25 million urban Southern Californians.The four Delta islands, now used for farming, are controlled by Zurich American Corp., the U.S. subsidiary of a Swiss insurer. Zurich has been trying for 20 years to convert the islands into giant for-profit reservoirs that could be used to store and ship water to big customers south of the Delta.Purchase of the islands also could play into ongoing negotiations over the Delta tunnels project, a controversial $16 billion plan to channel water from the north part of the Delta to existing pumping stations in the south. By purchasing the islands, Metropolitan and Westlands would eliminate the need for contentious eminent domain proceedings in that part of the project, said Craig Wilson, a former staff attorney with the State Water Resources Control Board.The project, championed by Gov. Jerry Brown, has been touted as a way to improve the reliability of water deliveries to Metropolitan, Westlands and other agencies south of the Delta. The four islands are adjacent to the path of the proposed tunnels.?Michael George, the state?s Delta watermaster, said one of the islands could be used to stockpile fill dirt unearthed by the twin 30-mile-long tunnels, at least temporarily. George said he wasn?t aware of possible interest in the islands by Metropolitan and Westlands.Wilson said Metropolitan and Westlands also could be interested in the islands simply for their access to generous amounts of water. The four islands come with riparian water rights that can be used only on the adjacent lands. But the two agencies could seek state approval to store that water during wet years, for later shipment south.?It?s a potential two-for-one for them,? said Wilson, who previously served as the Delta watermaster, overseeing the enforcement of water rights in the 600,000-acre region. The four islands total 20,000 acres of land.Metropolitan spokesman Bob Muir declined comment Monday. The agency?s real property committee is scheduled to discuss the issue in closed session Tuesday, according to agenda materials.Westlands hasn?t made any offer to acquire the properties ?and I do not anticipate that the district will make such an offer,? said Johnny Amaral, the district?s deputy general manager of external affairs, in an email to The Sacramento Bee. Agenda materials show that Westlands? water policy committee discussed the matter in closed session last week.Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta, a coalition of environmentalists and Delta farmers, said it?s not surprising that Metropolitan, with its deeper pockets, would be more interested than Westlands in trying to acquire the islands.??This is a way for the Metropolitan Water District to get a foothold in the Delta for greater water supply,? she said. Owning the islands, with its access to water, could be a great strategic advantage for Metropolitan whether the tunnels get built or not, she said.Rick Stephens, asset manager for Martinez-based Delta Wetlands Properties, said he couldn?t comment on the agenda items. He said the company is forging ahead with its plans for a storage project, but the land could be for sale once the permitting for that is done.??We?re working on our project,? Stephens said. Asked about Metropolitan?s interest, he said, ?I don?t know what?s going on with them. You saw what I saw. You saw Met?s agenda. I don?t have any input on their agenda.??As currently conceived, the Delta Wetlands project revolves around two islands: Webb Tract and Bacon Island, located just seven miles from the pumping plants near Tracy that ship water to the San Joaquin Valley and Southern California. The two bowl-shaped islands, which sit below sea level, would be flooded during wet years and could store up to 215,000 acre-feet of water. That?s 70 billion gallons.?In dry years, it can be delivered where it is needed,? reads a description of the project on Delta Wetlands? website. An influential Kern County water agency, the Semitropic Water Storage District, has worked with Delta Wetlands as a partner in the project.Two other nearby islands, Bouldin Island and Holland Tract, would continue to be farmed but would also be used for habitat management to offset the impact of flooding Webb and Bacon, according to environmental documents on Delta Wetlands? website.Dale Kasler:?916-321-1066,?@dakaslerreprints Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article36068055.html#storylink=cpy Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article36068055.html#storylink=cpy Sent from my iPad -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ecolaw at gmail.com Mon Sep 21 22:58:22 2015 From: ecolaw at gmail.com (Andrew Orahoske) Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 22:58:22 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Daily Triplicate: Klamath dams under pressure Message-ID: http://www.triplicate.com/News/Local-News/Klamath-dams-Under-pressure *Klamath dams: Under pressure* By Adam Spencer, The Triplicate September 21, 2015 09:43 am On the heels of Yurok Tribe's rejection of deal to remove dams on the Klamath, Hoopa Valley Tribe says it will challenge federal relicensing The Yurok Tribe announced this week intentions to withdraw from the Klamath Agreements that would help remove four dams on the Klamath River, but while the complex, multi-party deals have collected congressional dust, the Hoopa Valley Tribe ? never a party to the deals ? have been fighting for dam removal in court. The Hoopa Valley Tribe plans to file a brief by Friday in the U.S. Court of Appeals challenging that the federal dam regulatory agency has violated the Clean Water Act in its approach to the relicensing ? or lack of it ? of the Klamath River dams. The hydropower license needed for PacifiCorp to operate its hydroelectric dams on the Klamath expired in 2006, but the Warren Buffett-owned power company has delayed the relicensing of the dams since then using a legal-gray-area strategy outlined in one of the Klamath Agreements. All in hopes that Congress would pass legislation implementing the Klamath Agreements. But that hasn?t happened after three years of sitting in Congress with little traction. Now, the Hoopa Valley Tribe?s tactic of forcing the hand of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to get PacifiCorp to proceed with relicensing of the dams seems to have a better chance of removing the aging dams have decimated salmon runs in the Klamath Basin. To relicense the dams in accordance with the Clean Water Act, PacifiCorp needs to apply for Water Quality Certification from regulatory agencies in both California and Oregon, where the dams are located. ?Plainly the operation of the hydro project violates the water quality rules,? Hoopa Valley Tribe attorney Tom Schlosser said, adding the dams? previous 1956 license pre-dates environmental law. Complying with water quality requirements is not the only thing that would make dam removal a likely option. Even if water quality certifications were completed and a new license issued, it would require PacifiCorp to install ladders to provide for passage of migratory fish through the dams, an action already mandated by National Marine Fisheries Service. Fish ladders would exceed the cost of dam removal and the dams would produce less energy and be less profitable, making dam removal the most economical option for shareholders and ratepayers. The public utility commissions of California and Oregon have already decided that dam removal is the best option for ratepayers. To avoid this process in hopes of passing federal legislation, the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA), the agreement focused on dam removal, states ?PacifiCorp shall withdraw and re-file its applications for Section 401 (water quality) certifications as necessary to avoid the certifications being deemed waived under the (Clean Water Act) during the Interim Period.? The Clean Water Act says if a state fails or refuses to act on a water quality certification ?within a reasonable period of time (which shall not exceed one year)? than the certification is considered ?waived.? The purpose of the waiver provision is ?to prevent a State from indefinitely delaying a federal licensing proceeding by failing to issue a timely water quality certification,? according to case law cited in Hoopa Valley Tribe court documents. A waiver would lead to the relicensing process outside of the KHSA, a less desirable option for PacifiCorp, which would have decreased liabilities and cost for dam removal under the Klamath Agreements. PacifiCorp has withdrawn and re-filed its water quality certification application in both California and Oregon eight times to keep the application active without having certification considered waived by the state agencies. Withdrawing and re-filing the application is done with a single email. Attempts to reach PacifiCorp for comment Friday were not successful. ?Their theory is that the letter gives the water board another full year to do nothing,? Schlosser said. ?We kept saying ?no, this is a violation of the Clean Water Act and you can't get around it by this letter writing campaign.?? A spokesperson of the California State Water Resources Control Board said the agency would not comment due to the pending legislation. Although the FERC denied the Hoopa Valley Tribe?s request for a hearing on the issue in October 2014, the agency said they do agree that PacifiCorp and state regulators are ?clearly violating the spirit of the Clean Water Act? and possibly acting ?contrary to the public interest by delaying the issuance of new licenses that better meet current-day conditions than those issued many decades ago.? In the end, the FERC?s discussion concludes while it may violate the spirit of the law ?we do not conclude that they have violated the letter of that statute.? ?They are essentially saying that this little routine that PacifiCorp is using violates the spirit of the Clean Water Act but they are going to go ahead and approve it,? Schlosser said. Schlosser said the FERC?s actions are particularly egregious since the agency has not even approved the KHSA plan although approving settlement agreements for dam removal is in its purview. ?They are deciding to do nothing for a settlement agreement they never approved or reviewed,? Schlosser said. ?I?m optimistic that court of appeals will say FERC has fallen down on the job and they ought to dismiss the application for licensing.? Since the Yurok Tribe appears to be moving towards withdrawing from the Klamath Agreements, Schlosser said he hopes they will join the Hoopa Valley Tribe in forcing dam removal through the FERC. ?It?s great when the tribes work together,? Schlosser said. ?It?s been helpful when they do in the past and I hope they do with this issue.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 23 09:28:57 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 16:28:57 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] LA Times: Analysis Westlands Water District agreement a retreat from previous U.S. plan Message-ID: <1867011462.353650.1443025737673.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-westlands-20150922-story.html Analysis? Westlands Water District agreement a retreat from previous U.S. plan By?BETTINA BOXALLcontact the reporter - Environmental Issues - Dianne Feinstein Five years ago, a U.S. Interior Department official outlined the terms of potential legislation to resolve a lingering battle over badly drained farmland in the Westlands Water District.Any proposal, he said in a letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), should require Westlands "to permanently retire a minimum of 200,000 acres," prepare a drainage management plan with "measurable environmental objectives" and cap the district's long-term water deliveries at 70% of its existing federal contract.But the agreement approved last week by the Obama administration and Westlands beats a long retreat from those requirements, prompting cries that a district legendary for its political sway and hardball tactics has once again come out on top.The amount of land Westlands would retire under the settlement has been cut in half ? and the district has already taken most of that acreage out of production.See the most-read stories this hour >>As with the earlier proposal, drainage responsibilities would shift from the federal government to Westlands. But gone are stipulations that the district develop a comprehensive plan and environmental standards for managing the tainted field drainage.The deal also raises the proposed cap on Westlands water deliveries to 75% of its contract ? or nearly 900,000 acre-feet ? while locking in that water entitlement with a new, open-ended contract that doesn't require renewal. The indefinite term would make it easier for Westlands growers to hang onto cheap federal supplies in the future ? and sell what they don't need at a handsome profit.Additionally, the agreement would forgive the $350-million debt Westlands still owes U.S. taxpayers for the district's share of Central Valley Project construction costs, further boosting growers' federal water subsidy.Long-time Westlands combatants argue that the settlement offers no guarantee that the vexing drainage problem will be fixed. The agreement has only general language saying the district is "legally responsible for the management of drainage water" within its boundaries."There are no performance standards," said Kate Poole, an attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group that intervened on behalf of the U.S. in the prolonged court fight the settlement would end. "So there's no indication that they have to do something more than what's currently happening [with drainage] or that they have to do it by a certain time."cComments - Congress should reject the deal. It lets the Westlands Water District get off too easily.RTAMTCAT 2:02 PM SEPTEMBER 22, 2015 ADD A COMMENTSEE ALL COMMENTS2She also questioned why the government would give Westlands a long-term hold on deliveries from the environmentally ailing Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta."It's really inexplicable ? given all of the controversy currently in the delta and all of the recognition that we are taking too much water out of it ? why at this moment, they would chose to lock in a permanent contract," Poole said. "It doesn't make any sense," she added.As reclamation commissioner in 2010, Mike Connor wrote the letter to Feinstein. Now deputy Interior secretary, he helped negotiate the settlement, which must still be approved by Congress.While disputing that the agreement gives away too much, Connor was forthright about the administration's desire to escape the legal liability and mounting financial costs of dealing with the contaminated drain water that flows from Westlands fields."We have a settlement that is a very significant financial benefit to the United States and the U.S. taxpayer," he said in an interview.Congress and the reclamation bureau unwittingly set the stage for the government's predicament when they agreed a half-century ago to extend the Central Valley's big federal irrigation project to the arid west side of the San Joaquin Valley. Growers knew much of the land was badly drained, so the government also agreed to build a master drain that would run north and empty into the delta.But construction was halted by concerns about costs and delta impacts, so the partially finished drain discharged into ponds at the Kesterson National Wildlife Refuge. When federal biologists in the 1980s discovered the drainage was poisoning waterfowl, Interior closed the drain.The culprit was selenium, a naturally occurring trace element that washes into Westlands soil from the nearby Coast Range. Concentrated in field drainage, it reached levels toxic to wildlife, causing grotesque birth defects in refuge birds.With no place to send drain water that is also loaded with crop-damaging mineral salts, growers complained their fields were being ruined. They sued Westlands and Westlands sued the government.In 2000, a federal appeals court ruled that Interior was legally obligated to provide drainage to the district, but left it up to the department to figure out how. In 2007, the reclamation bureau proposed a $2.7-billion project that went nowhere, followed by years of negotiations."This whole issue of drainage in the Westlands district has been a festering sore of California water and environmental policy for over three decades," said Richard Frank, director of the California Environmental Law & Policy Center at UC Davis. "This controversy in all of its manifestations has dragged on for way too long."Westlands general manager Tom Birmingham, said that if Congress approves the settlement, the district would likely embark on a drainage treatment program similar to one conducted on a much smaller, experimental scale in a nearby irrigation district. That project includes using drain water to grow salt-tolerant crops, changing irrigation practices to reduce the volume of drainage and removing salts and selenium through treatment."Under this settlement Westlands will be required to manage drain water within its boundaries and if we fail to do that, our water supply can be cut off," he said. "And that is an obligation that is going to cost hundreds of millions of dollars."But the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Geological Survey have in the past cast doubts on the ability to treat large volumes of drainage without creating environmental problems. Evaporation ponds and reuse fields can attract waterfowl, exposing the birds to dangerous selenium levels. High-tech treatment produces mountains of salts and selenium that must be disposed of.The best solution, federal scientists have argued, is to simply stop producing the contaminated drainage by taking all of Westlands ill-drained lands out of irrigated agriculture. That would amount to roughly half of the 600,000-acre district.Under the 2007 proposal, the federal government would have retired about a third of the district ? a move that Westlands opposed ? and treated drainage from the remaining problem acreage.The proposal's price tag, which federal officials say would now exceed $3 billion, doomed the project. But the reclamation bureau, still under court order to do something, has in recent years spent roughly $35 million planning drainage services and building a demonstration treatment facility.At the same time, the agency's budget has shrunk. "So that's the financial piece, to be blunt, [that was] one aspect of a motivation to resolve" the drainage case, Connor said.As for why the settlement dropped requirements for a management plan and monitoring, Connor said federal and state environmental laws would apply to whatever the district does. He also noted that under the new contract, Westlands deliveries would still be subject to shortages related to drought or environmental restrictions.Ultimately, Connor said he suspects Westlands will retire more land and find other uses for it, such as the solar farms that are already popping up in parts of the sun-blasted district."Treatment facilities are expensive," he said. "Quite frankly, my view is land retirement will exceed that 100,000-acre figure and will likely, at the end of the day, get close to the 200,000, if not exceed that."cComments - Congress should reject the deal. It lets the Westlands Water District get off too easily.RTAMTCAT 2:02 PM SEPTEMBER 22, 2015 ADD A COMMENTSEE ALL COMMENTS2The agreement sets a January, 2017 deadline for Congress to enact settlement legislation. In a statement, Feinstein, the key congressional player on California water, said she was reviewing the document but was focused on moving drought legislation."My hunch is that the more Congress digs into the details of this, the more controversial the settlement is going to get," Frank said. "And the less are the prospects for a quick and easy congressional ratification."bettina.boxall at latimes.comTwitter:?@boxall -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Sep 30 11:10:15 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 18:10:15 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Public Open House at Shasta Big Springs Ranch--cancelled (school event still happening as planned though) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43777173.3576137.1443636615404.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Hi folks- ?Due to unforeseen circumstances, The Nature Conservancy will be cancelling this year?s public Open House at Shasta Big Springs Ranch on Friday and Saturday, October 16-17th. I apologize for any inconvenience this might cause.?We will still be hosting Siskiyou County school kids as planned on Wednesday and Thursday, October 14-15th. If you want to volunteer on Wednesday or Thursday, please go to this web-site to sign up:http://www.signupgenius.com/go/5080845a8a623a13-2015?We greatly appreciate everyone?s interest and dedication to a healthy and thriving salmon run in the Shasta River!?Please contact me if you have any questions about the kids days October 14 and 15:allylutes at gmail.com ? Thank-you, Ally Lutes -- Allison Lutes TNC Planning Committee 522-A Alma Street Mt Shasta CA 96067 530-859-5216 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Oct 1 08:33:37 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 15:33:37 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: Trinity River Restoration Program's Monthly Coordination E-mail - October In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1955370861.4104981.1443713617545.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Thursday, October 1, 2015 8:24 AM, "Jackson, Deanna" wrote: Good Morning,?Attached is our?monthly?coordination?e-mail for October. -- Deanna Jackson SecretaryTrinity River Restoration ProgramPO Box 1300, 1313 South Main StreetWeaverville, California ?96093Phone: ?530.623.1800Fax: ?530.623.5944E-Mail: dljackson at usbr.govWebsite: ?www.trrp.net? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRRP_Activities_2015_10_.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 49762 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Fri Sep 25 12:20:57 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2015 19:20:57 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Jweek38 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C586389@057-SN2MPN1-041.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hi All, Please see attached for the Jweek 38 (Sep 17 - 23) Trinity River trapping summary update. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW38.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 61691 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW38.xlsx URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Thu Oct 1 16:10:11 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 23:10:11 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Jweek 39 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C587D57@057-SN2MPN1-041.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hi folks, Please see attached for the Jweek 39 (Sep 24-30) update of the Trinity River trapping summary. The update shows trapping results from the Willow Creek Weir and fish processed at the Trinity River Hatchery. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW39.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 61749 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW39.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Oct 2 08:43:40 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 15:43:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com Editorial: Ich gone, for now Message-ID: <227620273.333791.1443800620630.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-ich-gone-for-now_86023688 Editorial: Ich gone, for now 6:00 PM, Sep 30, 2015editorials Back in 2002 we learned a valuable and painful lesson when a tiny single-cell parasite nicknamed ?Ebola of the Klamath salmon? wiped out an estimate 35,000 Chinook salmon during their fall run in the Trinity River.It was a deadly blow to the already threatened salmon population.So when Ichthyophthrirus multifiliis, commonly known as ?ich,? showed up again on the lower Klamath River last fall concerns ran high. The organism thrives in warm, low-flowing waters, the conditions found in many North State waterways during this persistent drought.The fish die-offs began and in an effort to cool the waters and raise water levels, officials ordered increased releases from Lewiston Dam on the Trinity River. It should have worked, but it didn?t have much impact. By midsummer at least 25 percent of the fish surveyed on the lower Klamath were infected with the deadly parasite, says senior fisheries biologist Mike Belchik of the Yurok tribe.The tribe has a long history with the Klamath and its fish population and is committed to preserving what?s left of the once plentiful salmon runs.But not everybody agrees that saving the salmon, already threatened by terrible conditions on other North State rivers, is a viable plan.Rep. Doug LaMalfa is fighting efforts to stop ich with more water. The Republican from Richvale has introduced an amendment to a federal appropriations bill that would forbid increasing river flows to save the fish.Fortunately, that law hasn?t been approved. Between August and September almost 51,000 acre-feet of water was released from Lewiston Dam on the Trinity River and from there to the Klamath.And this time it apparently worked just as it was supposed to, washing away the ich and cooling the water enough to boost the fishes? immune systems.Belchik says a survey he and his crew conducted last week at Tectah Creek on the lower Klamath found only two infected fish, and those illnesses were minor.Belchik and water authorities have kept a close and constant watch on the fish. He called the early infections an ?early warning? for another catastrophic fish kill in this fall?s run, which, if unheeded, could have led to another catastrophe.Just how many major die-offs could the species survive? Nobody?s sure, but we?d certainly not like to find out.No one has yet developed a permanent plan that would set the standards for future releases and establish the triggers that would cue increased flows.In normal years water negotiations are tricky enough, but the drought has complicated the situation as Southern California water districts and purveyors vie with tribes and North State stakeholders for every available drop.The bottom line is the question of whether water is best used to support the fish or agriculture.We in the North State seem torn over the priorities. But here in Shasta County salmon are more than an entr?e on today?s menu. The fish are a huge tourist draw, every bit as important to the local economy as are the thirsty orchards and fields in the southland.Meanwhile, plans continue for ways to save salmon populations decimated by construction of Shasta Dam and those in trouble simply as a result of the drought. As global warming continues and we adapt to living with less water, we must keep in mind protections for the fish endangered primarily by changes we have wrought. And keep an eye on ich. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Oct 2 10:28:13 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 17:28:13 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] The Banana Republic of California Message-ID: <1352393389.377458.1443806893448.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.waterdeeply.org/op-eds/2015/10/8640/banana-republic-california/ The Banana Republic of California October 2nd, 2015?by?David Zetland?????6 min read????? - Share5 ?- ? Tweet It is time for state leaders to show some spine and stop pretending there's enough water for all comersA rich farmer wrote to Senator Dianne Feinstein?several years ago?, complaining that "California will be little more than a third world country" because "our current political system has bankrupted this once great state by allowing runaway environmental regulations along with a failure to invest in water system infrastructure to completely destroy California's economic engine." The farmer, Jean Sagouspe, had a significant interest in the topic because he and his family had farms in California's Central Valley. Some of these farms relied on the Central Valley Project for irrigating their otherwise bone-dry lands that are part of the Westlands Water District, the largest irrigation district in the country.Last week at Water Deeply,?Cannon Michael described?the challenges facing California farmers as the state attempts to ration water among competing urban, agricultural and environmental uses. In this post, I will call attention to the flawed ? and potentially corrupt ? political discourse that has transformed a drought into crisis and diverted attention from meaningful solutions. The Elephant in the RoomCalifornia, like anywhere else in the world, receives different precipitation every year. This supply will be higher in rainy years than in drought years. The demand for surface water for human activities (so-called "developed water") is divided, on average, into shares of about 80 percent for agricultural use and 20 percent for municipal and industrial use. Remaining surface water goes into environmental flows that contribute to ecosystem health. Those ecosystems (and many human systems) are gravely threatened by massive, excess demand (see the map graphic).The water in many of California's rivers has been drastically over-allocated by public officials, suggesting a deep fracture in our understanding of nature's ability to meet our basic needs. (UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences)Let's take a moment to consider how California's development led to this mess.The development of water for human use has occurred in stages since California became a state in 1850. The first development was for hydraulic mining, i.e., diverting water out of rivers so that miners could wash dirt into sluices for recovering gold. This process required a new type of water right ? a right of "prior appropriation" ? that differed for traditional riparian and groundwater rights in two ways: First, prior appropriation rights allowed owners to take water without returning it to the river. Second, prior appropriation rights were ordered by seniority, meaning that those with junior rights would not be allowed to take water until holders of senior rights took theirs. Riparian rights, in contrast, did not allow water diversions to harm other riparian rights holders who had equal seniority.Groundwater rights, curiously, assumed that one could take as much water as one wanted from below one's land without regard for any impacts on neighboring lands or rivers. This was allowed because the law did not recognize the physical connection between groundwater and surface water. (I am not a water lawyer, so this description may be oversimplified, but I recommend?this chapter?on "California's Dysfunctional Surface Water Rights.") The next stages in California's water development involved damming, draining and diverting water for agricultural and urban uses between 1880 and 1980. It was during this time that the Central Valley was converted from?a vast inland sea to farm fields?, the Salton Sink was renamed "Imperial Valley"?to attract farmers who would use one-fifth of the Colorado River's flows, Southern California built huge aqueducts to bring water from the Owens and Colorado Rivers?, and the State Water Project began diverting Northern California's "wasted" river flows to the southern end of the State. Local and national politicians played a crucial role in each of these stages by issuing rights to surface water and subsidizing the construction of dams and canals. Readers of Marc Reisner's 1986 masterpiece,?Cadillac Desert?, will be familiar with the pattern of politicians competing to hand public money, lands and waters to farmers and developers. The backlash to such bankrupt policies began with?the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act in 1968?. It accelerated with the 1982 vote against a "Peripheral Canal"?that would "complete" the State Water Project by taking water around the Delta, and a ruling?that Los Angeles could not destroy Mono Lake's rare ecosystem by continuing to export water from the Owens Valley. InsanityAn insane person,?some say?, repeats the same mistakes while expecting different results. Just a few weeks ago, the Feds announced?an agreement that gave Jean Sagouspe and other Westlands farmers a permanent water contract in exchange for their pledge to "take care" of a drainage problem that was going to cost the government hundreds of millions to fix. This flawed settlement was particularly galling because it simultaneously wrote off massive debt while conferring rights to water that isn't really there in exchange for a promise that Westlands would "do its best" to stop toxic salinity from draining into wetlands. You usually only see sweetheart deals like this for Wall Street, but bankers are not uniquely persuasive. As the?L.A. Times reported?, "Westlands spends heavily on lobbyists ? $2.3 million in Washington since 2012, and $576,000 in Sacramento." In 1904, O. Henry?described a banana republic?as a Central American country whose corrupt politicians sacrifice citizens on behalf of fruit companies. California has always been a banana-shaped state, but its ongoing and deepening policy failures are giving it a reputation as a banana republic where money talks, citizens suffer and the future be damned. The Long NowThe name?California?comes from an old Spanish story in which "California" is a paradise, and the state was indeed endowed with incredible assets. Millions of people have come to the Golden State in pursuit of their dreams, and many have found an incredible quality of life. But popularity comes with a cost. The California grizzly that graces the state flag has not been seen since 1924?. The animal went extinct under the twin pressures of hunting and habitat destruction. This slightly esoteric essay was meant to convince you of two things. First, California goes through cycles in which overdevelopment threatens citizens' quality of life. The current "drought crisis" should be seen in this context. Second, farmers and land developers often "help" politicians over-exploit the State's resources in their own interests ? not for the benefit of average citizens.The solution, as always, is to step back from the brink. In the case of California's current drought and crisis over plummeting groundwater levels, dying rivers and bans on restaurant water, reform means that the State's leaders need to show some spine in retiring or taking back rights to water that either does not exist or cannot be diverted without destroying the ecosystems that benefit all citizens. Such moves are not just possible under traditional notions of "eminent domain" condemnation for public interest. They are justified by the?state's Constitution:It is hereby declared that because of the conditions prevailing in this State the general welfare requires that the water resources of the State be put to beneficial use to the fullest extent of which they are capable... with a view to the reasonable and beneficial use thereof in the interest of the people and for the public welfare.Bottom Line:?California does not have enough water to meet all demands. It is therefore necessary that the state revise its water accounting such that human uses are reduced to sustainable levels, for the benefit of current and future Californians. David Zetland is an assistant professor of economics at?Leiden University College?in the Netherlands. He received his Ph.D. from U.C. Davis in 2008, writing a dissertation on water management in Southern California. He blogs on water, economics and politics ataguanomics.com?and has written?The End of Abundance: Economic Solutions to Water Scarcity?(2011) and?Living with Water Scarcity (2014)?. He is also a member of Water Deeply?s advisory board. Top image: The lake bed at Big Bear Lake, exposed by the drought and water demand, on Monday, Aug. 24, 2015. (Nick Ut, Associated Press) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Fri Oct 2 10:40:55 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 10:40:55 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Winnemem Wintu Chief Leads 'Water. Every Drop Is Sacred' Rally and March In-Reply-To: <1955370861.4104981.1443713617545.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1955370861.4104981.1443713617545.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <84EC4254-BEB2-4DAB-86F0-B0E1261988DD@fishsniffer.com> http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/10/01/18778315.php http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/09/29/1425910/-Winnemem-Wintu-Chief-Leads-Rally-and-March-Against-Mt-Shasta-Crystal-Geyser-Plant Photo: Chief Caleen Sisk speaks in front of the Crystal Geyser plant, not yet in operation, in Mount Shasta City. 800_caleen_sisk_speaks_.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Winnemem Wintu Chief Leads 'Water. Every Drop Is Sacred' Rally and March by Dan Bacher Small cascades of cold, pristine water rush out of the hillside at Big Springs, the headwaters of the Sacramento River, as they converge in a clear and shallow pool located in the Mount Shasta City Park. Adults and children fill their jugs and bottles with the pristine water that takes 50 years to make it from snow and rain on Mount Shasta down through the volcanic aquifer to where the torrents converge in the park. Even in a record drought year like this one, the icy water rushes from the hillside to make its way to Lake Siskiyou, then Lake Shasta and then to the Delta and the ocean. People from throughout the world walk along the creek and hike along shaded trails and footpaths that cross through hedges of horsetail fern and willow and across small bridges. As people hiked to and relaxed besides Big Springs, Caleen Sisk, Chief and Spiritual Leader of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, and hundreds of environmentalists and activists from all over California and Oregon held a rally, the ?Water Every Drop Sacred? event, in this scenic park at the Sacramento River headwaters. After the rally ended, Sisk and tribal members led a march and protest of 160 people to the plant. The Tribe is opposed to the planned opening of the plant, closed after it was operated by the Coca-Cola Bottling Company and other corporations for years, in accordance with its commitment to protect and preserve the Headwaters of the river, the Mount Shasta watershed and sacred tribal lands. Otsuka Holding Co, a Japanese pharmaceutical conglomerate, owns Crystal Geyser. The event began with a performance of Iroha, a traditional Japanese Taiko drum group Performances by Sawako Ama, Rieko Ivaska and Mao highlighted the fact that Japanese residents and tourists are not pleased about the plans to open another bottling plant just 2000 feet from the headwaters, according to Vicki Gold, of Water Flows Free in a news release. "Crystal Geyser is already entrenched in Weed, CA, just 8 miles north of Mt. Shasta, reportedly extracting 1.5 million gallons of water daily, much of it headed for Japan in single use plastic bottles with a huge carbon footprint," said Gold. "Meanwhile, Japan has abundant water of its own." Signs at the rally proclaimed, "Want water?, Tap Mt. Fuji!," "The Truth Is?No one owns water!," "No Dam Raise," "Water Is Life" and "Help Protect Mt Shasta Sacred Waters 4 Next 7 Generations." Chief Caleen Sisk, the keynote speaker, spoke movingly about the sacredness of water and the threat to the environment and people posed by controversial plans to raise the Shasta Dam and build Jerry Brown's Delta Tunnels. ?This spring, the headwaters of the Sacramento, is sacred to us,? said Chief Sisk. ?Archeologists once said they couldn?t find any evidence of indigenous people around this spring. That?s because our ancestors believe the site was so sacred that they would leave nothing behind when they prayed there. It is for the sacred beings ? it is not for us to use.? ?Mount Shasta (where the Sacramento and McCloud and other rivers come from) is sacred. The sacred being brings us a message that the plant can?t be here. And if we?re not successful here, the mountain may take care of it instead," emphasized Sisk. She emphasized that the pending plan to open the Crystal Geyser plant in Mount Shasta is part of a large water grab by corporate interests, including the federal plan to raise Shasta Dam and the Brown administration scheme to shop water to agribusiness interests and Southern California water agencies. ?The twin tunnels will be built to transfer water from the headwaters to agribusiness farming in a desert. They are large enough to divert the entire Sacramento River in them," said Chief Sisk. She said that if the tunnels were built it would destroy the largest estuary on the West Cost of the Americas, a nursery for Chinook salmon, steelhead, green and white sturgeon, Delta and longfin smelt and numerous other fish species. ?If they kill the estuary, what will it mean? When the estuary is cut off from the fresh water, the estuary will disappear and no longer be a nursery," said Chief Sisk. Sisk also discussed the Tribe?s long struggle to bring the original run of winter run Chinook salmon back to the McCloud River above Shasta Dam. Sisk and Tribal Members journeyed to New Zealand in 2009 to conduct ceremonies with the Maori on the Rakaira River, where the descendents of the original winter run chinook salmon from the McCloud, transplanted from the Livingston Stone Fish hatchery over 100 years ago, now thrive. ?The Maori are ready ? they said they have 400,000 eyed eggs ready to be planted in the McCloud?But the scientists from the Bureau of Reclamation said they are not sure whether these are the same fish because they have no DNA from the McCloud River winter Chinooks to match the DNA of the New Zealand fish. Yet all of the records show that these fish came from this river!" Chief Sisk has often said, referring to the essential role of water to life itself. "People can live without oil, they can live without gold, but nothing can live without water." When the march arrived at the plant, Sisk appealed to Otsuka Pharmaceuticals in Japan to reconsider their plans and not open the facility. She also suggested that opponents of the plant make a trip to Japan to convince the company's owners to not open the plant in a manner similar to how members of the Hoopa Valley, Yurok and Karuk Tribes went to Scotland to convince Scottish Power, the owner of the Klamath River Dams, to decommission the dams in order to restore fish to the headwaters. Gold estimated that 500 people attended the event throughout the day, with 200 present at any one time. The speakers addressed the threats posed to our food sources, potable water supply, and ecosystem posed by water bottling and other water commodification schemes. In addition to rallying against Crystal Geyser?s pending plant in Mt. Shasta, speakers at the event discussed their opposition to Calpine?s proposed industrial geothermal plant in the Medicine Lake Highlands that the Pit River Tribe has been fighting for many years. Both of these industrial developments threaten water quantity and quality in the area and have been the target of grassroots campaigns. Lucas RossMerz, of Sacramento River Preservation Trust, addressed the importance of keeping the water in the river to all those who use it for recreation, residential use and farming. He cited the aphorism, ?I have Pessimism of the intellect and optimism of the will,? as his philosophy in addressing the many problems of the Sacramento River watershed. ?No matter how bad the numbers of fish and habitat get, my heart won?t let me quit," he said. "So I show up to work every day and do my best!? Reverend Amanda Ford, M.A., of the Environmental Justice Coalition for Water, who addressed human rights issues surrounding water, told the story about how she found Crystal Geyser bottled water in her mom's refigerator when she went home to Michigan recently. "Our message has to reach people like my mom, who view water as as a commodity," Ford said. Mauro Oliveira, of SOL Communications, emphasized, "The Sierra Nevada and Mount Shasta snowpacks are the lowest in 500 years. Our mission is to protect our water, our watersheds, oceans, all beings and their habitat. The oceans, rivers and all life forms are suffering from plastic pollution and consequent endocrine disruption. We have to change our habits and question every action of polluting industry.? Gold pointed out the importance of people uniting to stop the opening of the Crystal Geyser plant. "It's time to join forces in an alliance to protect our local water," she said. "We must continue to put pressure on Crystal Geyser, Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors, the City Council of Mt. Shasta and other public agencies. We are making a stand here, now, on Mount Shasta." "Our friends in Oregon at Cascade Locks are facing Nestle; British Columbia is facing new exploitation by Nestle," Gold explained. "The plastic pollution is choking our oceans, our landfills, our rivers. Single use plastic water bottles is an idea whose time has clearly passed. Boycott bottled water." She also urged people to ask Calpers (the California Public Employee Retirement System, largest in the world), to divest its holdings in Otsuka, Nestle, CocaCola amd Pepsi. "We must vote with our pocket books. This is time for the voice of the public, speaking for our fragile planetary ecosystem, to be heard," she concluded. The speakers at the five hour event also included Sherry Ackerman, PhD., who revealed why multinational conglomerates head for California and New York in search of water, "blue gold," at the pristine mountain source; Konrad Fisher, Klamath Riverkeeper; Bob McFarland, California Guild (formerly California State Grange); Geneva Omann and Roslyn McCoy of W.A.T.E.R.; Elaine Hsiao, PhD. candidate; Matt Isler, Sacred Economics; Phoenix Lawhon Isler of the Mount Shasta Bioregional Ecology Center (MSBEC); Bob Saunders of the Crunch Nestle Alliance; and Dan Axelrod, PHD, Professor Emeritus, University of Michigan on the EIR. Entertainers featured Saratone, Diane Patterson, Al Torre, Jenn Rogar, Sawako Ama and Rieko Ivaska with Iroha, Jenn Rogar who performed songs about love and respect for water. This event followed the lawsuit filed on August 23 by the environmental group "We Advocate Thorough Environmental Review" (W.A.T.E.R.) against Siskiyou County and Crystal Geyser Water Company, whose corporate offices are in Napa County. The group has demanded an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for 2 years. The lawsuit requests Crystal Geyser Water Company meet California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) standards and requirements. On September 16, Crystal Geyser, through their PR Firm, Burson- Marsteller, stated it will comply with the EIR process. "However, EIR?s don?t always present the entire picture of the effects of an industry's environmental impact,? said Gold. ?Our event shed light on the issues of water bottling overall, plastic waste resulting from bottling, the overall effects and impact on the environment, and the irrationality of bottling water during the time of the worst drought in California?s history.? The event was organized by Vicki Gold of Water Flows Free and the Environmental Justice Coalition for Water and sponsored by the Mount Shasta Bioregional Ecology Center. For more information, contact: Vicki Gold (530) 926.4206, Mauro Oliveira (530) 356-7343, Bob Saunders (916) 370.8251, or Angelina Cook or Phoenix Lawhon Isler, Mount Shasta Bioregional Ecology Center, (530) 926-5655 (office). ?Caleen Sisk and Rieke Ivaska by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_caleen_sisk_and_taiko... original image ( 5184x3456) Chief Caleen Audrey Sisk with Taiko drummer Rieko Ivaska at rally against Crystal Geyser in Mount Shasta on Saturday, September 26. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Michael Tuiimyali by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_michael_preston_with_... original image ( 5184x3456) Michael Tuiimyali, Winnemem Wintu, marching on Crystal Geyser. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Misa Joo and Lisa Olivera by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_misa_joo.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Misa Joo holds the "Water Is Life" sign at the rally while Lisa Olivera displays the "Protect the Salmon" sign. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Big Springs by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_big_springs_water.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Big Springs, located in the Mount Shasta City Park, is considered the headwaters of the Sacramento River. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Taiko Group by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_taiko.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Iroha, a traditional Japanese Taiko drum group, performs at the rally. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Jenn Rogar by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_jenn__vertical_.jpg original image ( 3456x5184) Jenn Rogar of Sacramento performs a song at the rally. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Diane Patterson by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_diane_patterson.jpg original image ( 3456x5184) Diana Patterson, singer/songwriter, sings another song at the rally. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Art and Revolution by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_art___revo.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Art and Revolution came from Sacramento to perform at the event. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Lucas RossMerz by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_ross-merz.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Lucas RossMerz, of the Sacramento River Preservation Trust, said, ?No matter how bad the numbers of fish and habitat get, my heart won?t let me quit." Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Reverend Amanda Ford by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_reverend.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Reverend Amanda Ford, M.A., of the Environmental Justice Coalition for Water, addressed human rights issues surrounding water. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?From Mauna Kea to Mount Shasta by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_ku_kia_i_mauna.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Defending sacred Mauna Kea in Hawaii and sacred Mount Shasta in California. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Signs in Park by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_signs_in_park.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Signs in the the park during the rally. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Caleen speaks at rally by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_caleen_with_glass_hor... original image ( 5184x3456) Chief Caleen Sisk gave the keynote speech at the rally. Photo Bay Dan Bacher. ?Vicki Gold by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_vicki_gold.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Vicki Gold of Water Flows Free, event organizer, speaks about the battle to prevent Crystal Geyser from opening its plant. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Crowd shot by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_crowd_listens_to_cale... original image ( 5184x3456) The crowd listens to Chief Sisk speak. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?In front of the plant by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_in_front_of_plant.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) The Winnemem Wintu and environmentalists in front of the Crystal Geyser plant. Photo by Dan Bacher. ?Big Springs Creek by Dan Bacher Thursday Oct 1st, 2015 7:55 PM 800_img_3955.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Big Springs Creek just downstream of where the spring water pours out of the rock. Add Your Comments -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_caleen_sisk_speaks_.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 378529 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_caleen_sisk_and_taiko_drummer.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 344914 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_michael_preston_with_sign.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 411612 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_misa_joo.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 333290 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_big_springs_water.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 434659 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_taiko.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 381962 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_jenn__vertical_.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 317936 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_diane_patterson.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 280767 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_art___revo.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 323992 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_ross-merz.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 303920 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_reverend.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 288109 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_ku_kia_i_mauna.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 407548 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_signs_in_park.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 445355 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_caleen_with_glass_horizontal.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 306513 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_vicki_gold.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 314846 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_crowd_listens_to_caleen.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 425218 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_in_front_of_plant.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 347507 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_img_3955.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 503069 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Oct 5 13:38:12 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 13:38:12 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: [Trinity Releases] Trinity River flow release notifications: new email system References: Message-ID: Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: "Peterson, Eric" > Date: October 5, 2015 at 12:50:02 PM MST > To: releases > Subject: [Trinity Releases] Trinity River flow release notifications: new email system > > For many years the Trinity River Restoration Program has hosted an email distribution system to notify the public of changes to the in-river flow release from Lewiston Dam (including releases for both restoration and for other purposes). We have changed the system that distributes the emails. It should now be more efficient for the public to sign up now, and notifications will also be visible on our Flow Release Notifications web page. > > Thank you for your interest in the Trinity River! > --- > Eric B. Peterson, Ph.D. > Trinity River Restoration Program > U.S. Bureau of Reclamation > 530-623-1810 > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "trinity-releases" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to trinity-releases+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From derek_rupert at fws.gov Wed Oct 7 11:10:49 2015 From: derek_rupert at fws.gov (Rupert, Derek) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 11:10:49 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Mainstem Trinity River spawn survey update for October 2, 2015 Message-ID: Hello All, The Trinity River spawn survey updates have returned! The US Fish and Wildlife Service along with the Yurok Tribe, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Forest Service, and Hoopa Valley Tribe have another weekly update for our Trinity River mainstem spawn survey posted on the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Fisheries webpage. *Trinity River spawn survey update Oct. 2, 2015 * This week our crews mapped 231 redds (345 total for the year) in the Reaches from Lewiston Dam to Pigeon Point, and Big Bar to Cedar Flat. The graph below is clipped from our weekly report (limited to the river upstream of Cedar Flat). ?Make sure to check out the Google Earth (.kml) data file nested within the weekly report (hyperlink above). This data will allow you to follow where and when salmon redds are built on the Trinity River. We hope that these updates are informative and useful. Please contact me if you have any questions or comments about the survey. Cheers, Derek -- Derek Rupert Fish Biologist US Fish and Wildlife Service Weaverville, CA Office 530.623.1805 Cell 570.419.2823 Derek_Rupert at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WeeklyGraphicSmall.png Type: image/png Size: 9551 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Oct 7 12:32:25 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 12:32:25 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Trinity Sr. Biologist References: <07968F55C4B6674AAB697ABE5DFD21F8CB4FC02D03@exchange.yuroktribe.nsn.us> Message-ID: Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: Dave Hillemeier > Date: October 7, 2015 at 11:02:19 AM PDT > To: Tom Stokely > Subject: Trinity Sr. Biologist > > Hi Tom ? we are recruiting for a Sr. Biologist for our Trinity Division. If appropriate, could you please distribute to the Trinity list server. > > Thanks, > > Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Sr Bio AFS Format.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 14506 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ebpeterson at usbr.gov Mon Oct 5 12:52:28 2015 From: ebpeterson at usbr.gov (Peterson, Eric) Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2015 12:52:28 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Change to Trinity River flow release notification Message-ID: This should be the last email you get from the old email address used for Trinity River flow release notifications. You should have also received an email about the new system just moments ago (subject= "Trinity River flow release notifications: new email system"). IF YOU DO NOT SEE that other email, then please check your spam or junk mail. If you find it there, then I recommend using your email system's method to ensure you receive similar future emails. Likely, this will include emails that come through the releases at trrp.net address or the Google Groups distribution system (trinity-releases at googlegroups.com). Thank you for your interest in the Trinity River! --- Eric B. Peterson, Ph.D. Trinity River Restoration Program U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 530-623-1810 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From derek_rupert at fws.gov Tue Oct 6 14:33:39 2015 From: derek_rupert at fws.gov (Rupert, Derek) Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2015 14:33:39 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Mainstem Trinity River spawn survey update for October 2, 2015 Message-ID: Hello All, The Trinity River spawn survey updates have returned! The US Fish and Wildlife Service along with the Yurok Tribe, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Forest Service, and Hoopa Valley Tribe have another weekly update for our Trinity River mainstem spawn survey posted on the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Fisheries webpage. *Trinity River spawn survey update Oct. 2, 2015 * This week our crews mapped 231 redds (345 total for the year) in the Reaches from Lewiston Dam to Pigeon Point, and Big Bar to Cedar Flat. The graph below is clipped from our weekly report (limited to the river upstream of Cedar Flat). ?Make sure to check out the Google Earth (.kml) data file nested within the weekly report (hyperlink above). This data will allow you to follow where and when salmon redds are built on the Trinity River. We hope that these updates are informative and useful. Please contact me if you have any questions or comments about the survey. Cheers, Derek -- Derek Rupert Fish Biologist US Fish and Wildlife Service Weaverville, CA Office 530.623.1805 Cell 570.419.2823 Derek_Rupert at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WeeklyGraphicSmall.png Type: image/png Size: 9551 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Fri Oct 9 12:54:00 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 19:54:00 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping summary JWeek 40 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C58872D@057-SN2MPN1-041.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hi Folks, Please see attached for the Jweek 40 (Oct 1-7) Trinity River trapping summary update. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW40.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 61835 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW40.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Oct 12 10:12:55 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 17:12:55 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Triplicate: Yurok Tribe files dam lawsuit amicus References: <355655796.2626698.1444669975254.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <355655796.2626698.1444669975254.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.triplicate.com/News/Local-News/Tribe-files-dam-lawsuit-amicus Tribe files dam lawsuit amicus By Adam Spencer, The Triplicate October 08, 2015 08:10 am | Yuroks join Hoopa Valley effort against Klamath dams? The Yurok tribe filed a friend of the court brief Friday in support of the Hoopa Valley Tribe's lawsuit that asks the U.S. Court of Appeals to force a federal agency to end eight years of relicensing delays for dams on the Klamath River.?Relicensing of the Klamath Hydroelectric Project might force the removal of four Klamath dams due to the costs associated with bringing the dams into environmental compliance, including fish passage and water quality improvements, versus the $300 million estimated cost of dam removal.?The Yurok filed their amicus brief Friday, just a few weeks after withdrawing support from the Klamath settlement agreements that have caused the longstanding delay in relicensing.?Under the Klamath Agreements, environmental regulators of California and Oregon agreed to let PacifiCorp, parent company of Pacific Power and owner of the dams, to put water quality certification needed for dam relicensing on hold while Congress considered legislation that would implement the agreements. The Klamath Agreements would facilitate removal of the four dams, pump millions of dollars in fisheries restoration into the Klamath Basin and provide security for farmers that use Klamath water in the Upper Basin.??But a Klamath Agreements bill in the Senate has barely budged and a companion bill has not even been introduced in the House. One of the key pacts, the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, expires at the end of the year. Some recently speculated that the Yurok Tribe?s withdrawal of support from the agreements was a negotiating tactic, but joining the relicensing fight led by Hoopa, never a party to the Klamath Agreements, may indicate serious interest in paths to dam removal outside of the controversial settlement agreements.The Yurok Tribe did not respond to request for comment.?Thomas Schlosser, attorney for the Hoopa Valley Tribe, said that the Yurok Tribe?s support ?doesn?t change the legal calculus? or change the law that applies to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission?s (FERC) responsibility to relicense the dams, but it helps.?This will make it harder for the other sides to claim that it?s just Hoopa being a spoilsport about their wonderful Klamath Agreements, because Yurok agrees with us that the Klamath Agreements have failed,? Schlosser told the Triplicate by phone Wednesday. ?There is nobody but PacifiCorp and the irrigators and a few hangers-on that think the agreements are a good idea.? Schlosser said it also helps that the Yurok Tribe ?underscored? that FERC has never approved the agreements.?Although the Yurok and Hoopa Valley tribes have been legal allies in other Klamath Basin lawsuits, this is the first time the Yurok Tribe has joined the relicensing case Hoopa has been fighting since 2010, the same year the Yurok Tribe, irrigators, commercial fishing groups and environmental organizations signed the Klamath Agreements.PacifiCorp has delayed relicensing of the dams through an annual withdrawal and resubmission of its water quality certification application, which it has done eight times since the dams? license expired in 2006.The Clean Water Act says if a state fails or refuses to act on a water quality certification ?within a reasonable period of time (which shall not exceed one year)? then the certification is considered waived, and California and Oregon water quality regulators have interpreted the annual withdrawal and resubmission process as a way to maneuver around waiving certification. In a previous decision, FERC said the withdrawal and resubmission process was ??clearly violating the spirit of the Clean Water Act? but not the letter of the law.The Yurok brief states that ?repeated withdrawals violate the reasonable time requirement for state certifications under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. Allowing repeated ongoing withdrawals also disserves both the public interest and environmental protection.?PacifiCorp representatives told the Triplicate that they have never left the water quality certification process and that PacifiCorp asked FERC not to review the Klamath Agreements because the agency?s approval would not be needed if the agreements passed Congress. ?As long as the agreements have life in them, PacifiCorp will prioritize that path, according to company spokesperson Bob Gravely.Schlosser said that if the U.S. Court of Appeals sides with the tribes and forces FERC to consider the states? chance at water quality certification ?waived,? the relicensing process would resume and FERC could issue a license that would require water quality improvements outlined in a previous FERC environmental analysis and fish passage demanded by federal fisheries managers. Thus, PacifiCorp would be forced to move forward with either making those costly improvements or removing the dams.Jim McCarthy, communications director and southern Oregon program manager for WaterWatch, a conservation group that was party to the Klamath Agreements negotiations until being ?involuntarily expelled,? for disagreeing with part of the deal, called the Yurok Tribe?s amicus brief ?significant? and agrees that the relicensing process would lead to dam removal.?Our view is that we believe removal and building (electricity) capacity elsewhere is cheaper than fish ladder and water quality improvements and operating those dams with fish passage,? McCarthy told the Triplicate.??WaterWatch, McCarthy said, would support a settlement agreement to protect PacifiCorp from liabilities associated with dam removal and reduce the dam removal costs borne by ratepayers, but not when it requires an act of Congress to implement and is tied to the controversial water deals in the KBRA. WaterWatch also believes reaching that a dam-removal-only settlement will be more likely reached by a return to the relicensing process being demanded by Hoopa Valley.?And Hoopa Valley, for their part, welcomes having the Yurok Tribe on board.?I think it?s great to have the two tribes working together, and they do on a lot of issues,? Schlosser said. Efforts to expedite dam removal through the courts instead of the Klamath Agreements can now be added to that list. | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Oct 12 13:26:11 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 20:26:11 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: KFHAT Alert Level at Green for Klamath & Tributaries In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <665044983.2723073.1444681571757.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Monday, October 12, 2015 11:55 AM, "Carter, Katharine at Waterboards" wrote: Hi all, ? Based upon the consensus of those calling into last week?s KFHAT call, and barring any objection from any KFHAT member via e-mail, the KFHAT alert level has been changed to green for the Klamath River and its tributaries.? This decision is based upon cooling water/air temperatures, increase in flows in the tributaries, and very low detections of ich in salmonids migrating up the Klamath River.? ? KFHAT members are encouraged to continue sharing information via e-mail.? ?If any member feels another KFHAT call is necessary please e-mail me and/or the group so we can discuss the possibility.? ? Katharine ? Katharine Carter Adaptive Watershed Management Unit North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board 5550 Skylane Blvd. Suite A Santa Rosa, CA 95403 707-576-2290 Katharine.Carter at waterboards.ca.gov ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 3812 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Oct 14 08:05:08 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 15:05:08 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal: Sidney Gulch project good for fish, people References: <1246333835.257820.1444835108358.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1246333835.257820.1444835108358.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_2f11dc4c-721a-11e5-8506-3b4cd079d768.html Sidney Gulch project good for fish, people Posted: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 6:00 am fish structure The Five Counties Salmonid Conservation Program of the Northwest California Resource Conservation and Development Council and the Trinity County Department of Transportation have completed a Sidney Gulch migration barrier removal project at Weaver Bally Loop Road in Weaverville. With grant funding from the Trinity River Restoration Program and California Coastal Conservancy, the project involved replacement of a narrow culvert with a new structure and overflow channel designed to allow large storm events to pass without washing out Sidney Gulch. Mark Lancaster, director of the 5Cs program, said the old pipe was causing poor distribution of gravel downstream and had formed a waterfall at the outlet preventing fish passage. It was also too small to handle floods, creating a risk of overtopping and potentially sending 4.5 acre-feet of water pooled above the culvert ?washing straight down into Weaverville.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From derek_rupert at fws.gov Wed Oct 14 08:11:14 2015 From: derek_rupert at fws.gov (Rupert, Derek) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 08:11:14 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Mainstem Trinity River spawn survey update for October 9, 2015 Message-ID: Hello All, The US Fish and Wildlife Service along with the Yurok Tribe, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Forest Service, and Hoopa Valley Tribe have another weekly update for our Trinity River mainstem spawn survey posted on the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Fisheries webpage. Trinity River spawn Survey update October 9, 2015. This week our crews mapped 285 redds (630 total for the year) in the Reaches from Lewiston Dam to Pigeon Point, and Hawkins Bar to Weitchpec (mouth of Trinity River). The graph below is clipped from our weekly report (limited to the river upstream of Cedar Flat). Our crews have spotted schools of adult Chinook and Coho salmon that are marking their way upstream to their spawning grounds. This means the next few weeks will be a great time to get out and see these wonderful fish as they build their redds, deposit their eggs, and insure the future of the species. Cheers, Derek -- Derek Rupert Fish Biologist US Fish and Wildlife Service Weaverville, CA Office 530.623.1805 Cell 570.419.2823 Derek_Rupert at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WeeklyGraphicSmall.png Type: image/png Size: 9615 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Wed Oct 14 15:52:34 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 15:52:34 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] CBB: Warming Coastal Ocean Temperatures May Lead To Negative Effect For Salmon 'Recruitment' By Reducing Prey Message-ID: <006101d106d3$047ea5d0$0d7bf170$@sisqtel.net> THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN: Weekly Fish and Wildlife News www.cbbulletin.com October 9, 2015 Issue No. 766 Warming Coastal Ocean Temperatures May Lead To Negative Effect For Salmon 'Recruitment' By Reducing Prey While the Pacific Decadal Oscillation is the most important factor in determining how many salmon return from the ocean to streams in the Northwest, a series of other more regional environmental factors also influence that return, according to a recent study. The study found that multiple, inter-related ecological pathways (environmental factors) can strongly influence Oregon coastal coho salmon abundance, with the most important factor being the PDO, an index of large-scale climate variability in the North Pacific Ocean. Among those pathways (17 in all, including two biophysical pathways) coastal ocean temperature (sea surface temperature -- SST) and juvenile salmon prey biomass (the biophysical pathway) had the strongest effects on recruitment of the salmon. Having less impact on recruitment were the North Pacific Gyre Oscillation (NPGO) and the Oceanic Nino Index (ONI). "We found that in years when the coastal ocean was warmer than average there also tended to be reduced salmon prey biomass and lower salmon recruitment levels compared to cool ocean years," said researcher Michael Malick, PhD Candidate, School of Resource and Environmental Management, at Simon Fraser University. "From a climate change perspective, this result suggests that warming coastal ocean temperatures may have a negative effect on coho salmon recruitment by reducing available prey resources for salmon in the coastal ocean." There is a degree of uncertainty associated with the environmental relationships, Malick added. "For example, our results indicated that when coastal ocean temperatures were above average there is still a 1 in 4 chance that recruitment would be above average," he said. The study, "Accounting for multiple pathways in the connections among climate variability, ocean processes, and coho salmon recruitment in the Northern California Current," was published online August 28, 2015 in the Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science (http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/cjfas-2014-0509#.VhaOsPlVik o) Malick's co-authors are Dr. Sean Cox (Associate Professor, Simon Fraser University) and Dr. Randall Peterman (Professor Emeritus, Simon Fraser University), both in the School of Resource and Environmental Management; Dr. Thomas Wainwright (Research Fishery Biologist, NOAA Fisheries, Newport, OR); and Dr. Bill Peterson (Oceanographer, NOAA Fisheries, Newport, OR). The physical network of ecological factors includes such factors as PDO, SST, ONI, NPGO, spring transition and upwelling. "The spring transition variable is meant to capture the timing of the change in ocean conditions that occurs between the winter months when there is little to no upwelling off the coast of Oregon (in fact there can be strong downwelling during the winter caused by southerly winds) and the spring and summer months when there can be strong upwelling off the coast caused by northerly winds," Malick said. The biophysical networks include copepod and icthyoplankton biomass. According to the study, in the physical network of environmental factors, the two with the most impact on salmon recruitment are cooler surface temperatures and an earlier spring transition date. In the biophysical network, higher prey biomass is associated with higher recruitment. In the course of the analysis, the researchers quantified the uncertainty among the environmental pathway relationships. For example, "there was a 71 percent chance that recruitment would be 150,000 salmon or less when the PDO was in a warm phase for the physical network and a 62 percent chance for the biophysical network," the study says. "When the PDO was cool, the probability of recruitment being equal to or below 150,000 was considerably less, with a 54 percent chance in the physical network and a 45 percent chance in the biophysical network," the study says. Temperature may directly influence salmon in the ocean, but it's the increase in icthyoplankton biomass caused by lower temperatures that links SST (the physical factor) and biomass (the biophysical factor) to salmon abundance, according to the report. The cooler water is associated with a northern community of copepods with low species diversity, but rich with lipids, good for fish growth. However, the warmer water is associated with a southern community of copepods with high species diversity, but it is poor with lipids. This probabilistic approach, where uncertainty is expressed, is an "important factor in using ecological models to guide decision-making," the study says. "From a management perspective, our research indicates that environmental factors can be useful indicators of coho salmon recruitment," Malick said. "However, our results also suggest that focusing on only a single environmental factor can be misleading due to inherent uncertainties in the relationships between recruitment and environmental indicators. "From a longer-term perspective, our findings indicate that future data collection and research efforts should focus on regional-scale oceanographic processes, for example, by obtaining more precise estimates of coho salmon prey resources," he concluded. An overview and summary graphic of the research can be found at: http://michaelmalick.com/research/bayes-network/index.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Oct 15 06:16:40 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2015 13:16:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Redding.com opinion Nadine Bailey: Firefighters train with purpose References: <1676310525.834577.1444915000076.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1676310525.834577.1444915000076.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/opinion/nadine-bailey-firefighters-train-with-purpose_81333322 Nadine Bailey: Firefighters train with purpose 7:57 PM, Oct 9, 20157:18 PM, Oct 14, 2015The crew gathers around to receive one final briefing as the sun begins to set and the humidity climbs. As in most of the mountains of Northern California, the night air calms the wind and the rising humidity allows fires to be started inside of a framework of barriers and fire lines that have been pre-built to protect structures and to keep the fire inside the property boundaries.The radio crackles and the command is given to start burning. With drip torches in hand the crews light strings of fire along the forest floor that glow like Jack O? Lanterns in the night.Unlike the summer fires, which roared with a force that could not be stopped, these fires will not break through the canopy of trees, but instead will burn brush under the trees until that fuel is consumed, creating a chance to for a property owner to save his home and property when the next fire comes.While it might seem strange to set fires in this year when we have seen so much destruction from fire, that is what is happening on the Klamath River.In September the Valley fire in Lake, Napa and Sonoma counties left 76,067 acres charred, 1,280 homes destroyed and four people dead in what has become one of the worst fires in California history. Like fires that nearly destroyed Burney and Weed last year, the Valley fire continues to drive home the need for something to be done to lessen the threat of wildfire to communities in California. While many people argue over the methods of removal of hazardous fuels, common sense tells us that something must be done, and quickly.After the small town of Orleans was twice nearly consumed by fire, a small group of concerned citizens decided they could wait no more.Isolated and remote, the small community of Orleans is on the north side of the Klamath River. Turn right on Highway 96 at Willow Creek and follow the highway along the Trinity River through the Hoopa Valley to Weitchpec and you will find the Klamath River. Large and slow moving, it snakes through canyons so steep that on winter days they refuse to let the sun touch the ground.The rugged terrain along the Klamath River is unique in both geological and geographic features. The highway follows the river past canyons lined with giant Woodwardia ferns, Jurassic reminders of a timeless world. On many evenings the ocean fog is pulled up the river like a blanket, giving the Klamath moisture that other California forests lack.Orleans this fall is the site of the Klamath River Training Exchange, a cooperative effort between the Salmon River Restoration Council, Mid Klamath Watershed Council, the Karuk Tribe and the Nature Conservancy, to train people, traditional method of fuel reduction, used by tribes in the area for generations, prescribed fire. The concept of prescribed fire is to burn in a weather condition that allows fire to clean up the forest floor, without killing and damaging healthy trees. It can serve as way to combat bug infestations and a way to encourage native grasses and beneficial plants to replace hazardous fuels. The Klamath River is perfect classroom setting to learn about how and why prescribed fire can help lessen danger from the years of non-management and drought have created in our forests.Experts like Fire Storm, mentor young forest workers and fire crews in techniques learned in decades of using proscribed fire. Skills learned in this training could help firefighters lessen the damage of back-burns used during wildfires as well as increasing the black zones that allow fire fighters to find safety, before the wildfires start again next year.Into the black is the term that firefighters use, to name a place that crews can retreat to if a fire turns back or blows up due to a change in weather or fuel loads. That is what prescribed fire is giving to towns and properties on the Klamath River. More than 20 projects have been completed that turn anywhere from several acres to over 100 in to a strip of forest that has burned from the ground up to the bottom branches of oaks and conifers. These projects are clearly visible on the landscape, as the fire has removed brush, poison oak, old stumps and leaves from the forest floor.Like a lady lifting up her long hoop skirts to reveal her legs, fire has revealed a landscape long hidden by decades of fire suppression. Prescribed fire combined with defensible space can add time to what can be a matter of minutes for people who have to leave their homes in a fire emergency.Last year on the Forest Service spent about 50 percent of its budget to fight fire. Imagine taking a small part of the millions of dollars spent each year on firefighting and directing it toward fuel management in the fall. Maybe then we can stop losing lives, property and forests, to out-of-control wildfires.Maybe then the fire that is destroying forests can be used as tool to save forests and the people the people who love them. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Oct 16 05:53:56 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 12:53:56 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Mercury=3A_El_Ni=C3=B1o=3A_Wet_winter_lik?= =?utf-8?q?ely_across_California=2C_not_just_in_south=2C_new_report_says?= References: <1569998865.1389865.1445000036909.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1569998865.1389865.1445000036909.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.mercurynews.com/drought/ci_28974825/el-nino-wet-winter-conditions-now-likely-across | El Ni?o: Wet winter likely across California, not just in south, new report says By Paul Rogersprogers at mercurynews.comPOSTED: ? 10/15/2015 11:44:06 AM PDT35 COMMENTS|?UPDATED: ? 32?MIN. AGOUmbrellas returned to the streetscape as a wet weather system made its way through the Bay Area in Berkeley, Calif. on Wednesday, June 10, 2015. A new report says all of California is now expected to receive average or above average rainfall this winter. (Kristopher Skinner/Staff)In the latest sign that El Ni?o conditions are likely to bring wet weather to drought-parched California, federal scientists on Thursday announced for the first time that the entire state -- including the northern part of California from the Bay Area to the Oregon border -- is now expected to receive average or above-average rainfall this winter.New study: El Ni?o could cause coastal erosionKGTV - San Diego, CAUntil Thursday, scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration had been predicting that Southern California was most likely to get drenching storms this winter, with Northern California -- home of the state's largest reservoirs -- less likely to receive a soaking.Water temperatures and wind patterns in the Pacific Ocean have created the strongest El Ni?o in a generation. And although heavy rains are not guaranteed, the last two times when conditions were this strong, in the winters of 1982-83 and 1997-98, rainfall totals in the Bay Area and much of the state were double the historic average, triggering massive flooding and mudslides.The new report still establishes Southern California as the odds-on favorite for major downpours, but it expands the rainy outlook more broadly across the state for the months of January, February and March, which are expected to be the wettest.Advertisement"We're very confident that this will persist though the winter and should result in some of the typical El Ni?o impacts that we've seen in the past," said Mike Halpert, deputy director of the NOAA's climate prediction center in College Park, Maryland.Scientists at the NOAA -- the parent agency of the National Weather Service -- released maps showing that from Santa Barbara to the Mexican border, there is a 93 percent chance of average or above-average rainfall during those three months. From San Jose to Santa Barbara, there is an 83 percent chance of average or above-average rainfall, and from Humboldt County to San Jose there is a 73 percent chance of average or above-average precipitation."Everything continues to line up in the right direction," said Jan Null, a meteorologist with Golden Gate Weather Services in Saratoga. "We haven't had a normal or above-normal winter in five years. To get out of the drought we have to have above-normal precipitation. So this is a good trend."During much of the past four winters, a giant ridge of high pressure has been parked off the West Coast, diverting storms that would have soaked California north, to Canada. There, they met cold air and brought massive snowstorms to Chicago, Boston and New York.Could that "Ridiculously Resilient Ridge" return again this year to block El Ni?o storms?Not likely, said the man who coined the term.In past years, warm ocean conditions in the western Pacific Ocean built up the ridge, said Daniel Swain, a climate researcher at Stanford University. But now, he said, the western Pacific is not as warm -- and even if the ridge reappears this El Ni?o is likely to affect the subtropical jet stream in ways that storms could barrel around the southern edges of the ridge and deliver rain to California.Computer models are showing that by January the ridge will become a trough, which is favorable to bringing big storms into the state, Swain said."Even a normal winter will feel really wet to most people," he said. "I've been biking to the grocery store in January. I don't think that's going to happen this year."El Ni?o is a disruption in the weather patterns over the Pacific. It occurs when the ocean's surface along the equator off Peru warms more than normal. Those warm waters release heat, changing wind directions and the jet stream. The conditions often bring more and wetter storms to California.As in the past, NOAA scientists and local experts on Thursday stressed that nothing is certain because the Earth's climate and weather patterns are so complex. If the storms are too warm, for example, they won't bring snow to help boost the Sierra Nevada snowpack, which normally provides nearly a third of California's water supply. If they are focused too far south, the storms won't fill the big reservoirs like Shasta, Oroville, Folsom and San Luis in Northern California that are key to the state's water system.The state has suffered massive rainfall deficits after the driest four-year period since California became a state in 1850.That said, Swain noted that some supercomputer climate models are "much more aggressive" than the NOAA's outlook in showing how widespread this El Ni?o's rainfall could be.?Meanwhile, as water agencies urge people not to let up on conservation, cities across the state are scrambling to clear storm drains and creeks, and homeowners are trimming trees and fixing roofs. A series of steady, drenching storms spread out over time would fill reservoirs without much damage. But so-called atmospheric river storms -- "Pineapple Expresses" -- in close succession could bring serious damage, as they have in other strong El Ni?o years."History has shown that with these real big El Ni?os we have seen very big storms, and a lot of landslides and floods," Halpert said. "That could be something that turns out this winter -- that while we're still dealing with severe drought in California, we'll be also dealing with flooding at the same time. And that's certainly not unheard of."Paul Rogers covers resources and environmental issues. Contact him at 408-920-5045. Follow him at?Twitter.com/PaulRogersSJMN | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Fri Oct 16 14:11:26 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 14:11:26 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] CBB: Urban Stormwater Runoff Killing Adult Coho Salmon In Streams Along West Coast Message-ID: <005701d10857$38a724b0$a9f56e10$@sisqtel.net> THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN: Weekly Fish and Wildlife News www.cbbulletin.com October 16, 2015 Issue No. 767 * Study: Urban Stormwater Runoff Killing Adult Coho Salmon In Streams Along West Coast Toxic runoff from highways, parking lots and other developed surfaces is killing many of the adult coho salmon in urban streams along the West Coast, according to a new study that for the first time documents the fatal connection between urban stormwater and salmon survival. The good news is that the same study published this month in the Journal of Applied Ecology http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2664.12534/abstract also found that inexpensive filtration of urban runoff through simple columns of sand and soil can completely prevent the toxic effects on fish. "Untreated urban runoff is very bad for salmon health," said Julann Spromberg, a research scientist at NOAA Fisheries' Northwest Fisheries Science Center in Seattle. "Our goal with this research is to find practical and inexpensive ways to improve water quality. The salmon are telling us if they work." Scientists have studied the impacts of urban stormwater on salmon most extensively around Puget Sound in Washington, where more than half of the coho returning to stormwater-dominated streams every year die before they can spawn. Coho salmon in California, Oregon and southwestern Washington are listed under the Endangered Species Act, and the loss of so many wild coho to toxic stormwater before they spawn could push them further toward extinction, the study finds. The filtration columns, similar to "rain gardens" gaining ground in the Northwest, are an example of emerging green stormwater infrastructure that should be integrated into future development and redevelopment to reverse the trend and help coho recover, the authors conclude. "If we can incorporate clean water design strategies into future growth, as some transportation projects are already doing, wild salmon might have a chance," said Nat Scholz, manager of the Ecotoxicology Program at the NWSFC in Seattle and a coauthor of the study. "They can't take the kinds of losses we've documented in urban streams." The study demonstrated that coho salmon are an ecological sentinel for the harmful effects of urban runoff. The study exposed adult coho from the Suquamish tribal hatchery in Poulsbo, Washington, to different degrees of polluted and clean water, including runoff from a busy urban highway in Seattle. All fish exposed to the highway runoff died within 24 hours. But after researchers filtered the water through a roughly three-foot-high soil column containing layers of gravel, sand, compost and bark, all the exposed coho survived as well as they did in clean water. Tests showed the filtration columns reduced toxic heavy metals by 58 percent and polyaromatic hydrocarbons, which are byproducts of gasoline combustion, by 94 percent. "What impressed me most was the effectiveness of the treatment," said Jen McIntyre, co-author and researcher at the stormwater program at WSU's Puyallup Research and Extension Center. "It's remarkable that we could take runoff that killed all of the adult coho in less than 24 hours - sometimes less than four hours - and render it non-toxic, even after putting several storms worth of water through the same soil mixture." The study also includes coauthors from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Suquamish Tribe. "Academic, governmental, and tribal scientists came together on this project," Spromberg said. "The participation of the Suquamish Tribe was particularly vital, as most hatcheries would be understandably wary of a small army of storm chasers, trucking large volumes of toxic runoff." In an unusual twist, scientists first tried unsuccessfully to create artificial stormwater by mixing up a brew of metals and components of crude oil known from urban runoff. However, the artificial stormwater did not have the fatal effects of the actual highway runoff, with the fish exposed to it surviving as well as they did in clean water. This suggests that the contents of urban runoff may include as-yet unknown toxins from exhaust, leaking oil and dust from brakes and tires as they wear. Researchers said it could take years of further testing and analysis to determine precisely what in the runoff is killing the coho. Previous research connected coho mortality rates to the amount of paved surface in a watershed, so the fatal ingredients appear linked to urban runoff and not household or agricultural pollutants such as pharmaceuticals or pesticides. "The recurring coho spawner deaths have been a high-profile mystery for many years, and we're now much closer to the cause," Scholz said. "Although we haven't identified a smoking gun, our study shows that toxic stormwater is killing coho, and that the problem can be addressed." The research was funded by Region 10 of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington Sea Grant, NOAA Coastal Storms Program and Puget Sound Regional Stormwater Monitoring Program. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Fri Oct 16 12:21:48 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2015 19:21:48 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Update Jweek 41 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C5912A1@057-SN2MPN1-043.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hi Folks, Please see attached for the Jweek 41 Trinity River trapping summary update. This week's update does not include information from the Trinity River Hatchery. The ladder is closed to fish entering the hatchery to help prevent interbreeding of fall and spring Chinook stocks. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW41.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 61913 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW41.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Sat Oct 17 08:14:19 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 15:14:19 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Bill Addresses Klamath Water Issues References: <2000420421.423354.1445094859948.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2000420421.423354.1445094859948.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://registerguard.com/rg/news/local/33613345-75/bill-addresses-klamath-water-issues.html.csp Bill Addresses Klamath Water IssuesBy Gerry O?BrienThe Herald and NewsOCT. 16, 2015 KLAMATH FALLS ? U.S. Congressman Greg Walden said he is close to drafting a bill in the House that will focus on resolving the water issues for the Klamath Basin.It will likely include the removal of the four dams that sit on the Klamath River and have been a source of dispute among parties who have not signed on to the water agreement.Walden has been adamant about not removing the dams, but has softened that stance in the last few years.In an interview with the Herald and News, Walden, a Republican from Hood River, said, ?Personally, I?m not a dam removal support guy. But the facts that have been agreed to (in the pact) require (dam removal) and there are really no alternatives unless you want to blow the whole agreement apart and give up on water certainty for agriculture and all the other components that go with the agreement.?The agreement is called the Klamath Water Recovery and Economic Restoration Act. It was hammered out by irrigators, the Klamath Tribes, environmental groups, state and local officials as a compromise to provide consistent water to farmers and ranchers, as well as keep enough water in Upper Klamath Lake and the Klamath River for protection of endangered fish species.Senate Bill 133 was introduced in January in the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, but has yet to move forward. It must pass the House and Senate and be signed by the president before it can become law. SB 133 was about to be heard in committee prior to the August recess, but more pressing energy matters took the stage.Now, Walden plans to sponsor a similar bill in the House, but he was not ready to talk specifics.?We?ve been working pretty aggressively in the last year reviewing all the issues surrounding the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement; the liability, sediment issues, dam removal, the whole thing,? he said. ?And, we?ve been working closely with the Tribes, the water users in the lower basin, PacifiCorp (the dam owners) and the state and governor?s office. So there?s a lot going on behind the scenes.?Once drafted, Walden said he wants to confer with the agreement parties before releasing it in the House.Once drafted, it will have to go before the House Natural Resources committee which includes California Republican congressmen Doug LaMalfa and Tom McClintock. In September at the Tulelake fair, LaMalfa said he remains adamantly opposed to dam removal. Three of the four dams are in his district.?I don?t know if LaMalfa will support my bill or not. I respect him and he?s a good man, but we may wind up in different places on this,? Walden said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Oct 19 12:42:41 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 19:42:41 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: [Trinity Releases] Change Order - Trinity River In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1626904568.23848.1445283761572.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Wednesday, October 14, 2015 9:21 AM, "Washburn, Thuy" wrote: | Date | Time | From (cfs) | To (cfs) | | | | | | | 10/16/2015 | 0200 | ? 450 | ? ?400 | | 10/17/2015 | 0200 | ? ? 400 | ? ? ? ?350 | | 10/18/2015 | 0200 | ? ? 350 | ? ? ? ?300 | Comment: ?Conserve StorageIssued by: ?Thuy Washburn-- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Oct 20 09:09:22 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 16:09:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Circle of Blue: Fish Screens Are Part of The Answer to Saving Sacramento River Salmon References: <1219709298.402436.1445357362703.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1219709298.402436.1445357362703.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.circleofblue.org/waternews/2015/world/fish-screens-are-part-of-the-answer-to-saving-sacramento-river-salmon/ Fish Screens Are Part of The Answer to Saving Sacramento River Salmon TUESDAY, 20 OCTOBER 2015 08:00 Out of social confrontation over water and fish in California comes a fish story worth telling.Photo ? Matt Black / Circle of BlueBureau of Reclamation Fisheries Biologist Zak Sutphin checks a fish trap set in the San Joaquin River near the town of Newman in California?s Central Valley. The trap, also known as a ?Fyke Net?, is used to catch salmon so they can be transported upstream by truck, bypassing obstacles, on their way to their historic spawning grounds near Fresno in the Sierra Nevada mountains.?Click image to enlarge.By Keith Schneider Circle of BlueMAXWELL, Ca. ??Before the founders of the?Family Water Alliance?began installing metal screens at the end of the big pipes that draw water from the Sacramento River to irrigate Colusa County?s rice and vegetable fields, seasonal salmon runs often included sizable helpings of fresh fish flopping in the brown dirt of farm furrows. The pumps that transported water were powerful enough to suck migrating fish into the pipes and toss them out the other end, typically startled and very much alive.Debra Lemburg, the project manager who has worked in the water alliance?s salmon fish screen program since 1999, said it is rare that salmon end up in the fields anymore. Her group raised over $US 13 million from state and federal wildlife agencies over the last two decades and installed 40 fish screens on the ends of irrigation water intake pipes on the Sacramento River and the Feather River, its principal tributary.?The lessons here are easy to explain. Farmers can pump water from the river. Fish are protected. They are not being killed.??Debra Lemburg, project manager Family Water AllianceHundreds more fish screens have been installed on northern California?s other salmon spawning rivers. The result is that in the struggle to sustain California?s imperiled chinook, coho, and steelhead fishery, hundreds of thousands of spawning adults, newly hatched fry, and migrating juveniles are not perishing in irrigation systems.??The lessons here are easy to explain,? said Lemburg in an interview with Circle of Blue. ?Farmers can pump water from the river. Fish are protected. They are not being killed.? Salmon In Trouble Drought, warming water, big dams that block spawning grounds, and contaminated runoff from cities and farmland are said by wildlife researchers to be the primary causes of salmon deaths in the Sacramento River. Installing fish barriers at the end of irrigation pipes, though, is a small, elegant, and not terribly expensive step to help prevent California?s salmon runs from disappearing.?How the fish screen program evolved also is an important story to tell in an era of environmental and social transition once marked by confrontation and, more recently in this region of California?s Central Valley, by acceptance and collaboration. The advent of salmon fish screens is a microcosm of the big adjustments that farmers, residents, and state authorities are making to elevate ecological principles to drive economic performance and?position California to thrive in the drier, harsher, and more challenging environmental conditions?of the 21st century.?Photo ? Keith Schneider / Circle of BlueDebra Lemburg, the project manager who has worked in the Family Water Alliance?s salmon fish screen program since 1999, said the group raised over $US 13 million from state and federal wildlife agencies over the last two decades and installed 40 fish screens on the ends of irrigation water intake pipes on the Sacramento River and the Feather River, its principal tributary. Here she displays the tiny vents in a conical screen being installed on the Sacramento River.?Click image to enlarge.As in all aspects of the contest for natural resources in a state that has twice as many people as it did in 1970 and is enduring the fourth straight year of severe drought, the confrontation between farmers and fish, and the program to install fish screens, required important changes in how this farm community considered its responsibilities to fish, water, and the law.??Put it in a package with a big bow on top,? explained Nadine Bailey, who joined the Family Water Alliance a year ago to be its chief operations officer. ?We had to change.?In 1973, California?s salmon runs on the Sacramento River were dwindling well below their historic levels. The big dams constructed after World War II on the headwaters of the Sacramento and other northern California rivers to store water and generate electricity impeded spawning fish. Irrigation pumps that killed salmon were also recognized as a factor. The salmon run was dying. That year, Congress approved the Endangered Species Act to provide powerful legal safeguards to prevent the extinction of species endangered as a ?consequence of economic growth and development.? Endangered Species Act In Play In the late 1980s, federal wildlife authorities formally declared the Sacramento River?s salmon endangered and threatened, and began to move aggressively to save the fish. By then, the influence of the endangered species law was profoundly clear.Put it in a package with a big bow on top. We had to change.??Nadine Bailey, chief operations officer Family Water AllianceFederal and state conservation agencies applied the law?s reach to recover populations of bald eagles, wolves, whales, falcons, and other animals heading to extinction. Federal jurists exhibited consistent allegiance to the act?s goals and issued stunning rulings to preserve wild habitat, prevent construction of big infrastructure installations, outlaw toxic chemical use, and take other actions that shut down development projects that put threatened or endangered animals at risk.?Federal and state authorities identified the water intake pipes and pumps of irrigation districts along the Sacramento River for improvement or removal. Many of the pump and pipe installations were constructed early in the 20th century in a way that attracted fish. Irrigation districts cut big sections and dug deep channels out of the river?s banks, allowing the water to form inlets large enough for their irrigation pipes. But the slack water in the inlets also proved irresistible resting places for fry and adult salmon seeking refuge from the river?s current. The systems sucked up unsuspecting fish, especially migrating juveniles.Photo ? Keith Schneider / Circle of BlueThe Family Water Alliance is completing its newest fish screen on the banks of the Sacramento upriver from Colusa. The excavation is large enough to easily swallow two or three big suburban homes.?Click image to enlarge.In 1991, near the conclusion of a widely watched federal court showdown between the government and Colusa County farmers, U.S. District Judge David Levi issued a preliminary injunction to bar the Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District, the largest consumer of pumped water on the west side of the Sacramento River, from taking river water from mid-July to November 30. The order was designed to protect the downstream migration of salmon. It also meant that the 70,820-hectare (175,000-acre) irrigation district?s water supply would drop 300,000 acre feet annually, or 40 percent of its total water consumption.?The court order, stunning in its sweep, cheered conservationists and businesses supported by California?s salmon sport and commercial fishing industry, then valued at nearly $US 1 billion annually. Farmers and food industry executives, along with many Colusa County residents, were aghast. They could not fathom how an environmental law could put the interests of a fish above the needs of people and farmers who fed the nation and the world. Colusa County, after all, raised more rice than any county in California and exported its crop globally.?Judge Levi?s ruling was later amended to reduce the district?s water supply from the river by 25 percent annually for three years, providing time to develop a solution. That still reduced the irrigation district?s water supply 200,000 acre feet annually ? an acre-foot is 1.2 million liters (326,000 gallons) ? and many farmers vowed to fight the government action. A Court Ruling, A Sound Response But Sue Sutton and Marion Mathis, the wives of two Colusa County farmers dependent on the Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District for water, decided that fighting the court ruling, and the powerful alliance of environmental, conservation, and government institutions that supported it, was a strategy that would not reopen the water tap. They founded the Family Water Alliance in 1991 to advocate pragmatic steps to respond directly to Judge Levi?s decision, steps that included installing screens to reduce fish mortality.Photo ? Keith Schneider / Circle of BlueRussell Berry III, and his son Russell Berry IV, serve as the principals of Intake Screens, Inc., a Sacramento-based manufacturer of salmon screens. The Berrys also are managing the construction and installation facets of the Family Water Alliance?s $US 400,000 project upriver from Colusa. The company reflects the capacity to develop new economic activity by calming social strife and advancing ecological principals.?Click image to enlarge.?That wasn?t the most popular answer around here. People wanted to fight,? said Nadine Bailey. ?A lot of people are still fighting. They want to change the Endangered Species Act. They want to amend it.??There are some things about the law that could use some work. But there are people out there, including our members, who say they aren?t going to waste their time fighting it. We?re going to figure out how to live within those constraints and find solutions. That?s how the fish screen program came about. People can see the results. We?re helping fish. We?re bringing back fish populations. That?s a good thing. It?s good for the farmers. It?s good for the people who make their livings from those fish as well.?In the southern regions of the Central Valley, some California farmers and farmworkers are rallying again this year to upend endangered species protections for salmon, the delta smelt, and several more threatened fish species that supporters assert are limiting water supplies for agriculture. California state water authorities are reserving the cold waters of California?s mountain reservoirs to support wildlife refuges and fish, and dramatically cutting supplies to farm irrigation districts. The ?Take Back Our Water? campaign, organized by California Water for Food and People, has attracted the interest of Sean Hannity, the Fox News host. A rally in Sacramento is planned for January.?Here in Maxwell, a small byway of 1,100 residents surrounded by fields of harvested rice and orchards of walnuts and almonds awaiting harvest, Bailey and her two other staff colleagues at the Family Water Alliance watch the protest campaign in the South develop. They see it as an expression of social frustration and legal futility.?Meanwhile, the alliance is completing its newest fish screen on the banks of the Sacramento upriver from Colusa. The stainless steel screen, in the shape of a shiny grated funnel, lies on its wide mouth alongside an excavation large enough to easily swallow two or three big suburban homes.?Photo ? Keith Schneider / Circle of Blue?That wasn?t the most popular answer around here. People wanted to fight,? said Nadine Bailey, chief operations officer of the Family Water Alliance, describing community sentiment about the Endangered Species Act. ?But there are people out there, including our members, who say they aren?t going to waste their time fighting it. We?re going to figure out how to live within those constraints and find solutions. That?s how the fish screen program came about.??Click image to enlarge.The screen was fabricated in Sacramento by Intake Screens, Inc., where Russell Berry III, and his son Russell Berry IV, serve as the principals. The Berrys also are managing the construction and installation facets of the $US 400,000 project. In an interview, the two explain that their screens are being bought and installed all over the West and the Midwest to respond to the requirements of the Endangered Species Act.?Intake Screens has built a solid business by protecting fish, they say. The company also reflects one more facet of this evolving story: the capacity to develop new economic activity by calming social strife and advancing ecological principals. That?s a fish story worth telling. Share this article: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From derek_rupert at fws.gov Tue Oct 20 09:19:14 2015 From: derek_rupert at fws.gov (Rupert, Derek) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 09:19:14 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Mainstem Trinity River spawn survey update for October 16, 2015 Message-ID: Hello All, The US Fish and Wildlife Service along with the Yurok Tribe, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Forest Service, and Hoopa Valley Tribe have another weekly update for our Trinity River mainstem spawn survey posted on the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Fisheries webpage. Trinity River spawn Survey update October 16, 2015. ? This week our crews mapped 373 redds (1003 total for the year) in the Reaches from Lewiston Dam to Pigeon Point, and Big Flat to Cedar Flat. The graph below is clipped from our weekly report (limited to the river upstream of Cedar Flat). ? I will be adding a new section with photos from the field to the weekly report. My hope is that these images will add insight and appreciation for our amazing salmon runs. Check out the photograph of fisheries technician, Chris Laskodi, marking salmon redds in a small side-channel near Junction City. Cheers, Derek -- Derek Rupert Fish Biologist US Fish and Wildlife Service Weaverville, CA Office 530.623.1805 Cell 570.419.2823 Derek_Rupert at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WeeklyGraphicSmall.png Type: image/png Size: 9675 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Oct 21 09:49:31 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 16:49:31 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: [Trinity Releases] Change Order - Trinity River In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <225797028.1094200.1445446171882.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 9:47 AM, "Washburn, Thuy" wrote: | Date | Time | From (cfs) | ? To (cfs) | | | | | | | 10/22/2015 ? | 0600 | ? ? 350 | ? ??300 | Comment: ?Conserve StorageIssued by: ?Thuy Washburn--? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Oct 21 15:39:30 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 22:39:30 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: TRRP Watershed Pre-Proposals Due November 20th In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <198789346.846934.1445467170553.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 3:25 PM, Sean Ledwin wrote: Dear Prospective Applicants, The Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) Watershed Workgroup is soliciting pre-proposals for the FY16 watershed program.? Projects must be within the watersheds/tributaries of the Trinity River between Lewiston Dam and the confluence of the Klamath River at Weitchpec.? Pre-proposals are due November 20th.? The watershed workgroup has identified two priority areas: reduction of fine sediment and improvement of fish habitat connectivity.? Projects focused on fine sediment should accelerate ongoing efforts to reduce fine sedimentloading by trapping and/or removing sedimentsthrough project through implementation in tributary watersheds, floodplains, riparian areas, and associated wetlands.Anticipated project types include roaddecommissioning, road treatment, upland erosion and sediment control, increasinginstream roughness (large wood augmentation), improved sediment storage andretention on floodplains, and streambank treatment.? Projects focused on fish habitat connectivity should improve orenhance habitat connectivity (longitudinal as well as lateral) between fishhabitats through project implementation in tributary channels, floodplains, riparian areas, and associated wetlands.?This is anticipated to be accomplishedprimarily through the enhancement of fish passage through manmade or artificialbarriers (partial and full) but will also be accomplished by other means deemedappropriate (e.g. by improving floodplain connectivity and instream poolfrequency/depth or improving? instreamflow to connect fish habitats in managed tributaries). While it is expectedthat most of the projects will be dedicated to on the ground implementation,applications may include project design and planning, research, monitoring to establish baselines, and monitoring to assess project effectiveness.??Please let me know if you have any questions.? A full proposal process will commence shortly after the pre-proposal process has ended.? For more details on TRRP programs, please see http://www.trrp.net/. Sean -- Sean LedwinHabitat Division LeadHoopa Tribal Fisheries 530-625-4451 x 14 hvtsean at gmail.com? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Watershed Pre-proposal Template_FY16.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 16406 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Oct 23 09:39:20 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 16:39:20 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Dan Walters: A new law stops gold dredging References: <876200118.2435715.1445618360522.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <876200118.2435715.1445618360522.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/dan-walters/article41018163.html?OCTOBER 22, 2015Dan Walters: A new law stops gold dredgingDiscovery of gold made California what it isA few thousand miners kept the 49er spirit aliveA new law puts them out of business BY DAN WALTERSdwalters at sacbee.com California is what it is ? a diverse and economically and culturally potent society ? largely because gold was discovered in the American River in 1848.It drew thousands from every corner of the globe, establishing it as a magnet for those with ambition and drive that is still powerful.It jump-started an innovative and diverse economy, led to our very rapid ? perhaps premature ? admission as a state, and sparked construction of the transcontinental railroad that gave cohesion to the still-young nation.A personal note: One 49er was my cousin, Hugh Glenn, who left behind his St. Louis medical practice and eventually became the ?wheat king? of California and the 1880 Democratic candidate for governor. Glenn County carries his name.Gold is, of course, no longer even a minor factor in California?s economy. But for decades, the 49er spirit has survived in a few thousand semi-professional hobbyists who have used small suction dredges to gather gold-bearing gravel from streams.After years of political and legal sparring, however, these weekend miners are being suppressed by new legislation, enacted at the behest of the Sierra Fund and other environmental groups that contend dredging stirs up pockets of toxic mercury left by gold extraction many decades ago.The miners say what they do is an infinitesimal fraction of what water flows do naturally and that they actually remove mercury from the streams.The Reno-based Western Mining Alliance had been fairly successful in judicial challenges to previous efforts to impose a moratorium on suction dredging, contending that federal law allowing it pre-empted state action. However, the state won the right to regulate dredging, if not ban it outright.Senate Bill 637, carried by Sen. Ben Allen, D-Santa Monica, shifts that power to the State Water Resources Control Board, which has quickly notified dredgers that they cannot operate without a series of permits that everyone agrees will be impossible to obtain.SB 637 will ?kill off an entire recreational activity,? Assemblyman Frank Bigelow, R-O?Neals, complained on the Assembly floor before its 44-24 passage, calling it ?an assault on the lifestyle of rural Californians.??I don?t know what our next step will be,? says Craig Lindsey, who heads the miners? alliance, adding that it lacks the financial wherewithal to pursue more litigation.The Nevada City-based Sierra Fund, meanwhile, is jubilant, calling the bill ?a great victory for all of us concerned about clean water and healthy fisheries.?Ironically, however, the Sierra Fund may become a gold miner itself. It is ?exploring the marketing potential of metals obtained in the restoration of the environment, in an effort to recapture the costs of remediation, and fund future restoration projects.?The newly displaced suction dredgers claim that the Sierra Fund?s sponsorship of SB 637 was merely eliminating its competition ? a charge that the group rejects.Dan Walters: 916-321-1195, dwalters at sacbee.com, @WaltersBeereprints -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Oct 23 09:47:49 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 16:47:49 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] East Bay Express: Damning California's Future References: <872127455.423104.1445618869951.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <872127455.423104.1445618869951.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/damning-californias-future/Content?oid=4544982&showFullText=true Damning California's Future? Hoping to capitalize on the epic drought, the state's water industry wants to usher in a new era of dam-building in the state. But environmentalists say it would cost billions and do more harm than good. By?Will ParrishBERT JOHNSONProponents contend that dam-building will create "a new era of abundance." But critics argue that dams, such as Los Vaqueros in Contra Costa County, are environmentally destructive and too expensive.On the edge of the Yolla Bolly Wilderness, about 15 miles north of the dusty town of Covelo, 81-year-old Richard Wilson sat across from me in a ranch house that his father constructed here in the 1940s. For much of his adult life, Wilson has defended the meaning and importance of the Round Valley area of Mendocino County and the values that he and other local people attach to it. So while the ostensible purpose of my visit was to discuss Wilson's unique personal role in shaping California's water engineering history, it was no surprise that he also held forth on the local impacts of the four-year-long drought."When we get good, wet winters, the snow packs down on the mountaintops at about 4,000 feet, then holds there into the summer," explained Wilson in his spare and relaxed style. "As the snow melts, it keeps the grass growing, and that's how you know where to find your cattle. In the last four years, there's just been no snow."Wilson's expansive spread, known as Buck Mountain Ranch, spans a portion of the state's third largest watershed: the Eel River. Few places in California are more remote from urban life than Round Valley, but the watershed and Wilson are central to understanding why Governor Jerry Brown and other powerful interests are avidly pursuing several multibillion-dollar dam projects and two massive water tunnels that are strikingly similar to plans laid out in economic and engineering charts in California in the early-1950s.In 1960, state voters narrowly approved the California Water Project, which is still the largest bond issue in the state's history when accounting for inflation. (It cost $14.31 billion in today's dollars.) By the end of the Sixties, the water project had blocked the Feather River in the Sierra foothills with what was then the world's tallest dam, the Oroville Dam. The bond had paid for giant pumping stations in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to move water into canals that parallel Interstate 5 through the San Joaquin Valley, via the 444-mile-long California Aqueduct.But the State Water Project has never fully been built, and Richard Wilson is a major reason why. In 1967, the US Army Corps of Engineers unveiled a proposal to construct the largest dam and reservoir project in California history: the so-called "Dos Rios Dam" on the Middle Fork of the Eel River. In addition to being 742 feet tall, the dam would have flooded a 40,000-acre area for its reservoir, equal in surface area to the Shasta and Oroville reservoirs combined. These liquid resources would have then passed through thirty miles of ditches and tunnels in the Mendocino National Forest and into a smaller reservoir on the west side of the Sacramento Valley.For California's water industry, the Dos Rios Dam was the key project that would unlock a host of others. Having completed a series of mega-water projects throughout the mid 20th century, state and federal water developers had long trained their sights on California's North Coast, where about one-third of the state's surface water flows mostly unimpeded to the ocean through magnificent mountain ranges and redwood groves. Besides for the Eel, the US Congress had authorized feasibility studies for dams and reservoirs on the Klamath, the Lower Trinity, the Mad, and the Van Duzen rivers.The Dos Rios reservoir would have flooded Round Valley, a 24-square-mile alluvial basin that is home to one of California's largest Native American reservations, and which, in the late Sixties, had a population of about 1,500. Wilson and his wife, Susan, who then lived in Round Valley with their three children, mounted an opposition campaign. Although both Susan and Richard came from well-connected Republican families, they were up against interests whose power was roughly equivalent to that of the coal industry in Kentucky ? or so it seemed.click to enlarge - Dorothy Wood - Richard Wilson helped bring an end to California's last dam-building era. Wilson's fireplace mantle displays memorabilia from his unique civic life, including a picture of him shaking hands with former California Governor Pete Wilson, under whom he served as director of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection in the 1990s. An autographed picture of former US president Richard Nixon occupies a slot nearby. But the largest item is located on the mantle's far left: a California Department of Water Resources map depicting the state's northern coastal rivers almost entirely submerged by reservoirs and blocked by dams. The big, bold header screams in red lettering: "We Can't Let This Happen!"By 1969, the opponents of Dos Rios Dam had rallied enough support in Sacramento that then-Governor Ronald Reagan declined to support the project. The environmental movement had spawned mainstream acceptance of the idea that rivers are vital natural ecosystems that should be protected, and that dams erected to divert water for agriculture, cities, and suburbs had pushed numerous fish species to the brink of extinction."The thing about Dos Rios was: It was really a project that was out of step with the times because I think we were moving on to other ways of looking at water," Wilson said.The victory over the dam marked a stunning defeat for California's water industry. And it had a cascade of consequences. In 1972, the state legislature passed the California Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, which prohibited construction of new dams on the Smith, Klamath, Scott, Salmon, Trinity, Eel, Van Duzen, and American rivers.Though dam proponents subsequently retreated from the North Coast, their dream of capturing large new water sources to fuel an everlasting cycle of growth and development has never fully faded. And California's epic four-year drought, characterized by reservoirs that sport bathtub rings where water once was, has given them perhaps their last best chance to launch a new era of dam-building in California.Advocates of other approaches to meeting the state's water needs point out that the new dams would cost California taxpayers billions of dollars, while doing astonishingly little to relieve the state's water woes. They also noted that the dams would lead to further destruction of fragile watersheds, the decimation of fisheries, and the ruination of Native people's cultures and sacred sites. And some caution that they could pave the way for a renewed effort to drain the North Coast.Inside Proposition 1, the $7.5 billion water bond that California voters enthusiastically approved last November, is a provision requiring the expenditure of $2.7 billion on water storage projects. Many environmentalists had hoped that a substantial amount of those funds would be used for groundwater storage, but according to some close observers, it appears increasingly likely that most, if not all, of the money will go to dam-building. In addition, US Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, both D-California, introduced a $1.3 billion emergency drought relief bill in July of this year to "support communities affected by drought."This senate bill, as presently drafted, would authorize $600 million of spending on "Calfed storage projects," in reference to four dam-expansion and construction projects that the state and federal governments have studied since 2004: Sites, Temperance Flat, Shasta, and Los Vaqueros. The first three of these projects are in various parts of the vast Central Valley, while Los Vaqueros is located in eastern Contra Costa County.Feinstein, a former longtime chair of the Senate subcommittee that funds the US Bureau of Reclamation, has been a key player in advancing the dam proposals. "Building or expanding these four reservoirs would result in hundreds of thousands of acre-feet of additional water storage, benefit urban and rural communities and increase the pool of water available for releases that benefit fish species," she wrote in a 2013?San Francisco Chronicle?op-ed.Of the four projects, the most costly would be Sites Reservoir. With an estimated pricetag of about $3.9 billion, the project calls for the construction of two large dams, each about 310 feet tall, on the Sacramento River. Engineers plans to pump the water through the Tehama-Colusa and Glenn-Colusa canals, as well as a third canal built specifically for the project that would originate north of Colusa, to an off-stream storage reservoir that would flood the Antelope Valley, located just east of Mendocino National Forest, about 10 miles west of the small town of Maxwell on Interstate 5.The Temperance Flat project calls for building a 665-foot-tall dam on the Upper San Joaquin River in the southern Sierra foothills, northeast of Fresno. The proposed dam would flood scenic canyons and historic sites along the river. It would be the second tallest dam in California, and the fifth tallest in the United States (it would be about 63 feet higher than Shasta Dam). In February, Congressmember Jim Costa, D-Fresno, introduced a bill to authorize construction of the dam ? which is projected to cost as much as $3.36 billion.click to enlarge - John Mabanglo/EPA - Dam proponents hope to take advantage of the current drought to increase the size of Shasta Lake. But environmentalists note that there is not much water available to fill up a larger reservoir. And then there's the proposal to expand Shasta Lake by raising Shasta Dam by up to 18.5 feet, at an estimated cost of $1.2 billion. The reservoir expansion would flood thousands of additional acres of the Trinity-Shasta National Forest and innumerable sacred sites of the Winnemem Wintu people. It would add 300,000 acre-feet of storage capacity to what is already California's largest reservoir, with an existing capacity of 4.55 million acre-feet. And finally, the proposed expansion of Los Vaqueros dam in Contra Costa County would add 115,000 acre feet of water storage capacity and cost an estimated $840 million.Earlier this month, US Senator Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, chair of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, held a long-awaited legislative hearing on both Feinstein's bill and drought-relief legislation produced by the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, along with several other bills dealing with Western water issues. Congressmember Kevin McCarthy, R-Bakersfield, the House majority leader, has been instrumental in advancing the new dam proposals.Meanwhile, the California State Water Commission, the nine-member committee appointed by the governor that will rule on allocation of the Prop 1 bond money, has held meetings this month to craft guidelines for handing out the water storage money. The commission is expected to announce the guidelines next month and to allocate the funds sometime in 2017.Some legislators have seized on the dam projects and attempted to stamp them as the start of a new era. In the mid-1990s, then-Congressmember John Doolittle, D-California, repeatedly said that the proposed construction of the Auburn Dam on the American River would "inaugurate a great new era of dam-building." (The dam was defeated largely on environmental grounds.) A new stock phrase, courtesy of Congressmember Tom McClintock, R-Roseville, is that the new reservoir projects subject to Proposition 1 and Congressional funding will help "to build a new era of abundance."But opponents of the projects point out that California is already home to nearly 1,600 dams, plus thousands more of mostly small, privately owned ones. All together, more than 60 percent of the state's water fills up behind concrete and earthen walls. With California largely leading the way, in fact, the American West as a whole was transformed during the last century into a region of dams and canals.Critics of the current dam-building plans note that they are extremely costly compared to the amount of water that they would yield. Despite the fact that the projects would add lots of capacity to store water in the state, they would likely only yield, on average, about 400,000 acre-feet of additional water per year for California because of the lack of water available ? and would cost taxpayers about $9.75 billion to construct, according to an analysis by the environmental group Friends of the River. "[M]ost of the water that would fill these dams is already being diverted," explained Ronald Stork, senior policy advocate for Friends of the River. "For example, Temperance Flat would be built on a river, the San Joaquin, that's already bone dry most of the time because its water is so over-allocated."By contrast, according to an analysis by the California Department of Water Resources, water-saving techniques ? such as wastewater reuse, stormwater capture, and groundwater cleanup ? have yielded the state nearly 2 million acre-feet of water per year at the far lower cost of $5.13 billion.The view that dams are too costly was bolstered in 2014 by the release of an Oxford University study. Researchers looked at 245 large dams built between 1934 and 2007 and found that actual construction costs were, on average, nearly double the projected costs, and that construction took 44 percent longer than forecast. "Forecasts of costs of large dams today are likely to be as wrong as they were between 1934 and 2007," the study concluded.click to enlarge - Bureau of Land Management - The Temperance Flat dam project is highly controversial because it would flood thousands of acres of public land in the San Joaquin River Gorge. California's enormous and elaborate water infrastructure ? dams, reservoirs, power plants, pumping plants, canals, aqueducts, gates, tunnels, and other machinations plumbed together across more than six hundred miles ? is divided into numerous management regimes. The largest of these is the Central Valley Project, which is administered by the US Bureau of Reclamation and has the capacity to deliver more than 7 million acre-feet of water a year, using Shasta Dam as its linchpin.The November 1960 water bond that authorized the State Water Project (SWP) passed by the narrowest of margins: less than one percentage point. Key to the measure's victory was the influential Los Angeles-based Metropolitan Water District, a consortium of 14 cities and 12 municipal water districts that provides water to 18 million people in Southern California. The district only supported the bond measure after the California Department of Water Resources agreed to give it nearly half of the project's estimated annual yield of 4.23 million acre-feet of water.Other entities that signed contracts to receive SWP water included the Kern County Water Agency and San Luis Delta-Mendota Water Authority, both of which represent large agricultural interests in the dry San Joaquin Valley."But today, the State Water Project yields only half the water promised to these entities, or about 2.2 million acre feet. "In the old planners' minds, the SWP is only half-built," said Stork. "The question is, Where's the missing yield? And one answer would probably be Richard Wilson's answer, which is that the Department of Water Resources sought to turn the Eel River from a wild river into a series of reservoirs but failed."One month after the State Water Project's narrow approval in 1960, the California Department of Water Resources released a blueprint for future water development entitled "Delta Water Facilities," which describes the operation of the San Luis Reservoir, Oroville Reservoir, and the pumps in the southern section of the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta that move water from north to south. The bulletin encourages construction of 2 million acre-feet of reservoir capacity on the Eel River by 1981. The bulletin also anticipated the completion of new dams on the Mad, Van Duzen, and Klamath rivers by 2012."I can't emphasize enough that it's all laid out in Bulletin 76," said Michael Jackson, a prominent water rights attorney.The central feature of California's existing water system is the delta, the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas. The delta is also a pivotal transportation bottleneck that hinders water development: Pumping too much freshwater from it increases the salinity of the remaining water, thereby causing devastating harm to the aquatic life in the estuary and diminishing the quality of water shipped to millions of Californians.Since the 1970s, a defining question for California water planners has been whether the delta would be unblocked to permit more water to flow from north to south, or whether there would be a paradigm shift in water policy, as suggested by the water industry's defeat at Dos Rios. The idea of building peripheral canals around the delta became the solution for delivering new water to the irrigated farms of the west side of the San Joaquin Valley and to the Metropolitan Water District.In the early-Eighties, Jerry Brown, during his first stint as governor, and the legislature sought to deliver new water to these interests by proposing a peripheral canal. Despite being dressed up with fish ladders and screens and assurances that North Coast rivers were not the target of such a facility, the Peripheral Canal was defeated in a 1982 statewide referendum. It was the second crushing rebuke of California's water industry, with the first being at Dos Rios.But Big Ag in California still thirsts for more water. Los Angeles, for instance, uses about 600,000 acre-feet of water annually, while Kern County, at the southern end of the San Joaquin Valley, consumes more than four times as much ? about 2.7 million acre-feet in a typical year.In recent years, the state's water industry, with Brown's ardent backing, has resurrected the old peripheral canal concept as the Delta Twin Tunnels, with the same essential features. These 40-foot-diameter water pipelines would tap into the Sacramento River upstream of the delta. And, as Stork noted, "With the tunnels project back on the table, some of the firebrands are turning up heat on undoing protections for North Coast rivers."In July 2013, the agribusiness-dominated Tulare County Board of Supervisors made known its ongoing desire to tap the northern coastal rivers. "The continued over-drafted groundwater basins of the Central Valley are also a very serious threat to the economic future of California agriculture, and the Central Valley is in dire need of the development and importation of more surface water to eliminate mining groundwater," the board wrote in a statement. "The legislature should revisit Wild and Scenic Rivers status of the North Coast waters, where nearly one-third of California's water supply flows to the ocean, when there is such a demonstrated need to put available resources to their highest and best use."One conservative ideologue who bemoans the failure to tap California's northern coastal waterways is Victor Davis Hanson, a senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution ? an influential right-wing think tank. Writing in the urban-policy magazine?City Journal?earlier this year, Hanson stated, "Had the gigantic Klamath River diversion project not been canceled in the 1970s, the resulting Aw Paw reservoir would have been the state's largest man-made reservoir. At two-thirds the size of Lake Mead, it might have stored 15 million acre-feet of water, enough to supply San Francisco for 30 years."Stork sees the recent resurrection of these ideas as part of a broader strategy by south-of-Delta water interests. "From their perspective, you have to find a way to put water into the delta pumps. To do that, you have to build the tunnels. Then, you can put a little more in by raising Shasta and a bit more by constructing Sites or Temperance Flat. But the really juicy parts come from attacking North Coast rivers."Sites Reservoir is perhaps the most likely of California's four prospective new dam projects to receive state and federal funding. As Bill Kier, the former water projects branch chief of California Department of Fish and Wildlife, noted, Sites is "a reincarnation" of a facility described in Department of Water Resources Bulletin 76, known as the Paskenta-Newville reservoir in Glenn County. That reservoir's original function was to receive water diverted from the Dos Rios Reservoir, serving as a forebay to regulate the rate at which diverted Eel River water would flow into the Sacramento."When the North Coast rivers ? the Eel and others ? were given protection under the State and federal Wild and Scenic River systems in the 1970s, it was game over for Paskenta-Newville," Kier said. "Well, Sites Reservoir is just Paskenta-Newville migrated about seventeen miles south-southeast from Glenn into Colusa County."Stork, who is a member of the California Water Commission's Stakeholder Advisory Committee, says the competition for the Prop 1 funding appears to be "a shoot-out between the two new reservoirs" ? Sites and Temperance Flat. Tensions concerning each dam are ratcheting up in their respective areas. Earlier this year, two Bureau of Reclamation attorneys visited the homes of residents in the town of Auberry and informed them that, should Temperance Flat Dam be constructed, the government would be taking the family's property via eminent domain.click to enlarge - California Department of Fish and Wildlife - The Sites dam project would divert more water from the Sacramento River, which environmentalists note is already over-allocated. Temperance Flat is highly controversial because it would flood thousands of acres of public land in the San Joaquin River Gorge, where scenic canyons and historic sites are located. Meanwhile, an effort to promote Sites Reservoir is simultaneously ramping up in Butte and Colusa counties. On September 22, state Senator Jim Nielsen, Assemblymember James Gallagher, and Congressmember Doug LaMalfa ? all Republicans ? convened an event that they dubbed the North State Water Action Forum, where they encouraged attendees to flood the state water commission with comments supporting the project. But Barbara Vlamis, executive director of AquaAlliance in Chico, said the reservoir "does not have slam-dunk support up here." She said the forum's two hundred attendees were roughly divided among those in favor, against, and undecided.Environmentalists also note that neither Sites nor Temperance Flat pencils out in terms of the costs to construct them and the amount of water they would yield. Sites Reservoir, for example, would be filled via the Sacramento River, and proponents of the project believe it would solve a problem of too much water racing down the Sacramento River during high flows. So they propose a "Big Gulp, Tiny Sips" approach in which Sites the would be filled by big gulps during wet years and tiny sips the rest of the time.But the reservoir, according to Kier, also would be "an evaporation pan" on account of its hot, dry location and shallow size. And, he said, it's "unclear whether there is sufficient water remaining in the Sacramento River even to fill the proposed Sites Reservoir, or whether it would require raising Shasta Dam and increasing the capacity of Shasta Reservoir to make the Sites scheme work."According to the state and federal Pacific Salmon Plan for the Sacramento River, the river's flow past the city of Sacramento to San Francisco Bay must be 30,000 cubic-feet per second in order to provide safe downstream passage for juvenile fall-run chinook salmon ? the backbone of California's salmon fisheries ? thereby allowing enough juvenile salmon migration to reach the Pacific Ocean's rearing grounds to ensure the subsequent levels of returning adults that the plan calls for (122,000?180,000). The State Water Board has yet to make these flow levels mandatory, however."If the water agencies choose to ignore those delta through-flow needs in the development of projects like Sites Reservoir or raising Shasta Dam, then California's salmon fisheries are doomed, together with the communities, economies, and cultures that they support," Kier said.When Shasta Dam was constructed in the 1940s, it flooded roughly 90 percent of the Winnemem Wintu's traditional territory and eliminated the chinook salmon runs that are the Winnemem's source of life. In exchange for appropriating the Winnemem's land, the federal government promised to compensate the tribe ? but never did.Now, raising the dam would flood many of the Winnemem's remaining cultural strongholds. On August 12, 2014, Winnemem Wintu Chief Caleen Sisk delivered that message to the United Nations' 85th Session of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. Sisk was one of five indigenous leaders from North America selected to present to the committee, which was investigating the United States' record of compliance with the Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.Sisk has noted that the US government's refusal to recognize the Winnemem prevents the tribe from having enough political standing to take on the federal government in court. In a conversation with me last year, she referred to the twin tunnels plan and associated projects under the catch-all term "Brown Water Planning," in reference to California's governor."This water plan is one big toilet," she said at the time. "Shasta Dam is the tank. The San Francisco Bay Estuary is the bowl. And the tunnels are the exit pipes, one of which goes right to Westlands Water District to provide for their selenium-laden, poisoned crops."In spite of the lack of official recognition, the Winnemem have mounted a campaign to oppose the dam's construction and cultivated alliances throughout the world. In 2003, when Feinstein introduced legislation to fast-track feasibility studies related to expanding California's water storage capacity, including the raising of Shasta Dam, the Winnemem responded by holding a traditional war dance, the first by their people since 1887. Asserting that Shasta Dam is a Weapon of Mass Destruction that has caused great harm to the Winnemem culture, she chose September 11, 2004 as the date of the ceremony.As the war dance was about to begin, the Winnemem people got word that then-US Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell, R-Colorado, was preparing to introduce legislation to restore their federal tribal recognition ? something they had long sought. The Winnemem were asked to cancel or postpone the war dance, to avoid attracting negative attention or arousing the wrath of politicians who favored raising the dam. But political compromise could not interfere with their spiritual beliefs, and the war dance went on.click to enlarge - Bert Johnson - The Los Vaqueros project calls for raising the height of the dam in order to create a larger reservoir. During the dance, Feinstein and Boxer presided over the passage of legislation that funded $395 million in studies on increasing California's water storage infrastructure, including raising Shasta Dam. On the fourth day of the dance, word came that Campbell was going to remove the language recognizing the Winnemem from his proposed amendment. But the Winnemem people completed their dance and it was reported in media around the world, including in?The New York Times.While the McCloud River, which drains into Shasta Lake, is not included in the California State Wild and Scenic River System, it is protected from further dam construction in the Wild and Scenic River section of the California Public Resources Code. Therefore, the plan to raise Shasta Dam is ineligible to receive state funding unless the state legislature removes the wild and scenic designation on the McCloud. If that were to happen, it would set a precedent: neither the state nor federal government has ever removed a wild and scenic designation on a river.In recent years, though, two of the most powerful water districts in the state ? Westlands Water District and Metropolitan Water District ? have been pushing to remove this protection from the McCloud. And Westlands is a notoriously influential donor to state and federal politicians, including Feinstein.But environmentalists note that raising Shasta Dam, like the Sites and Temperance Flat projects, would cost far more than it's worth. At $1.3 billion, it would provide no more than 133,000 acre-feet of additional water, on average, each year ? because of the lack of water available to fill the expanded reservoir. The Bureau of Reclamation even points to this problem in the feasibility study it released for the dam project.For the residents of Round Valley, the success of their campaign in the 1960s and '70s powerfully affirmed the meaning and importance of the place where they lived and the values they attached to it. In an era marked by liberation movements of Blacks, Latinos, and American Indians, Round Valley's indigenous people proved to be a potent force.The Round Valley Indian Reservation, one of four California reservations that the federal government had established in the mid-19th century, was not only home to Round Valley's original inhabitants, the Yuki, but also indigenous people from throughout Northern California whose grandparents and great grandparents had been force-marched onto the reservation by the US Army and American vigilantes.Ernie Merrifield, 74, is a Round Valley Indian of mixed Wailaki and Pit River ancestry and was among several spokespeople to emerge in the campaign against Dos Rios. "Richard Wilson was the first to stand up against the dam," recalled Merrifield, who has taught California Indian history at Humboldt State University and in public high schools. "In the end, we had elders going on television and saying, 'We were force-marched here, and we're not about to be forced to leave."Merrifield added a cautionary note. "My elders told me this fight will never really be over," he said.By the time I met Wilson, in late-September, the hills around Buck Mountain Ranch were a golden hue after weathering months of unending sunlight beating down out of cloudless skies. More than half the needles on many of the drought-stricken ponderosa pines and Douglas firs surrounding his ranch had died under the strain. As with so many landowners in California, he said it's the driest he's ever seen.Nowadays, Wilson is mostly withdrawn from the day-to-day battles that characterize the world of California water politics. As a former director of Cal Fire, one of his main focuses is management of forests to reduce fuel loads. For several weeks this summer, Mendocino County and surrounding environs were blanketed with ash from wildfires that consumed roughly 150,000 acres in neighboring Lake County.Seated beneath his mantlepiece, Wilson recalled the period after Ronald Reagan had decided against supporting the Dos Rios Dam when he worked for the passage of the California Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. "The way these developers do things is, if they get derailed, they come right back," he said. "They will continually come back as long as they see there's an opportunity. So, we tried to get it nailed down with as much protection as we could. It took us a couple of years running at the legislature to get [the Wild & Scenic Rivers] decision, but we finally did."? Corrections: The original version of this story misspelled Yolla Bolly Wilderness. It also mistakenly stated that the Westlands Water District has a contract to receive water from the State Water Project. Westlands is actually a contractor of the federally operated Central Valley Project.Contact?the author of this piece,?send?a letter to the editor,?like?us on Facebook, or?follow?us on Twitter. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Fri Oct 23 10:11:38 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 10:11:38 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] EGN Contributor Dan Bacher's Reporting on Illegal Dumping of Fracking Wastewater is Project Censored's #2 Story In-Reply-To: <876200118.2435715.1445618360522.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <876200118.2435715.1445618360522.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <876200118.2435715.1445618360522.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <371BF42C-01E2-4896-BC17-58C8BAAD765D@fishsniffer.com> Good Morning Special thanks go to Dan Gougherty of elkgrovenews.net for writing this very nice story about Project Censored's #2 Story. Following the articles are the links to the coverage of the Project Censored Top 10 by the East Bay Express and Reno News and Review and a link to the Project Censored website. I've also attached the two stories about fracking wastewater and Big Oil Money and Power that were cited by Project Censored. Thanks Dan http://www.elkgrovenews.net/2015/10/egn-contributor-dan-bachers-reporting.html EGN Contributor Dan Bacher's Reporting on Illegal Dumping of Fracking Wastewater is Project Censored's #2 Story of 2015 Written By EGN on Sunday, October 18, 2015 | 10:00 October 18, 2015 | If being censored by corporate mainstream media were a badge of honor, Elk Grove News contributor and Fish Sniffer managing editor Dan Bacher would be highly decorated. According to ProjectCensored.org, Bacher's 2014 story on the oil industry's illegal dumping of waste water into Central California's aquifers was the second most significant story not covered by mainstream media outlets. In their summary Project Censored noted "In May 2015, the Los Angeles Times ran a front-page feature on Central Valley crops irrigated with treated oil field water; however, the Los Angeles Times report made no mention of the Center for Biological Diversity?s findings regarding fracking wastewater contamination." In addition, months earlier Bacher also reported on the cozy relationship between big oil and California state legislatures who received over $63 million to persuade them to continue fracking in the state. Connecting the dots, Bacher and Danny Shaw of Maplight.org documented that California state "senators who voted against the moratorium [SB 1132] received fourteen times more money in campaign contributions from the oil industry than those who voted for it. Congratulations to Bacher for his tenacity in reporting on this important matter that the mainstream media has ignored. The entire list of the top 25 censored stories can be viewed here. 2. Coverage of Project Censored Top 10 Stories: http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/censored-ten-big-stories-the-news-media-ignored/Content?oid=4536284 https://www.newsreview.com/reno/censored-ten-big-stories/content?oid=18830959 http://www.projectcensored.org/oil-industry-illegally-dumps-fracking-wastewater/ 3. Dan Bacher, ?Massive Dumping of Wastewater into Aquifers Shows Big Oil?s Power in California,? IndyBay, October 11, 2014, http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2014/10/11/18762739.php . The illegal dumping took place in a state where Big Oil is the most powerful corporate lobby and the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) is the most powerful corporate lobbying organization, alarming facts that the majority of the public and even many environmental activists are not aware of. An analysis of reports filed with the California Secretary of State shows that the oil industry collectively spent over $63 million lobbying California policymakers between January 1, 2009 and June 30, 2014. stop_fracking.jpg Massive dumping of wastewater into aquifers shows Big Oil's power in California Oil industry illegally injected nearly 3 billion gallons of wastewater by Dan Bacher As the oil industry spent record amounts on lobbying in Sacramento and made record profits, documents obtained by the Center for Biological Diversity reveal that almost 3 billion gallons of oil industry wastewater were illegally dumped into Central California aquifers that supply drinking water and irrigation water for farms. The Center said the wastewater entered the aquifers through at least nine injection disposal wells used by the oil industry to dispose of waste contaminated with fracking (hydraulic fracturing) fluids and other pollutants. (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/california_fracking/pdfs/20140915_State_Board_UIC_well_list_Category_1a.pdf ) The documents also reveal that Central Valley Regional Water Quality Board testing found high levels of arsenic, thallium and nitrates, contaminants sometimes found in oil industry wastewater, in water- supply wells near these waste-disposal operations. The illegal dumping took place in a state where Big Oil is the most powerful corporate lobby and the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) is the most powerful corporate lobbying organization, alarming facts that the majority of the public and even many environmental activists are not aware of. An analysis of reports filed with the California Secretary of State shows that the oil industry collectively spent over $63 million lobbying California policymakers between January 1, 2009 and June 30, 2014. The Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA), led by President Catherine Reheis-Boyd, the former chair of the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative Blue Ribbon Task Force to create so- called "marine protected areas" in Southern California, topped the oil industry lobby spending with $26,969,861. The enormous influence that the oil lobby exerts over legislators, agency leaders, the Governor's Office and state and federal regulatory officials is the reason why Big Oil has been able to contaminate groundwater aquifers, rivers and ocean waters in California for decades with impunity. The contamination of aquifers becomes even more alarming when one considers that California is now reeling from a record drought where people, farms, fish and wildlife are suffering from extremely low conditions in reservoirs, rivers and streams. Hollin Kretzmann, a Center attorney, criticized state regulators for failing to do their job of protecting precious water supplies from oil industry pollution - and urged Governor Jerry Brown to take action to halt the environmentally destructive practice of fracking in California. (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2014/fracking-10-06-2014.html ) "Clean water is one of California?s most crucial resources, and these documents make it clear that state regulators have utterly failed to protect our water from oil industry pollution," said Kretzmann. "Much more testing is needed to gauge the full extent of water pollution and the threat to public health. But Governor Brown should move quickly to halt fracking to ward off a surge in oil industry wastewater that California simply isn?t prepared to dispose of safely.? Kretzmann said the State Water Resources Control Board "confirmed beyond doubt" that at least nine wastewater disposal wells have been injecting waste into aquifers that contain high-quality water that is supposed to be protected under federal and state law. (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/california_fracking/pdfs/20140915_Bishop_letter_to_Blumenfeld_Responding_to_July_17_2014_UIC_Letter.pdf ) "Thallium is an extremely toxic chemical commonly used in rat poison," according to a statement from the Center. "Arsenic is a toxic chemical that can cause cancer. Some studies show that even low-level exposure to arsenic in drinking water can compromise the immune system?s ability to fight illness." ?Arsenic and thallium are extremely dangerous chemicals,? said Timothy Krantz, a professor of environmental studies at the University of Redlands. ?The fact that high concentrations are showing up in multiple water wells close to wastewater injection sites raises major concerns about the health and safety of nearby residents.? The Center obtained a letter from the State Water Resources Control Board to the federal Environmental Protection Agency stating that the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Board has confirmed that injection wells have been dumping oil industry waste into aquifers that are legally protected under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. The State Water Board also concedes that another 19 wells may also have contaminated protected aquifers, and dozens more have been injecting waste into aquifers of unknown quality. "The Central Valley Water Board tested eight water-supply wells out of more than 100 in the vicinity of these injection wells," according to the Center. "Arsenic, nitrate and thallium exceeded the maximum contaminant level in half the water samples." The Vote No on Prop. 1 (Water Bond) Campaign responded to the Center's release of the documents by pointing out the irony of the fact that the same Legislature that nearly unanimously voted to put the water bond on the November ballot also rejected a fracking moratorium in California "Prop 1 folks tout how it will provide funding to clean up groundwater in the SJ Valley," according to a statement from the campaign. "This is something we want to see too. But if fracking is unregulated and fracking wells are already leaking, shouldn't we work on the fracking moratorium first? Or at least simultaneously. And the legislators who passed Prop 1 voted against the fracking moratorium." It is no surprise that the State Senators who voted no on the fracking moratorium bill received 14 times more money in campaign contributions from the oil industry than those who voted no on the measure. (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2014/06/07/18757051.php ) Restore the Delta responded to the report also: "At RTD, we have always known that water needs to be shared from the Delta- we argue that it must be at levels that are sustainable for the estuary. When we see items like this, however, it's hard to maintain that reasonable stance. We predicted a year ago that SJ Valley fracking sites would contaminate groundwater, making the region more dependent on water exports." Long term threat posed by waste water disposal may be even worse The Center said that while the current extent of contamination is cause for "grave concern," the long-term threat posed by the unlawful wastewater disposal may be even more devastating. "Benzene, toluene and other harmful chemicals used in fracking fluid are routinely found in flowback water coming out of oil wells in California, often at levels hundreds of times higher than what is considered safe, and this flowback fluid is sent to wastewater disposal wells. Underground migration of chemicals like benzene can take years," the Center stated. The state?s Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) shut down 11 Kern County oil field injection wells and began scrutinizing almost 100 others that were potentially contaminating protected groundwater. The Environmental Protection Agency, which has ultimate legal authority over underground injection, ordered state officials to provide an assessment of the water-contamination risk within 60 days, and the letter from the state Water Board confirms that illegal contamination has occurred at multiple sites. California?s oil and gas fields produce billions of gallons of contaminated wastewater each year, much of which is injected underground. California has an estimated 2,583 wastewater injection wells, of which 1,552 are currently active, according to the Center. Wastewater injection wells are located throughout the state, from the Chico area in Northern California to Los Angeles in Southern California and even include offshore wells near Santa Barbara. Kern County in the Southern San Joaquin Valley is home to the largest number of oil wells in California. The fracking wastewater poses a huge threat not only to human health, but to fish including endangered and threatened salmon and steelhead and wildlife as the water makes its way to rivers and streams. The last thing that imperiled salmon and steelhead populations need, as they face a combination of drought and poor management of the state's reservoirs and rivers by the state and federal agencies, is the threat of increased pollution of their habitat by benzene, toluene and other harmful fracking chemicals, A recent study by the US Drought Monitor reported that 58 percent of California is experiencing ?exceptional drought,? the most serious category on the agency?s five-level scale. A fracking job can require as much as 140,000 to 150,000 gallons of water per day. (http://www.desmogblog.com/2014/08/01/fracking-making-california-s-drought-worse-say-activists ) For more information, go to: http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/ Big Oil power and money dominates California politics As an investigative journalist who has written many articles documenting oil industry power and money in California politics, I find it extremely important to review recent financial data on the oil industry in California. This data reveals how the regulated have captured the regulators in California, just like Wall Street big banks captured the regulatory apparatus. While there are many powerful industries based in California, ranging from the computer and high tech industry to corporate agribusiness, no industry has more influence over the state's environmental policies than Big Oil. Unfortunately, most of the public and even many environmental activists have no idea how much influence the oil industry has on the Governor, the Legislature and state panels and environmental processes in the state. An ongoing analysis of reports filed with the California Secretary of State shows that the oil industry collectively spent over $63 million lobbying California policymakers between January 1, 2009 and June 30, 2014. The Western States Petroleum Association led the oil industry lobby spending with $26,969,861. "The oil industry is spending over $1 million per month lobbying Sacramento, with the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) as the second overall leading spender so far in 2014 with almost $3 million spent in the past six months," according to Stop Fooling California (http://www.stopfoolingca.org), an online and social media public education and awareness campaign that highlights oil companies efforts to mislead and confuse Californians. "Chevron, with $1.3 million spent so far in 2014, is also among the top five. If money speaks, Big Oil has the loudest voice in politics." WSPA was California?s second overall leading lobbyist spender, with $1.5 million spent in the second quarter of 2014. This is the second largest quarter going back to January 2009. WSPA is on pace to exceed the previous record annual (2012) total in 2014. WSPA has paid over $2 million to KP Public Affairs, the state?s highest paid lobbying firm, during the current (2013-14) legislative session, according to the group. WSPA spent $4,670,010 on lobbying in 2013 and $5,698,917 in 2012. Chevron is the fifth overall spender in California through the second quarter of 2014, having spent $784,757 that quarter, an increase of nearly $300,000 over the prior quarter. Yet these millions of dollars are just chump change to Big Oil, since the five big oil companies made over $93 billion in profits in 2013. This year, Big Oil's profits are estimated to be over $72 billion to date, based on information from The Center for American Progress (http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/news/2014/02/10/83879/with-only-93-billion-in-profits-the-big-five-oil-companies-demand-to-keep-tax-breaks/ ) A report released on April 1, 2014 by the ACCE Institute and Common Cause reveals that Big Oil has spent $143.3 million on political candidates and campaigns ? nearly $10 million per year and more than any other corporate lobby ? over the past fifteen years. (http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2014/04/10/bil_oil_floods_the_capitol_4.1.14v2.pdf ) But Big Oil exerts its influence not just by making campaign contributions, but also by lobbying legislators at the State Capitol. The oil industry spent $123.6 million to lobby elected officials in California from 1999 through 2013. This was an increase of over 400 percent since the 1999-2000 legislative session, when the industry spent $4.8 million. In 2013-2014 alone, the top lobbyist employer, Western States Petroleum Association, spent $4.7 million. Big Oil's enormous influence over the California Legislature was exposed when Governor Jerry Brown in September 2013 signed Senator Fran Pavley's Senate Bill 4, the green light for fracking bill, after oil industry lobbyists gutted the already weak bill to "regulate" fracking in California. The bill ?undermines existing environmental law and leaves Californians unprotected from fracking and other dangerous and extreme fossil fuel extraction techniques,? stated Californians Against Fracking, a statewide coalition of over 100 organizations now calling for a moratorium on fracking. Oil industry officials serve on regulatory and advisory panels The oil industry also exerts its muscle by serving on and dominating state and federal regulatory and advisory panels. For example, Catherine Reheis-Boyd, the President of the Western States Petroleum Association, chaired the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative Blue Ribbon Task Force to create alleged "marine protected areas" in Southern California. She also served on the task forces to create "marine protected areas" on the Central Coast, North Central Coast and South Coast. It is no surprise that the so-called "marine protected areas" created under the helm of Reheis-Boyd and other corporate operatives failed to protect the ocean from fracking offshore oil drilling, pollution, corporate aquaculture, military testing and all human impacts on the ocean other than sustainable fishing and gathering. Ironically, while WSPA President Catherine Reheis-Boyd served on the task forces to "protect" the ocean, the same oil industry that the "marine guardian" represents was conducting environmentally destructive hydraulic fracturing (fracking) operations off the Southern California coast. Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and media investigations by Associated Press and truthout.org reveal that the ocean has been fracked at least 203 times in the past 20 years, including the period from 2004 to 2012 that Reheis-Boyd served as a "marine guardian.? (http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/10/19/calif-finds-more-instances-of-offshore-fracking/3045721/ ) To make matters worse, Reheis-Boyd also serves on a federal government marine protected areas panel. The National Marine Protected Areas Center website lists Reheis-Boyd as a member of a 20 member MPA (Marine Protected Areas) Advisory Committee. In addition to the oil industry spending exerting its enormous power through campaign contributions, lobbying legislators and serving on state and federal regulatory panels, the oil industry also has set up "Astroturf" groups, including the California Drivers Alliance and Fueling California, to fight against environmental regulations protecting our air, water, land, fish, wildlife and human health. "The set up is basically this: some Californian (who is supposed to be your proxy) regurgitates Big Oil talking points that don't resemble reality, equating protecting Big Oil's profits with protecting the people," according to Stop Fooling California. Most recently, the Monterey Herald reported that San Benito United for Energy Independence, the oil and gas industry-funded group behind a slate of ads airing throughout the Central Coast on TV and radio, raised more than $1.7 million to fight Measure J, an initiative to ban fracking in San Benito Count that goes before the voters on November 4. "While the group touts its local ties, none of the money funding Measure J's opposition comes from San Benito County," said reporter Jason Hoppin. "San Benito United is entirely funded by an industry-backed group called Californians for Energy Independence. Oil companies have been pumping millions into that group in the last few months, including $2.5 million from San Ramon-based Chevron, $2.1 million from San Ardo- based Aera Energy and $2 million from Houston-based Occidental Petroleum," said Hoppin. (http://www.montereyherald.com/localnews/ci_26698353/big-oil-opens-wallet-fight-fracking-bans ) Politicians like Governor Jerry Brown like to portray California as a "green" leader, but the reality is that the oil industry, along with agribusiness and other corporate lobbies, exerts enormous influence over the state's environmental policies, making the claims that California is a "green" state highly dubious. 4. Dan Bacher, ?Senators Opposing Fracking Moratorium Received 14x More Money from Big Oil,? IndyBay, June 7, 2014, http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2014/06/07/18757051.php . The failure of the fracking moratorium bill on May 29 is a classic example of the inordinate power that the oil industry, the most powerful corporate lobby in Sacramento, exerts over California politics. Photo of fracking operation courtesy of MapLight. fracker.jpg Senators opposing fracking moratorium received 14x more money from Big Oil By Dan Bacher Five days after a bill calling for a moratorium on fracking in California failed in the State Senate, a non partisan watchdog group revealed that those who voted against the legislation or abstained from voting on it received many times more in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry than those who supported the bill. State Senators voting 'NO' on the fracking moratorium bill on Thursday, May 29 received 14 times as much money the oil and gas industry, on average ($25,227), as senators voting 'YES' ($1,772) from January 1, 2009 to December 21, 2012, according to MapLight, a non profit organization revealing money's influence on politics. The report also said the Democrats who abstained from voting on the moratorium received, on average, 4.5 times as much money from the oil and gas industry as the Democrats who voted 'YES'. Under intense pressure from the Western States Petroleum Association, Chevron, Occidental Petroleum and other oil companies, the Senate failed to pass Senate Bill 1132, legislation that would have placed a moratorium on oil and gas well stimulation treatments, including hydraulic and acid fracturing, until the government completes a scientific study of the practices' impacts on human and environmental health. The bill was authored by Senators Holly Mitchell and Mark Leno. The final vote was 16-16, with eight Senators not voting. Twenty-one votes were required for the bill to pass. Three of those with no vote recorded ? Leland Yee, Rod Wright and Ron Calderon - have been suspended from the Senate due to corruption allegations. "If the five active senators who abstained from voting -all Democrats- voted in favor, the moratorium would have passed," according to a statement from MapLight. ?The Democrats who abstained from voting on the moratorium have received, on average, 4.5 times as much money from the oil and gas industry as the Democrats who voted 'YES'." Senator Jeanne Fuller (R), who received $52,300 from the oil and gas industry, more than any other senator voting on the bill, voted 'NO'. Fuller is known not only for her big contributions from the oil and gas industry but from corporate agribusiness in Kern County. It was Fuller who sponsored legislation to eradicate striped bass in the Bay- Delta estuary, a bill that failed twice due to massive opposition by recreational anglers and grassroots environmentalists. The oil industry contributions to the Senators voting NO were as follows: Joel Anderson (R) $18,750 Tom Berryhill (R): $15,000 Anthony Cannella (R): $40,150 Lou Correa (D): $11,350 Jean Fuller (R): $52,300 Ted Gaines (R): $27,250 Cathleen Galgiani (D): $24,950 Ed Hernandez (D): $23,250 Bob Huff (R): $45,550 Steve Knight (R): $24,050 Mike Morrell (R): $19,300 Norma Torres (D): $13,250 Mimi Walters (R): $51,000 Mark Wyland (R) - $12,250 When one adds in the oil industry contributions for 2013, the campaign contributions mushroom. For example, Fuller received $76,850 from 2009 to 2013, while Galgiani received $47,600. The oil and gas industry contributions to those Democrats who abstained from voting were as follows: Marty Block: $2000 Jerry Hill: $3,950 Ben Hueso: $12,400 Ricardo Lara: $21,300 Richard Roth: $ 0 The MapLight analysis of campaign contributions from PACs and employees of oil and gas interests to legislators in office on the day of the vote was during the period from January 1, 2009 - December 31, 2012. The National Institute of Money in State Politics was the data source for the campaign contributions. For more information, go to: http://maplight.org/content/fracking-oil-gas-hydraulic-fracturing-ca-legislature-bill?utm_source=Fracking+Bill+Killed+by+CA+Leg.&utm_campaign=CA+SB+1132+-+Fracking+Bill&utm_medium=email Big oil spent $123.6 million on lobbying from 1999 through 2013 The failure of the fracking moratorium bill on May 29 is a classic example of the inordinate power that the oil industry, the most powerful corporate lobby in Sacramento, exerts over California politics. A report released on April 1, 2014 by the ACCE Institute and Common Cause reveals that Big Oil has spent $143.3 million on political candidates and campaigns ? nearly $10 million per year and more than any other corporate lobby ? over the past fifteen years. (http://www.commoncause.org/atf/cf/%7Bfb3c17e2-cdd1-4df6-92be-bd4429893665%7D/BIL%20OIL%20FLOODS%20THE%20CAPITOL%204.1.14.PDF ) But Big Oil exerts its influence not just by making campaign contributions, but by lobbying legislators at the State Capitol. The Western States Petroleum Association, the most powerful corporate lobbying group in Sacramento. spent $123.6 million to lobby elected officials in California from 1999 through 2013. This was an increase of over 400 percent since the 1999-2000 legislative session, when the industry spent $4.8 million. The combination of the $143.3 million in political candidate and campaign contributions and $123.6 million spent lobbying legislators amounts to a stunning $266.9 million over the past 15 years. The report, ?Big Oil Floods the Capitol: How California?s Oil Companies Funnel Funds Into the Legislature,? also exposes how the oil and gas lobby has spent nearly $15 million to influence Sacramento lawmakers halfway through the 2014-15 legislative session. The record is $25.5 million, set in 2011. While the mainstream media failed to cover the Common Cause/ACCE report, the LA Times did report on the Maplight report on Big Oil's campaign contributions to legislators voting no or abstaining on the fracking moratorium bill (http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/ p2p-80409776/). This is a very positive development - and I hope that the LA Times reporters and editors do some more indepth research, as I have done, into the power of the oil industry in California. Big Oil lobbyist oversaw creation of Southern California "marine protected areas" It is critical to realize that the oil and chemical industry exerts its influence not just through spending enormous sums on lobbying and contributions to political campaigns, but by serving on state and federal government panels. This is a topic that the LA Times and other mainstream media outlets have failed to explore. You won?t find any mention in the LA Times or other corporate media outlets about one of the biggest conflicts of interest in California environmental history ? the key leadership role that a big oil lobbyist played in the creation of alleged ?marine protected areas? in California. Catherine Reheis-Boyd, President of the Western States Petroleum Association, served as the Chair of the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative Blue Ribbon Task Force to create so-called "marine protected areas" in Southern California, as well as sitting on the task forces for the Central Coast, North Central Coast and North Coast. The alleged "Yosemites of the Sea" created under Reheis-Boyd's "leadership" fail to protect the ocean from fracking, oil drilling, pollution, military testing, corporate aquaculture and all human impacts on the ocean other than sustainable fishing and tribal gathering. These ?marine protected areas? are good for big oil and ocean industrialists ? and bad for recreational anglers, Tribal gatherers, commercial fishermen and the people of California. At the same time that Reheis-Boyd, MLPA Initiative advocates and state officials were greenwashing one of the most corrupt environmental processes in California history, the oil industry was fracking like crazy in Southern California ocean waters. ?In waters off Long Beach, Seal Beach and Huntington Beach ? some of the region's most popular surfing strands and tourist attractions ? oil companies have used fracking at least 203 times at six sites in the past two decades, according to interviews and drilling records obtained by The Associated Press through a public records request,? reported USA Today on October 19, 2013. (http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/10/19/calif-finds-more-instances-of-offshore-fracking/3045721/ ) The greenwashing of Big Oil's role in "marine protection" I suspect that the failure of the LA Times and other mainstream media outlets to report on the prominent role the Western States Petroleum President played in the crafting of fake ?marine protected areas? in southern California is because their reporters, editors and publishers have been bamboozled by state officials and corporate ?environmentalists? as to what really happened in the MLPA Initiative process. For example, an article published in the LA Times on December 19, 2012, completely greenwashed the MLPA Initiative fiasco, claiming that "California officials today completed the largest network of undersea parks in the continental United States ? 848 square miles of protected waters that reach from the Oregon state line to the Mexican border." (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-undersea-parks-20121219,0,4717471.story ) This piece, as in previous ones in the Times, failed to address any of the real, substantial criticisms of the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative process by grassroots environmentalists, Indian Tribe members, commercial fishermen, recreational anglers and advocates of democracy and transparency in government, including the role that the Western States Petroleum Association President played in the creation of these alleged ?undersea parks.? The reporter, Kenneth R. Weiss, portrayed a false conflict of "fishermen versus environmentalists" over the MLPA Initiative when the real conflict is one of public policy between those that favor corporate greenwashing and the privatization of conservation and those who oppose corporate greenwashing and the privatization of conservation. The reporter fails to mention any of "inconvenient truths" about the MLPA Initiative, including Catherine Reheis-Boyd?s chairing of the MLPA Blue Ribbon Task Force. Not only did Reheis-Boyd help craft oil industry-friendly "marine protected areas" in California, but she currently sits on a federal marine protected areas panel. The National Marine Protected Areas Center website lists Reheis-Boyd as a member of a 20 member MPA (Marine Protected Areas) Advisory Committee. (http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/28/big-oil-lobbyist-serves-on-federal-marine-protected-areas-panel/ ) Reheis Boyd has also "served" on other government and non-profit organization commissions and committees, as revealed in her biography published on the Department of Fish and Wildlife website (http://www.dfg.ca.gov/marine/mpa/brtf_bios_sc.asp ): "Reheis-Boyd was appointed by the Governor as a California petroleum industry representative on the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission and is a member of the California Chamber of Commerce Natural Resources and Policy Committee. She has chaired the Bakersfield Chamber of Commerce Air Quality Committee, and was past president of the Sacramento chapter of the Air & Waste Management Association. She has also served as past president of the Kern County Chapter of the American Lung Association, and is a past recipient of the Bureau of Land Management's State Director's Oil and Gas Award for Special Achievement." To really understand the power of Big Oil in California, you have to look at not just the money spent on campaign contributions and lobbying, but also at the role the oil industry plays on government panels and in manipulating environmental processes. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Censorship.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 15756 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: stop_fracking.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 49507 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: fracker.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 109284 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Fri Oct 23 13:36:53 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 20:36:53 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Jweek42 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C591CD5@057-SN2MPN1-043.057d.mgd.msft.net> Greetings, Please see attached for the Jweek 42 Trinity River trapping summary update (Willow Creek weir only). The Hatchery is still closed for the spawning break between spring and fall-run Chinook. It is scheduled to resume operations on Oct 26. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW42.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 61970 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW42.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Oct 25 20:03:55 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 03:03:55 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] AP: Judges hear Washington challenge to fish-passage ruling References: <147964553.983944.1445828635059.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <147964553.983944.1445828635059.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> OCTOBER 16, 2015 http://www.theolympian.com/news/state/washington/article39385668.html Judges hear Washington challenge to fish-passage ruling BY GENE JOHNSONAssociated Press - - - - - LINKEDIN - GOOGLE+ - PINTEREST - REDDIT - PRINT - ORDER REPRINT OF THIS STORY SEATTLE?In a case that could have implications for dams and development in the Northwest, federal appeals judges heard arguments Friday about whether Washington state should have to spend billions of dollars to replace large pipes that allow streams to pass under roadways ? but which also block salmon from migrating upstream to their spawning grounds.The lawsuit is the latest twist in more than 40 years of litigation between Washington and Native American tribes over fishing rights since a federal court decision guaranteed the tribes the right to half of Northwest salmon harvest. Washington's tribes, backed by the U.S. Justice Department, sued the state in 2001, trying to force the state to replace the culverts with bridges or other structures that better allow fish to pass.The crux of their argument is that based on mid-19th century treaties, they don't just have a right to fish, but for there to be fish to catch ? something that doesn't happen when culverts block the salmon from spawning. In 2007, U.S. District Judge Ricardo S. Martinez agreed, and in an order years later, he demanded that the state replace hundreds of culverts.The state agrees that replacing the old culverts is one important part of restoring salmon runs and notes that is has spent hundreds of millions of dollars to fix fish habitat. But Martinez's 2013 order is far too sweeping and expensive, and would force the state to focus on fixing culverts even when salmon-restoration dollars could be spent more effectively elsewhere, state Solicitor General Noah Purcell told the three-judge 9th Circuit Court of Appeals panel Friday.The tribes do not have a treaty right to habitat restoration, Purcell said. If they did, he suggested, they could conceivably sue the state for virtually anything that impairs salmon, such as state or utility district-owned dams that block salmon passage ? a topic the judges asked about repeatedly. The state's court filings pointed to Boeing's and the Port of Seattle's activities on the Duwamish River as other potential targets of litigation.Those arguments were echoed in a friend-of-the-court brief submitted by the state of Oregon."It goes far beyond the treaty language," Purcell said. "This case has been going on for 45 years. Under the district court's ruling, it's going to be going on for 45 more."The state Legislature this year approved a 16-year transportation bill that includes $300 million for fish passage ? far more than in years past, but a far cry from the estimated $2 billion it would take to comply with Martinez's order. The state has said it would need to fix 30 to 40 culverts each year until 2030, spending $155 million annually, to comply.Some are beneath Interstate 5 and would require the highway's closure to fix, Purcell said. Many of the culverts overseen by the state Department of Natural Resources or Fish and Wildlife have already been fixed.But Martinez noted that at its current pace of replacing culverts, it would take more than a century to fix them all, which he considered unacceptable.The pipes, which were mostly installed decades ago, can block salmon in several ways. Their downstream ends are frequently elevated above the level of the stream, making it impossible for salmon to swim up. They were sometimes placed at a grade that accelerated the rush of the water, making it more difficult for the fish to fight the current.The tribes acknowledged that they typically work closely with the state to restore salmon, but the sides had unable to reach agreement on how quickly to fix the culvertsJim Peters, a habitat policy analyst with the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission and former chairman of the Squaxin Island Tribe, noted that in south Puget Sound, there are many small creeks that might each only bear a few hundred salmon. Individually, he said, those waters might not be a priority for culvert repair, but collectively their fish are an important resource."When we signed these treaties our understanding was that there would actually be fish to harvest," he said. "If you don't have fish, you don't have a treaty right."The state noted something of a cruel irony in the case: that the culverts at issue had been constructed to federal standards. The state sought in the lower court to require the feds to help pay for the culvert replacement if the state was ordered to fix them; that request was denied. Purcell asked the appeals judges to reconsider that.Read more here: Judges hear Washington challenge to fish-passage ruling | ? | | ? | | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | Judges hear Washington challenge to fish-passage rulingIn a case that could have implications for dams and development in the Northwest, federal appeals judges heard arguments Friday about whether Washington state sh... | | | | View on www.theolympian.com | Preview by Yahoo | | | | ? | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From derek_rupert at fws.gov Mon Oct 26 10:31:27 2015 From: derek_rupert at fws.gov (Rupert, Derek) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 10:31:27 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] Mainstem Trinity River spawn survey update for October 23, 2015 Message-ID: Hello All, The US Fish and Wildlife Service along with the Yurok Tribe, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Forest Service, and Hoopa Valley Tribe have another weekly update for our Trinity River mainstem spawn survey posted on the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Fisheries webpage. Trinity River spawn Survey update October 23, 2015. ? This week our crews mapped 210 redds (1,213 total for the year) in the Reaches from Lewiston Dam to Pigeon Point, and Hawkins Bar to Weitchpec. The graph below is clipped from our weekly report (limited to the river upstream of Cedar Flat). ? Be sure to see the photo of the week in the weekly report. Cheers, Derek -- Derek Rupert Fish Biologist US Fish and Wildlife Service Weaverville, CA Office 530.623.1805 Cell 570.419.2823 Derek_Rupert at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WeeklyGraphicSmall.png Type: image/png Size: 9707 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Wed Oct 28 12:51:33 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 12:51:33 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] PNW study: Understanding the Shapeshifting Rainbow Trout/Steelhead Message-ID: <024601d111ba$0ca08250$25e186f0$@sisqtel.net> http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/sciencef/scifi177.pdf USFS-Pacific Northwest Research Station SCIENCE FINDINGS - issue no. 177, Sept. 2015 IN SUMMARY Steelhead are the sea-going form of Oncorhynchus mykiss. Rainbow trout, also O. mykiss, remain in freshwater. Each form, or life-history, can produce offspring of the other, but the mechanism for this and potential effects that climate change may have on the species are poorly understood. Forest Service scientist Gordie Reeves, along with colleagues from other federal agencies and Oregon State University, conducted a series of studies to better document the biological processes that affect the life-history expression of O. mykiss. They found that standard metabolic rate and lipid levels play important roles: those fish with higher metabolisms and lower lipid levels tended to be steelhead, while those with lower metabolisms and higher lipid levels tended to be resident rainbows. Reeves' findings challenge the existing theory that faster growing individuals of the species tend to be seagoing steel- head. The research examined the effects of water temperature on life-history expres- sion within the species. These findings offer clues about how climate change may affect the rainbow/steelhead ratio in the years ahead. This research informs habitat improvement efforts and protection for steelhead populations, which are listed under the Endangered Species Act. It provides context, revealing how their life-history is interconnected with that of rainbow trout, which are not listed. More. .Reeves cautions that it's a mistake to look at life-history strategies as a black-or-white, either/or proposition. "Within the O. mykiss population, there are actually multiple strate- gies to achieving reproductive success," he says. "Think of the population as essentially trying to diversify its portfolio of strategies to ensure that the species as a whole is main- tained." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Oct 29 08:17:16 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 15:17:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Chronicle: Drought-driven salmon deaths could have far-reaching impact References: <1876689133.1429976.1446131836724.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1876689133.1429976.1446131836724.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Great job Bureau of Reclamation killing 95% of the winter run baby salmon two years in a row! ?It was not unanticipated despite claims to the contrary. ?See?http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/docs/workshops/nrdc_tbi_pres.pdf http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Drought-driven-salmon-deaths-could-have-6596901.php Drought-driven salmon deaths could have far-reaching impact By?Peter Fimrite? Updated 7:46?am, Thursday, October 29, 2015 One of the last wild runs of chinook salmon in California is sinking fast amid the four-year drought and now appears perilously close to oblivion after the federal agency in charge of protecting marine life documented the death of millions of young fish and eggs in the Sacramento River.The?National Marine Fisheries Service?reported Wednesday that 95 percent of the winter-run chinook eggs, hatchlings and juvenile salmon died this year in the river, which was too warm to support them despite conservation efforts.It was the second year in a row that most of the juvenile salmon died in the soupy water released from Shasta Dam, failing to make it to the ocean.The situation could have far-reaching effects, leading to cuts in water allotments to farmers next year if projected rains and a strong snowpack don?t erase drought deficits this winter. Commercial and recreational fishing limits could be imposed to protect the endangered chinook population, taking a toll on those industries.?Certainly there is cause for alarm when we are talking about 95 percent mortality,? said?Garwin Yip, the branch chief for water operations and delta consultations for the fisheries service. ?We think it is temperature-related.?Not enough cold waterThe problem was caused by a lack of snow this year on top of four years of drought. The?U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Yip said, was left without enough cold water behind Shasta Dam to release during spawning season.Chinook, also known as king salmon, are born in the Sacramento River and pass through San Francisco Bay. They roam the Pacific Ocean as far away as Alaska before returning three years later to spawn. There are three distinct runs of salmon ? winter, spring and late fall, which is what West Coast fishers catch in the ocean. The winter and spring-run chinook salmon are listed under the state and federal endangered species acts. The winter run has been endangered since 1994.The fisheries service worked with two state agencies, the?Department of Water Resources?and the?Department of Fish and Wildlife, to develop an elaborate plan this year to regulate cold-water releases from Shasta Dam.Resource officials are required by law to release enough cold water to keep the Sacramento River at 56 degrees ? the ideal temperature for fish. In a bid to meet that requirement, federal officials sharply limited flows and delayed water deliveries to hundreds of Central Valley farmers.Failed planThe problem, Yip said, was that ?there wasn?t as much cold water as anticipated and the water wasn?t as cold as we thought it was going to be.? RELATED STORIES - New survey finds 43 percent of salmon is mislabeled - Who owns California?s water? - Dramatic photos show California's water-starved Folsom Lake Reservoir The lack of cold water forced regulators to come up with a new temperature management plan, this one allowing the water to warm up to 57 degrees. But it didn?t work, and water temperatures, at times, rose to 58 degrees, he said.As a result, the number of juvenile fish counted this month at the Red Bluff diversion dam, downstream of Shasta, was down 22 percent compared with last year, which was also a bad year. That?s despite the fact that there were 21 percent more adult fish laying eggs in the river, Yip said.Two months remain in this year?s run, but the number of juvenile fish is unlikely to grow much beyond the 217,489 counted so far.The dismal state of affairs is even more stark when compared to historic numbers. In 2005, officials counted 8.5 million winter-run juveniles, and there were 4.4 million juveniles in 2009, the year the winter-run salmon conservation requirements were drafted.Another bad year would mean that all three year classes of winter-run chinook are in peril, a clear sign that the species is heading toward extinction.?I think the message is that winter run, at least right now, aren?t doing too well,? Yip said. ?The species can bounce back, but we?ve had drought conditions since 2012. It?s a caution that we are going to have to operate Shasta tighter and monitor releases more closely next year.?Salmon fishermen are alarmed about how the fish deaths might affect their industry next year, said?John McManus, executive director of the?Golden Gate Salmon Association, a major advocate for the state?s $1.4 billion salmon industry.?The real problem here is that water management policies in the Sacramento Valley and the delta are killing these winter-run fish,? he said.The Sacramento River?s spawning run is the last great salmon run along the giant Central Valley river system, which includes the San Joaquin River, where leaping, wriggling chinook were once so plentiful that old-timers recall reaching in and plucking fish right out of the water.The construction of Shasta Dam on the Sacramento, Friant Dam on the San Joaquin,?Folsom Dam?on the American River and Oroville Dam on the Feather River over the past century cut off huge sections of river, wiping out most of the fish.Today, mostly fall-run hatchery fish are caught in the ocean and river flows are regulated to protect the remaining wild fish, including winter-run salmon.That?s why the fate of juvenile salmon is so important. Reduced flows from Shasta this year required officials to increase releases from Folsom Lake, which reached record-low levels.The cascade effect increased the tension among farmers, water agencies and environmentalists throughout the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta region.Peter Fimrite is a?San Francisco Chronicle?staff writer. E-mail:?pfimrite at sfchronicle.com?Twitter: @pfimrite -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Oct 30 09:49:23 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 16:49:23 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] DOI OIG Report: Investigation of a Bureau of Reclamation Civil Engineer at the Trinity River Restoration Division References: <965379667.252664.1446223763566.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <965379667.252664.1446223763566.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> OIG Hotline ? Report Wrongdoing Investigation of a Bureau of Reclamation Civil Engineer Create Date:?Wednesday, October 28, 2015SummaryReport Date:?Thursday, December 18, 2014OIG investigated misconduct allegations against a Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) civil engineer at the Trinity River Restoration Division. The complainant alleged that the USBR employee was unprofessional and improperly gave one contractor preferential treatment over another.We reviewed contracting documents and emails, and interviewed the parties involved, and found no evidence of an inappropriate relationship between the civil engineer and the contractor or any evidence of impropriety. We referred our report to USBR for information only.?InvestigativeSummary_USBRCivilEngineer.pdf? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/png Size: 46098 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/png Size: 346 bytes Desc: not available URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Fri Oct 30 10:06:06 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 10:06:06 -0700 Subject: [env-trinity] A Real Halloween Horror Show: Jerry Brown's Delta Death Tunnels In-Reply-To: <965379667.252664.1446223763566.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <965379667.252664.1446223763566.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <965379667.252664.1446223763566.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <95E87C95-D675-476A-8BB6-1C69ABE07CC4@fishsniffer.com> http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/10/29/18779405.php http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/10/29/1442205/-A-Real-Halloween-Horror-Show-Jerry-Brown-s-Delta-Death-Tunnels http://www.elkgrovenews.net/2015/10/a-real-halloween-horror-show-jerry.html halloween-pumpkin-grim-re... A Real Halloween Horror Show: Jerry Brown's Delta Death Tunnels by Dan Bacher The real life horror show of Governor Jerry Brown's Delta Tunnels Plan keeps revealing its deadly surprises as the public comment period for the California Water Fix draws to a close on Friday, October 30. Like an evil vampire that you just can't seem to kill, the Delta- destroying tunnels plan keeps coming back. The voters overwhelmingly defeated the water-sucking and fish- exterminating vampire project, originally known as the Peripheral Canal, in November 1982. However, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger resurrected the undead project from its electoral tomb starting in 2007 under new, less scary- sounding names - the Delta Vision Plan and the Bay Delta Conservation Plan - and did everything he could push the plan through without allowing the voters to vote, including pressuring the Legislation to pass a water policy/water bond package in November 2009 that cleared the path to the construction of the peripheral canal. Jerry Brown embraced the water-guzzling vampire project of Schwarzenegger's as his own "legacy" when he entered his third term as Governor in January 2015 - and in fact fast-tracked the project as the peripheral canal became the twin tunnels. However, after the scientists from Environmental Protection Agency, Delta Independent Science Board, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Academy of Sciences and every science panel examining the project issued scathing reports revealing how the tunnels could hasten the extinction of Central Valley salmon and steelhead, Delta and longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other fish species, the Brown and Obama administrations resurrected the conveyance plan as the "California Water Fix" - and stripped the "habitat restoration" component out of the plan to become the "Eco Restore" proposal. In addition to hastening the extinction of Central Valley steelhead and salmon and other species, the killer project will imperil the salmon and steelhead populations on the Trinity and Klamath rivers. Massive quantities of water from Trinity Reservoir are diverted every year to the Sacramento River via a tunnel through the Trinity Mountains that releases the water into Whiskeytown Reservoir and then into Clear Creek, a tributary of the Sacramento. New horrors unveiled: Kern County Water Agency demands unlimited water without restrictions! Every week its seems that new horrors about the Delta-killing nature of the tunnels plan are revealed - and that was the case on October 28 when Restore the Delta (RTD) exposed a new document that unveils the true goals of the Kern County Water Agency - "unlimited water, on demand, with few environmental restrictions." If that it isn't scary at a time when endangered Sacramento winter-run Chinook salmon, Delta smelt and other imperiled fish species are getting closer and closer to the dark abyss of extinction, I don't know what is. If preliminary figures released by the National Marine Fisheries Service this week are confirmed, this would be the second year in a row that nearly all of the juvenile winter-run Chinook salmon perished in lethally warm water conditions on the Sacramento River, due to the over-appropriation of water to agribusiness. ?The bottom line is they (the state and federal regulators) ignored the law,? Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Projection Alliance told the Sacramento Bee. ?We?ve over- appropriated and over-promised, and this is the result.? (http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article41684160.html ) As the latest grim data on winter-run Chinook was unveiled, the Kern County Water Agency's draft public comments letter on the Recirculated EIR/S for the Delta Tunnels revealed the true goals of agricultural water exporters - "unlimited water supplies, even if it violates federal Endangered Species and Clean Water Acts," according to a statement from RTD. In the letter the Kern County Water Agency (KWCA) declares appreciation for this revised draft because they believe it is ?an important? first step toward creating a workable solution for their agency. Yet, they still want more; otherwise, the project is not ?economically feasible.? The letter reveals their goals: greater deliveries for the State Water Project and allowing for "adaptive management" with limited adjustments to the water supply of the project, RTD stated. "Their demands are clear: Proposition 1 money to be used for water purchases (never mind that Prop 1 claimed no such thing would happen); no limits on supply to the State Water Project or the Central Valley Project during spring months (regardless of Delta fishery needs or Federal ESA protections)," said RTD. The letter concludes: "Finally, in addition to revising the operational criteria, the Agency requests that the description of the alternatives in the RDEIR/SDEIS be revised to clarify that the spring outflow criteria will be satisfied in accordance with the following hierarchy: a. Available State and federal public funding will be used to purchase water necessary for spring outflow (e.g., through Proposition 1 funding). b. State and federal agencies will attempt to obtain additional water to satisfy the spring outflow criteria if it becomes available. c. The California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service will include spring outflow requirements in their permitting decisions on all issues related to water in the Delta watershed. d. All other available sources of water will be considered by the Real Time Operations and/or Adaptive Management Program teams prior to reducing SWP and Central Valley Project (CVP) exports. e. Water should be made available by the SWP and CVP only in amounts determined to be necessary by the Real Time Operations and/or Adaptive Management Program processes. f. No spring outflow contributions should be required from the SWP or CVP for the first 10 years of Project operations.? Page 124 -- http://www.kcwa.com/public/documents/PublicBoardPacket.pdf User Name: publicuser Password: kcwa1234 KCWA letter exposes Brown administration's "Big Lie" Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta, slammed the KCWA for demanding a project that "defies both nature and the law." "It also exposes the big lie that BDCP officials and Governor Brown?s office have used to mollify San Francisco Bay-Delta residents and fishing communities who depend on a healthy Delta ecosystem," she said. "Tunnel proponents like BDCP Director Jerry Meral, DWR Director Mark Cowin, Resources Secretary John Laird, Fish and Wildlife Director Chuck Bonham, and California Water Fix Director Karla Nemeth have stated on numerous occasions that the project would not increase the total water exports from the Delta, it would simply rebalance where the water is being drawn from and the timing of exports, in a way that protects the Delta." She said the Kern County Water Association comment "destroys that talking point" and reveals what Dr. Jeff Michael from the University of the Pacific has pointed out repeatedly -- the project is not cost effective for farmers without guaranteed water supply. "The KCWA wants all the water they can use, delivered on their schedule, even if it pushes protected species like the Central Valley Spring-run Chinook Salmon to extinction, or causes salt-water intrusion or toxic buildup in the Delta, in violation of the federal Clean Water Act," noted Barrigan-Parrilla. ?Californians were told the Delta Tunnels will meet the co-equal goals of the Delta Reform Act of 2009, to provide a more reliable water supply for California AND protect, restore, and enhance the Delta ecosystem,? she concluded. ?Sadly, this letter confirms what we have always suspected: the Tunnels are simply a water grab by Big Ag in the Southern San Joaquin Valley. To get what they want, they are willing to sacrifice the San Francisco Bay-Delta, its residents, farmers, and endangered species.? Take Action Against This Vampire Project NOW! We don't want the zombie-like advocates of the Governor's tunnels plan to convert the Bay Delta Estuary into a fish and wildlife graveyard! That prospect is scarier than the Night of the Living Dead, Dawn of the Dead, Revenge of the Living Dead, Evil Dead, Phantasm, Pet Sematary, the Shining, the Descent, Pan's Labyrinth or any classic horror movie. If you haven't already, you should sign the Restore the Delta petition at Change.org: http://restorethedelta.us3.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=06887fa70084fef8e939fef63&id=09bcd6ca08&e=120d0c2b69 The petition letter outlines three objections to the Tunnels plan for officials based on 1) environmental, 2) public health, and 3) economic concerns. It also encourages investment in shovel-ready water projects that will bring jobs and sustainability to California. I also highly recommend writing a letter based your experience and expertise: http://restorethedelta.org/take-action-oppose-the-delta-tunnels/ Also, on the final day of public comments for the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on Governor Jerry Brown's proposed Delta Tunnels, a coalition of fishermen, environmentalists, residents, and elected officials will reveal why the Delta Tunnels (BDCP/WaterFix) would be an "ecological and economic disaster for California." The press conference will take place on the North Side of the State Capitol in Sacramento on Friday, October 30, 2015 at 11:00 am. Tunnels opponents are encouraged to attend. Speakers include State Senator Cathleen Galgiani; Assemblymember Susan Talamantes Eggman; Conner Everts, Environmental Water Coalition; Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Restore the Delta; Bob Wright, Friends of the River; Tim Sloane, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations; Esperanza Vielma, Caf? Coop; and Ryan Camero, Delta Activist, 2015 Brower Youth Award Winner. For more information, go to: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/10/28/1441675/-Coalition-to-deliver-closing-arguments-against-Delta-Tunnels Finally, you must check out the great Rage Against the Tunnels music video, "Get Fracked," about the tunnels scheme: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi9UXcYPcas&feature=youtu.be -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: halloween-pumpkin-grim-reaper-4.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 32132 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Oct 30 10:10:12 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 17:10:12 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: WRTC Program Assistant In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1776500383.268190.1446225012742.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Thursday, October 29, 2015 1:09 PM, Piper McDaniel wrote: Hello all, The Watershed Center is seeking a temporary, part-time Watershed Restoration and Forest Health Program Assistant. Position will be 32 hours per week, last 3-6 months, and pay $15-$17 per hour depending on experience. Work will entail a variety of fieldwork and program support activities, offering a great opportunity for learning as well as exposure to different WRTC projects. ? We are able to fund this position ?through the Smart Business Resource Center, which has restrictions for eligibility-- the main eligibility requirement specifies that applicants must have been unemployed for 15 of the last 26 weeks, and are not are not employed elsewhere. For a complete list of requirements, see the full job description below or find the attached job post.? Because of the additional eligibility requirements, we are seeking help getting the word out about this position-- please share this with those you know who might be interested in a great short-term work opportunity.? Thank you,? Piper? Job Description? The Watershed Center is seeking a temporary Watershed Restoration and Forest Health Program Assistant. Position will entail a variety of fieldwork and program support activities. Fieldwork will include stream and forest stand monitoring, data collection, cruising and marking timber, hiking, and vegetation management. Program support will entail data entry and management, cartography, spatial analysis, organizing and facilitating volunteer events, and support with planning and project maintenance.?Desired skills/qualifications include:?Plant identification, propagation and cultivation experienceAbility to learn timber cruising and timber markingAbility to operate a professional GPS unitComputer savvy, knowledge of Excel and WordArc GIS knowledge desiredBasic understanding of forest and riparian ecosystemsAbility to learn and use field tools (compass, clinometer, etc.)Ability to hike steep terrain and complete physically demanding tasks?This is a temporary position.? Hours will be 32 hours per week, and work is expected to last 3-6 months.?Pay rate: $15-$17 per hour, depending on experience and qualifications.?To apply, please send a cover letter and resume to Piper at the Watershed Center by emailing?piper at thewatershedcenter.com?with Program Assistant as the subject line, by mail to P.O. Box 356, Hayfork, CA 96041, or bringing your application to the Watershed Center office at 98 Clinic Ave in Hayfork.?Application Deadline: Open until filled?Eligibility Requirements:?This position is funded through a Smart Center employment program, and has unique requirements for eligibility. To be eligible for this position you must: - Be at least 18 years of age. - Meet one of the following criteria: a.???????Have been unemployed 15 out of the previous 26 weeks.b.???????OR have been affected by the drought with a reduction in hours with your current employment.c.????????OR have been laid-off from employment due to the drought.d.???????OR reside in a household that has been directed affected by the drought. - Hold a valid driver?s license. - Be able to successfully pass a drug screening. - Be a resident of Trinity County during your employment. *If you think you may qualify, but aren?t certain, please contact Piper at the Watershed Center Office?530-628-4206?for help determining your eligibility.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Fri Oct 30 12:51:57 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 19:51:57 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary update Jwekk 43 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C59248C@057-SN2MPN1-043.057d.mgd.msft.net> Greetings, Please see attached for the Jweek 43 update to the Trinity River trapping summary. This week's summary shows updates for the Willow Creek weir and Trinity River Hatchery. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW43.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 62155 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW43.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Oct 30 19:07:13 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2015 02:07:13 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Coalition Submits 30, 000 Comments Opposing Jerry Brown's Delta Tunnels Plan In-Reply-To: <28EEB83D-4401-4D56-8BC9-C333A20B4E7D@fishsniffer.com> References: <28EEB83D-4401-4D56-8BC9-C333A20B4E7D@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <504882066.69399.1446257233557.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Friday, October 30, 2015 4:31 PM, Dan Bacher wrote: Good Afternoon. Here's a quick piece on the Governor's statement, Restore the Delta press conference and Californians for Water Security statement as the comment period comes to a close today. ?I'll be posting an article with photos on indybay.org and elsewhere later. ThanksDan http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/10/30/1442848/-Coalition-Submits-30-000-Comments-Opposing-Jerry-Brown-s-Delta-Tunnels Coalition Submits 30,000 Comments Opposing Jerry Brown's Delta Tunnels Plan by Dan Bacher As the public comment period for the California Water Fix comes to a close on Halloween Eve, Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. issued a three sentence statement praising the plan to build the massive Delta Tunnels, referring to them as "the Delta pipeline."??The Delta pipeline is essential to completing the California Water Project and protecting fish and water quality. Without this fix, San Joaquin farms, Silicon Valley and other vital centers of the California economy will suffer devastating losses in their water supply," Brown claimed. He then slammed opponents of the controversial tunnels plan by stating, "Claims to the contrary are false, shameful and do a profound disservice to California?s future.? As the Governor was sending out the statement, a coalition of conservation, fishing and environmental justice groups and elected leaders gave their ?closing argument? against the proposed Delta Tunnels at a press conference held on the steps of the State Capitol in Sacramento. They said controversy over the project, which could cost upwards of $68 billion, has only grown the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers issued scathing comments blasting the draft EIR for the project in October 2014. To refresh your memory, a "Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report/Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement (RDEIR/SDEIS)" was released on July 10 and a new round of public comments began.? Today the coalition announced that 30,000 comments were submitted by California individuals and organizations AGAINST the re-proposed Delta Tunnels plan. This is 18,000 more than the 12,000 letters of support for the California Water Fix that the corporate agribusiness-backed "coalition" called the "Californians for Retirement Security" announced the day before they had gathered from tunnels proponents.? The speakers explained how the new Recirculated EIR will violate an array of laws, including the Delta Reform Act of 2009, the federal Clean Water Act, the federal Endangered Species Act, the California Constitution, the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA) and numerous administrative codes under CEQA and NEPA. They said the environmental report is once again incomplete and inadequate after nine years and one-quarter of a billion dollars has been spent. Speakers asked Governor Brown to listen to Californians and end his push for the Delta Tunnels, once and for all. Speakers also explained how the Delta Tunnels will continue the trend towards centralization of the state?s water supply, at a time when regional resilience should be the goal.? They suggested redirecting state investment towards building and expanding local water sustainability projects like groundwater recharging, water recycling, and expanding urban conservation programs that have been so successful this year.??Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta, kicked off the press conference by announcing, ?Today we are proud to announce that 30,000 Californians, from every background, have submitted public comments against the Delta Tunnels! Governor Brown, the people of California are not convinced." "We have done our homework and read the 48,000 pages you asked us to when you told us to 'Shut Up.' We have decided we do not want to spend $60 billion to export more water from the San Francisco Bay-Delta estuary to the top one-percent of big industrial growers and special interest water districts," she explained. "We do not want a project that does not meet Clean Water Act or Endangered Species Act standards. We do not want a project that will decimate our regional economy. What we do want is sustainable solutions to California's water challenges based on recycling, conservation, stormwater capture, groundwater recharge, and local water projects that create jobs," she said. She also discussed a new document that exposes the real goals of the Kern County Water Agency (KCWA) - "unlimited water, on demand, with few environmental restrictions."? "In their drafted public comments letter on the Recirculated EIR/S for the Delta Tunnels, the Kern County Water Agency reveals the true goals of agricultural water exporters -- unlimited water supplies, even if it violates federal Endangered Species and Clean Water Acts," she noted.?In the letter KWCA declares appreciation for this revised draft because they believe it is ?an important? first step toward creating a workable solution for their agency. Yet, they still want more; otherwise, the project is not ?economically feasible," according to Barrigan Parrilla. (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/10/29/1442205/-A-Real-Halloween-Horror-Show-Jerry-Brown-s-Delta-Death-Tunnels)?State Senator Cathleen Galgiani followed Barrigan-Parrilla, affirming her opposition to the Delta Tunnels Plan. ?Notwithstanding the recent changes to the tunnel plan, I must remain opposed to it for both economic and environmental reasons," she emphasized. "The research has convincingly demonstrated how the tunnel plan is not economically justified and is financially infeasible without a substantial taxpayer subsidy. Many of the reported benefits of the ?WaterFix? project include unrealistic and inaccurate comparisons of conditions without the tunnels." "It is imperative that we look at many options with regards to long-term water policy. Any long-term plan including Delta tunnels will need to provide much more compelling economic, environmental and increased water supply arguments in order to be beneficial to the Delta and the State," Senator Galgiani concluded. Assemblymember Susan Talamantes Eggman noted that the "tunnels do nothing to increase water supply. They do nothing but cause further conflict in California."?Robert Wright, Senior Counsel for Friends of the River, emphasized the extreme ecological crisis that the San Francisco Bay-Delta is in now, with winter Run Chinook salmon, Delta and longfin smelt, Central Valley steelhead, green sturgeon and other species nearing the abyss of extinction. ?This is an emergency," said Wright. "The San Francisco Bay-Delta is in peril. Extinction is forever. This Tunnels project must either be dropped, or the ?Water Fix? agencies must issue new, honest documents under the National Environmental Policy Act and the California Environmental Policy Act that will disclose the cons of the Water Tunnels as well as tout the claimed pros and thus serve as a basis for meaningful review and consideration by the public. The lying has to stop.??Tim Sloane, Executive Director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, stated, ""It's not rocket science: our salmon and our Delta Estuary need fresh water to survive. The Tunnels would hijack that water and deprive all but a fraction of Californians of its benefits. It's just a big straw with public trust resources on the Delta end, and industrial agribusiness sucking on the other."? "This is our water," said Mike Hudson, commercial salmon fishermen and President of the Small Boat Commercial Fishermens' Association, referring to the water in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River watershed. "The current administration of the water by the state and federal governments doesn't work for us. My industry is at the edge of collapse because of the way the water is managed. Every year, even in good years, we need to fight for water for salmon."?Espe Vielma, from Environmental Justice Advisory Group for the San Joaquin Air Pollution Control District, said the California Water Fix and Bay Delta Conservation Plan processes have been excluded many people of color and non-English speakers. ? ?It's sad that there were few public comments from the Environmental Justice community," she stated. "Forty percent of Californians speak languages other than English at home; twenty percent of Californians speak Spanish at home. Our communities cannot comment on what they cannot read." "Did the Delta Tunnels agencies refuse to translate the plan because too many Spanish speakers would join the fight to stop the tunnels?? she asked. Rogene Reynolds, the President of the Restore the Delta Board of Directors and Delta landowner, ended the press conference by stating, "We are reaching out to Governor Brown. We are not telling him to 'shut up' like he told us to several months ago - we are asking him to listen."? On the day before, Californians for Water Security, touted the alleged benefits of the California Water Fix in a press release. ?The broad and diverse coalition supporting the Governor?s plan to fix our aging water distribution system represents strong majorities of Californians who want to secure our state?s water supply,? said Cesar Diaz, Legislative Director of the State Building and Construction Trades of California. ?Working families and all Californians need reliable access to water whether we are in a historic drought or saving water during wet times for the future.? ? However, this "broad and diverse coalition" included only one "environmental" NGO, the Natural Heritage Institute, no environmental justice organizations and not one single California Indian Tribe. In a classic ?case of institutional racism against Indigenous Peoples, both federally recognized and non-recognized Tribes have marginalized and excluded in both the Bay Delta Conservation Plan and California Water Fix processes. The 150 organizations in the pro-tunnels coalition did include agribusiness groups, water agencies, Chambers of Commerce, business organizations, construction unions and some community organizations.? The Governor and his allies are pushing the Delta Tunnels Plan at a time when Sacramento winter-run Chinook salmon, Delta and longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other imperiled fish species are getting closer and closer to the dark abyss of extinction. If preliminary figures released by the National Marine Fisheries Service this week are confirmed, this would be the second year in a row that nearly all of the juvenile winter-run Chinook salmon perished in lethally warm water conditions on the Sacramento River, due to the over-appropriation of water to agribusiness. ? ?The bottom line is they (the state and federal regulators) ignored the law,? Bill Jennings, Executive Director of the California Sportfishing Projection Alliance told the Sacramento Bee. ?We?ve over-appropriated and over-promised, and this is the result.? (http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article41684160.html) ? Everybody who cares about West Coast salmon fisheries, the Bay-Delta Estuary and ocean ecosystem, the public trust, Delta and Sacramento Valley farming, environmental justice, Tribal water rights, fair water rates for Southern California ratepayers and future of California must help drive a stake into Jerry Brown's water-sucking plan by taking action!? If you haven't already, you should sign the Restore the Delta petition at Change.org, but you don't have much time left:?http://restorethedelta.us3.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=06887fa70084fef8e939fef63&id=09bcd6ca08&e=120d0c2b69 Finally, you must check out the great Rage Against the Tunnels music video, "Get Fracked," about the tunnels scheme:?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi9UXcYPcas&feature=youtu.be? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dljackson at usbr.gov Mon Nov 2 09:40:22 2015 From: dljackson at usbr.gov (Jackson, Deanna) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 09:40:22 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Restoration Program's Monthly Coordination E-mail - November Message-ID: Good Morning, Attached is our monthly coordination e-mail for November. -- Deanna Jackson Secretary Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street Weaverville, California 96093 Phone: 530.623.1800 Fax: 530.623.5944 E-Mail: dljackson at usbr.gov Website: www.trrp.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRRP_Activities_2015_11_.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 60807 bytes Desc: not available URL: From derek_rupert at fws.gov Tue Nov 3 08:05:25 2015 From: derek_rupert at fws.gov (Rupert, Derek) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 08:05:25 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Mainstem Trinity River spawn survey update for October 30, 2015 Message-ID: Hello All, The US Fish and Wildlife Service along with the Yurok Tribe, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Forest Service, and Hoopa Valley Tribe have another weekly update for our Trinity River mainstem spawn survey posted on the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Fisheries webpage. Trinity River spawn survey update October 30, 2015. This week our crews mapped 293 redds (1,506 total for the year) in the Reaches from Lewiston Dam to Pigeon Point, and Big Flat to Cedar Flat. The graph below is clipped from our weekly report (limited to the river upstream of Cedar Flat). ? Coho Salmon have been seen moving through the Trinity. They will begin spawning soon and the field crew will mark their redds. Let's hope that the Coho show up in force and boost our total redd count for the year. Cheers, Derek -- Derek Rupert Fish Biologist US Fish and Wildlife Service Weaverville, CA Office 530.623.1805 Cell 570.419.2823 Derek_Rupert at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WeeklyGraphicSmall.png Type: image/png Size: 9762 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Nov 4 14:06:50 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 22:06:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: MP-15-193 Klamath River Coho Habitat Restoration Grant Program RFP, Open House In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1680831038.1922587.1446674810502.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Todd Plain To: tstokely at att.net Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2015 1:37 PM Subject: MP-15-193 Klamath River Coho Habitat Restoration Grant Program RFP, Open House MP-15-193 Klamath River Coho Habitat Restoration Grant Program RFP, Open House Mid-Pacific Region Sacramento, CAMP-15-193Media Contact: Shane Hunt, 916-978-5100, shunt at usbr.govFor Release On: Nov. 4, 2015Klamath River Coho Habitat Restoration Grant Program Announces Request for Proposal, Open HouseYreka, Cali. ? The Bureau of Reclamation, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation announced Nov. 4, 2015, a Request for Proposal under the Klamath River Coho Habitat Restoration Grant Program, a requirement of the 2013 Biological Opinion on Klamath Project operations. The restoration program will serve to enhance the survival and recovery of the Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), a species listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.To assist with development of project proposals, Reclamation, NMFS and NFWF invite the public to attend an open house event for an overview of the restoration program as well as details on the types of projects that will be given priority:Thursday, Nov. 5, 2015, from 2:45-5:00 p.m. Karuk Community Center 1836 Apsuun Drive Yreka, CA?For 2016, approximately $1 million in Reclamation funds will be available to implement coho habitat restoration actions within the Klamath River and its tributaries,? said Therese O?Rourke Bradford, Klamath Basin Area Office manager. ?The restoration program is a wonderful opportunity for Reclamation to meet its Endangered Species Act requirements while providing interested parties the prospect to develop and implement specific projects that offer direct benefit to the coho salmon.?The geographic focus is within the mainstem Klamath River and tributaries between Bogus Creek and the mainstem Salmon River. Projects in other tributaries in the mid and lower Klamath River may also be eligible under certain circumstances. The types of projects that will receive the highest priority are those that improve habitat and access to cold water refugia, create instream habitat enhancement and protection, remove barriers or other access improvement, and water conservation projects.To view the RFP, please visit http://www.nfwf.org/klamathcoho/Pages/2015-rfp.aspx. For additional information please contact Kristen Hiatt at 541-880-2577 (TTY 800-877-8339) or khiatt 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 Nov 4 09:36:42 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 17:36:42 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Initiative That Threatens Delta Tunnels Qualifies For Nov. 2016 Ballot In-Reply-To: <1EF00AB3-43DB-4255-BEC0-D793CA171621@fishsniffer.com> References: <1EF00AB3-43DB-4255-BEC0-D793CA171621@fishsniffer.com> Message-ID: <808203009.1822767.1446658602931.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> From: Dan Bacher To: Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2015 9:02 AM Subject: Initiative That Threatens Delta Tunnels Qualifies For Nov. 2016 Ballot ?http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/11/04/18779641.php? Photo of the entrance to the Delta Cross Channel Gates on the Sacramento River by Dan Bacher. 800_img_5005.jpg original image ( 5184x3456) Initiative That Threatens Delta Tunnels Qualifies For Nov. 2016 Ballot? by Dan Bacher? Governor Jerry Brown has done everything he can to prevent his environmentally destructive Delta Tunnels Plan from being approved by a vote by the public, but California voters in the November 2016 election will get a chance to stop the tunnels and other multi-billion dollar government projects from going forward without voter approval if they approve a Constitutional Amendment.? The "No Blank Checks Initiative," now poised for qualification on the November 8, 2016 Ballot, would force voter approval for public infrastructure bonds amounting to more than $2 billion and requiring new or increased taxes or fees.? If the initiative passes, it would prevent the multi-billion dollar "California Water Fix" Delta Tunnels Plan from being financed without a vote by the public.? Supporters have turned in 932,966 signatures for the measure that is spearheaded by Dean Cortopassi, a Stockton region farmer and landowner who has run a number of high profile media ads in recent years opposing the construction of a Peripheral Canal or Delta Tunnels. Cortopassi and his wife, Joan, have contributed $4 million to the initiative effort.? In a statement released on November 3, Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Executive Director of Restore the Delta, said that the group has not taken an official position on the initiative.? "Dean Cortopassi has not been a board member with Restore the Delta since the end of 2012," said Barrigan-Parrilla. "His total contributions over our nine-year history make up 2.4% of our total money raised. Restore the Delta was not consulted regarding the ballot initiative and has not taken a position on it, but we do support the ability of California voters to be heard when it comes to spending billions of dollars on a water project that is not designed to restore the Delta or solve the drought challenges we are facing today.?? Cortopassi, the Co-Owner of Stanislaus Food Products in Modesto, was not available for comment on the initiative at press time.? You can expect strong opposition to the "No Blank Checks Initiative" by corporate agribusiness interests on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley, developers, construction unions and companies, oil companies, Southern California water agencies and other Big Money interests that will aim to profit from the construction of the massive tunnels under the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.? ?It would be very problematic for creating a secure water supply in California,? Robin Swanson, a consultant working with the pro-tunnels Californians for Water Security, told the Sacramento Bee Monday. (http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article42315972.html)? The initiative's official ballot title is: Revenue Bonds. Infrastructure Projects. State Legislature and Voter Approval. Initiative Constitutional Amendment.? According to the official summary, the initiative:? "Requires State Legislature approve use of revenue bonds for public infrastructure projects funded, owned, or operated by the state or any joint agency that includes the state, if the bond amount exceeds $2 billion and repayment requires new, increased, or extended taxes, fees, or other charges. Requires that legislatively approved projects be presented on statewide ballot for voter approval. Applies to previously approved projects if remaining bond amount exceeds $2 billion. Requires that specified project information for all state bonds be included in voter ballot pamphlet."? The Delta Tunnels, a project that would hasten the extinction of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River Chinook salmon, Delta and longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other species, could cost ratepayers and taxpayers up to $68 billion.? Restore the Delta and allied conservation, fishing and community organizations on October 30, 2015 announced the filing of more than 30,000 comments on the EIR/EIS by members of the public at large at a press conference at the State Capitol in Sacramento. For a complete report on the event with photos, go to:http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/11/02/18779564.php? For detailed analysis of opposition to the Delta Tunnels, please visit this collection of Comment Letters on BDCP/California Water Fix New Draft EIR/EIS 2015:http://bpspr.us11.list-manage.com/track/click?u=1914aefabf5c2d2e17d6a9950&id=7ba113b0a1&e=886c8e9254 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 800_img_5005.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 304908 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Nov 5 07:53:37 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 15:53:37 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Capitol Journal Brown gets touchy over criticism of water tunnel plan References: <214645571.241959.1446738817144.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <214645571.241959.1446738817144.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-pol-sac-cap-brown-tunnels-20151105-column.html Capitol Journal? Brown gets touchy over criticism of water tunnel plan George SkeltonContact ReporterCapitol Journal?Gov.?Jerry Brown?has been getting quite cranky lately when anyone belittles a pet project, especially his proposed water tunnels.And if he's crotchety now, wait until next year's election, when he'll probably be forced to defend his pricey tunnels and pokey bullet train.That's because there'll be a citizens' initiative on the ballot that could bury the tunnels and sidetrack the train. The measure would require voter approval of any project with a price tag exceeding $2 billion if it's to be financed by state revenue bonds. The tunnels probably would be; the train, perhaps.Last week after tunnel opponents protested on the state Capitol steps ? claiming the $15.5-billion project was financially risky and a water grab by San Joaquin Valley corporate farmers and Southern California developers ? Brown issued a brief prepared statement unique in its formal acerbity.The governor began civilly enough: "The delta pipeline is essential to ? protecting fish and water quality. Without this fix, San Joaquin farms, Silicon Valley and other vital centers of the California economy will suffer devastating losses in their water supply." Opponents strongly disagree, contending that delta fish and water quality would suffer and that there are other, cheaper solutions for the state. But Brown's opening remark was not offensive. This concluding slap, however, was:"Claims to the contrary are false, shameful and do a profound disservice to California's future."Very un-gubernatorial. Since when is it shameful and a disservice to democracy to express an opposing viewpoint at the state Capitol?You might recall that in a speech last spring to local water officials the governor told tunnel opponents to "shut up" unless they'd studied the project ? as his administration had ? for 1 million hours. "Because you don't know what the hell you're talking about."That million hours, for one opponent, would consume 480 years of normal work weeks.The water managers laughed, and a Brown spokesman later said the governor was just kidding. But the body language didn't show that. It portrayed a guy who thinks he's the smartest one around ? maybe because he has been around longer than just about anyone else in the room. But Brown has always been that way, even decades ago when he was the new kid.In July, you might also remember, Brown spoke at a climate-change conference in Canada and called U.S. politicians who refuse to act against global warming "troglodytes," or cave dwellers.But back to the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, California's main water hub. Brown has been trying to build two humongous 40-foot-wide, 35-mile tunnels under the West Coast's largest estuary. They would siphon fresh water from the Sacramento River before it flows into the delta and pour it into southbound aqueducts.Brown says this is needed to protect California's water supply against collapsing levees during a big earthquake, against federal judges who periodically turn off fish-chomping pumps in the current plumbing system and against a rising salty sea in future global warming.Opponents point out there has never been such a delta earthquake in recorded history. And they argue there are cheaper alternatives that wouldn't destroy delta farming and salmon reliant on fresh water. They include strengthening delta levees and installing better fish screens on pumps. Plus finally building reservoirs and focusing on local projects: groundwater cleanup, storm water capture, recycling and desalination.One man who feels strongly about this is wealthy food processor Dean Cortopassi, 78, who has lived his entire life in the delta and loves it. He has spent $4 million of his own money to qualify what he calls the "no blank checks" initiative for the 2016 ballot.It's not a referendum on the tunnels, exactly, but could collapse them.A little civics refresher here: There are two basic types of state bonds. The most common is a general obligation bond, which is paid off through the state general fund with tax money. These bonds must be approved by voters. They're not involved in the initiative.The second type is a revenue bond. It is financed with revenue from a project: vehicle tolls or water rates. Voters don't get a say on these projects because they're paid for by user fees.Cortopassi's proposal would require any revenue bond project exceeding $2 billion to win voter approval. About the only current projects that would be affected are the twin tunnels and possibly the $68-billion bullet train. Voters already have approved $9 billion in general obligation bonds for high-speed rail, but that's far short of what would be needed to complete the line.Brown, labor unions and business interests are adamantly opposed to the measure. They contend it would torpedo many infrastructure projects. There could be some, such as dams partly paid for by water users.Requiring voter approval of huge user-funded projects might be a bad idea. That will require more thought. But the tunnel project was purposely set up to avoid the electorate. Politicians and their appointees are making all the decisions.And as Cortopassi pointed out to me, delta plumbing provides water for about two-thirds of California's population."I find it a specious argument that users are not taxpayers and taxpayers are not users," he says. "When do they ever get a chance to say aye or nay? We shouldn't be leaving that kind of willy-nilly spending up to government agencies."You'll no doubt be hearing more about that from the grumpy governor.george.skelton at latimes.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Thu Nov 5 15:58:32 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 15:58:32 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Winnemem Wintu & Conservationists: Shasta Dam Raise Will Destroy Native American Culture In-Reply-To: <214645571.241959.1446738817144.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <214645571.241959.1446738817144.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <214645571.241959.1446738817144.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/11/05/1445408/-Winnemem-Wintu-Conservationists-Shasta-Dam-Raise-Will-Destroy-Native-American-Culture From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Fri Nov 6 11:59:04 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 19:59:04 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River trapping Summary Jweek 44 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C592EA1@057-SN2MPN1-043.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hi All, Please see attached for the JWeek 44 update to the Trinity River trapping summary. This week's update shows only new data for the Willow Creek weir. It is a busy time at the hatchery and data for weekly updates will be sent as they become available. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW44.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 62060 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW44.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Nov 9 08:15:34 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 16:15:34 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Klamath Basin Water Deal Ticks Toward December Deadline References: <10166431.1623463.1447085734894.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <10166431.1623463.1447085734894.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.publicnewsservice.org/2015-11-09/energy-policy/klamath-basin-water-deal-ticks-toward-december-deadline/a48860-1 Public News Service - OR???November 09, 2015 Klamath Basin Water Deal Ticks Toward December Deadline KLAMATH FALLS, Ore. - Time is running out for Congress to pass the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement. But at the White House Tribal Nations Conference late last week, there were glimmers of hope that it could still be possible. President Obama told the group he's committed to working with tribal nations to protect natural resources and honor their heritage. Kathy Hill ? a member of the Klamath Tribal Council who was on the negotiating team for the agreement ? was there, and said she heard mixed views about the future of the water agreement. "[U.S. Interior Secretary] Sally Jewell was optimistic," said Hill. "But then another person, not with the administration, told me, 'You know, nothing's going to get through this House this year.' And that's the mood, I think maybe, in Washington, D.C." The agreement governs water use in southern Oregon and northern California. It was hammered out by more than 40 parties, but expires at the end of this year without congressional approval. The Senate bill (SB 133) is stalled until a companion House bill is introduced. For that, all eyes are on Congressman Greg Walden, who has said it's a priority.? Parts of the agreement affect more than Oregon and California. It calls for removal of four older dams in the region. However, if the agreement expires, PacifiCorp could upgrade and re-license the dams instead, passing the costs on to ratepayers in a half-dozen states. Greg Addington, executive director of the Klamath Water Users Association, said for irrigators, dam removal was a critical compromise. "We shook hands on that deal and we're still committed to that outcome, if the agreement goes forward," Addington said. "We don't want to go back and do this all over again; we don't even know if we can do it all over again. We've really tried to convey that sense of urgency to Congress. Hopefully, they hear us." But Hill wonders if lawmakers unfamiliar with Oregon's "water wars" understand the importance of the agreement. "With climate change and everything that's going on, this is something positive, that people felt like they were doing for the future of their communities," she said. "So, it concerns me that there's so much misunderstanding that I think could really be what causes some problems." She hopes members of Congress will see it the agreement as a successful local model for negotiations on tough topics, and that they'll vote for it ? if they get the chance.? ? ? ? ?Copyright ? 2015 Public News Service -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From derek_rupert at fws.gov Mon Nov 9 08:40:58 2015 From: derek_rupert at fws.gov (Rupert, Derek) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 08:40:58 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Mainstem Trinity River spawn survey update for November 6, 2015 Message-ID: Hello All, The US Fish and Wildlife Service along with the Yurok Tribe, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Forest Service, and Hoopa Valley Tribe have another weekly update for our Trinity River mainstem spawn survey posted on the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Fisheries webpage. Trinity River spawn survey update November 6, 2015. This week our crews mapped 186 redds (1,692 total for the year) in the Reaches from Lewiston Dam to Pigeon Point, and Hawkins Bar to Weitchpec. The graph below is clipped from our weekly report (limited to the river upstream of Cedar Flat). Hooray for rain and snow! Keep it coming Mother Nature. Cheers, Derek -- Derek Rupert Fish Biologist US Fish and Wildlife Service Weaverville, CA Office 530.623.1805 Cell 570.419.2823 Derek_Rupert at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WeeklyGraphicSmall.png Type: image/png Size: 9767 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Nov 10 15:18:07 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 23:18:07 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Fw=3A_This_just_in_=E2=80=A6_Enviro_group?= =?utf-8?q?s_sue_Reclamation_and_rice_growers_for_mismanagement_leading_to?= =?utf-8?q?_demise_of_near-extinct_salmon?= In-Reply-To: <88af2b23c65f1c863838dd9a5ee51fcf060.20151110221647@mail221.atl171.mcdlv.net> References: <88af2b23c65f1c863838dd9a5ee51fcf060.20151110221647@mail221.atl171.mcdlv.net> Message-ID: <1021996254.2335260.1447197487889.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Maven To: tstokely at att.net Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 2:16 PM Subject: This just in ? Enviro groups sue Reclamation and rice growers for mismanagement leading to demise of near-extinct salmon This just in ??Enviro groups sue Reclamation and rice growers for mismanagement leading to demise of near-extinct salmon#yiv6537892637 #yiv6537892637outlook a{padding:0;}#yiv6537892637 body{width:100% !important;}#yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637ReadMsgBody{width:100%;}#yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637ExternalClass{width:100%;}#yiv6537892637 body{}#yiv6537892637 body{margin:0;padding:0;}#yiv6537892637 img{border:0;height:auto;line-height:100%;outline:none;text-decoration:none;}#yiv6537892637 table td{border-collapse:collapse;}#yiv6537892637 #yiv6537892637backgroundTable{height:100% !important;margin:0;padding:0;width:100% !important;}#yiv6537892637 body, #yiv6537892637 #yiv6537892637backgroundTable{background-color:#FAFAFA;}#yiv6537892637 #yiv6537892637templateContainer{border:1px solid #DDDDDD;}#yiv6537892637 h1, #yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637h1{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:34px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv6537892637 h2, #yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637h2{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:30px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv6537892637 h3, #yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637h3{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:26px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv6537892637 h4, #yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637h4{color:#202020;display:block;font-family:Arial;font-size:22px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;margin-top:0;margin-right:0;margin-bottom:10px;margin-left:0;text-align:left;}#yiv6537892637 #yiv6537892637templatePreheader{background-color:#FAFAFA;}#yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637preheaderContent div{color:#505050;font-family:Arial;font-size:10px;line-height:100%;text-align:left;}#yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637preheaderContent div a:link, #yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637preheaderContent div a:visited, #yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637preheaderContent div a .yiv6537892637yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv6537892637 #yiv6537892637templateHeader{background-color:#FFFFFF;border-bottom:0;}#yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637headerContent{color:#202020;font-family:Arial;font-size:34px;font-weight:bold;line-height:100%;padding:0;text-align:center;vertical-align:middle;}#yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637headerContent a:link, #yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637headerContent a:visited, #yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637headerContent a .yiv6537892637yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv6537892637 #yiv6537892637headerImage{height:auto;max-width:600px !important;}#yiv6537892637 #yiv6537892637templateContainer, #yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637bodyContent{background-color:#FFFFFF;}#yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637bodyContent div{color:#505050;font-family:Arial;font-size:14px;line-height:150%;text-align:left;}#yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637bodyContent div a:link, #yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637bodyContent div a:visited, #yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637bodyContent div a .yiv6537892637yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637bodyContent img{display:inline;height:auto;}#yiv6537892637 #yiv6537892637templateFooter{background-color:#FFFFFF;border-top:0;}#yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637footerContent div{color:#707070;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;line-height:125%;text-align:left;}#yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637footerContent div a:link, #yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637footerContent div a:visited, #yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637footerContent div a .yiv6537892637yshortcuts {color:#336699;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv6537892637 .yiv6537892637footerContent img{display:inline;}#yiv6537892637 #yiv6537892637social{background-color:#FAFAFA;border:0;}#yiv6537892637 #yiv6537892637social div{text-align:center;}#yiv6537892637 #yiv6537892637utility{background-color:#FFFFFF;border:0;}#yiv6537892637 #yiv6537892637utility div{text-align:center;}#yiv6537892637 #yiv6537892637monkeyRewards img{max-width:190px;} | | | Breaking News from Maven's Notebook | Is this email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser. | | | | | | | | | Just posted at Maven's Notebook: This just in ? Enviro groups sue Reclamation and rice growers for mismanagement leading to demise of near-extinct salmon | | | | | | ?follow on Twitter | friend on Facebook | forward to a friend? | | Copyright ? 2015 Maven's Notebook, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you opted in at Maven's Notebook. Our mailing address is: Maven's NotebookP. O. Box 2342Canyon Country,, CA 91386 Add us to your address book | | | | | | | | | This email was sent to tstokely at att.net why did I get this?????unsubscribe from this list????update subscription preferences Maven's Notebook ? P. O. Box 2342 ? Canyon Country,, CA 91386 ? USA | | @media screen and (max-width:480px){#yiv6537892637 table[id="yiv6537892637canspamBar"] td{font-size:14px !important;}#yiv6537892637 table[id="yiv6537892637canspamBar"] td a{display:block;margin-top:10px !important;}} -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Tue Nov 10 15:31:45 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 15:31:45 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Pharaoh Brown Should Build A Pyramid Or Sphinx Rather Than Tunnels In-Reply-To: <1021996254.2335260.1447197487889.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <88af2b23c65f1c863838dd9a5ee51fcf060.20151110221647@mail221.atl171.mcdlv.net> <1021996254.2335260.1447197487889.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7CCDCFBA-F7FA-4CA8-9C5C-FF402B385064@fishsniffer.com> http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/11/10/18779837.php brown_stone_likeness.jpeg Pharaoh Brown Should Build A Pyramid Or Sphinx Rather Than Tunnels by Dan Bacher Jerry Meral, the former Brown administration's Bay Delta Conservation Plan point man who retired from state "service" in 2013, unwittingly exposed the absurdity of the California Water Fix to build the Delta Tunnels as a "legacy" project for Governor Jerry Brown when he recently compared opponents of the tunnels to people who didn?t like the pyramids being built. ?The people who filed the comments who haven?t wanted this project for 10 years or so and are still upset, so that?s not surprising,? Meral, who now works for the faux ?environmental group? called the Natural Heritage Institute, told the Sacramento Bee on November 8. ?I?m sure there were people who didn?t like the pyramids, but in the end they got built because, frankly, the people who had the power to build them built them.? (http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/delta/article43691418.html#storylink =cpy) Actually, Jerry, if the Governor?s "legacy" is all about him being a modern-day Pharoah with the overwhelming obsession of building a monument to his "legacy," a pyramid would be a much more environmentally friendly project than the salmon-killing Delta Tunnels. And I know of at least one Delta Tunnels opponent, Robert Ramsdell, who would wholeheartedly support the construction of a pyramid rather than Jerry Brown's Delta Death Tunnels. In 2013 Robert Ramsdell came up with a creative solution to how Governor Jerry Brown can build a gigantic monument to his legacy without building the enormously costly and environmentally destructive tunnels: "The period when a long time pol enters the terminal phase of his career is fraught with danger for the public (and in this case the environment, too). The nearly spent executive is obsessed with his 'legacy' and in the case of Jerry Brown, following in the foot steps of his father, these manias are exacerbated and can be especially hazardous to the common good. For instance: Having already smitten the poor and the elderly with savage budget cuts he has fixed his ambitions for managerial immortality on a grandiose scheme for a cross delta tunnel project, or in popular parlance: The Twin Tunnels of Ecological Doom. I have a few less destructive options for him to entertain instead of his legacy enhancing dreams for two giant tunnels under the California Delta, which will probably put the final nail in the coffin of the largest fresh/saltwater estuary on the West Coast and so to a priceless ecological and recreational resource. Alternatives: 1. Here is one tried and true legacy booster: a pyramid! Is there anything more mysterious and awe inspiring than a gigantic triangular pile of rocks pointing at the sky? And the effect can be enhanced further by rooms and tunnels cunningly designed into the structure. Maybe even a likeness of Linda Ronstadt (circa 1976) could be painted on the walls of some of the tunnels or a statue of her included in one of the torch lit rooms. 2. A stone likeness or monument (com'mon Jerry, at least think about it!) 3. A cathedral! Right religion for the Governor and it could only improve the sky line of Sacramento." Robert has some superb ideas on how Brown can build a giant monument to his "legacy" while at the same time not endangering the Delta, Central Valley salmon and Delta fish populations, Tribes, family farmers and the common good like his Delta Tunnels project will do. My personal favorite is a Pharoah-like pyramid, especially one with a likeness of Linda Ronstadt, circa 1976, painted on the walls. I would add likenesses and statues of Brown?s biggest campaign contributors, including Stewart and Linda Resnick, owners of Paramount Farms in Kern County. Since Brown is an avid supporter of the oil industry and its lobby, the Western States Petroleum Association, the wealthiest and most powerful corporate lobby in Sacramento, the logos of the association, Chevron, Exxon and other oil companies should be prominently engraved on its walls. The stone likeness or monument of Jerry Brown or a cathedral would also serve as great alternatives to the Delta tunnels. The Jerry Brown pyramid, monument or cathedral would be much more welcome additions to the landscape than a massive tunnel project that would take many years to complete. Not only would they be less costly and have a much lighter environmental footprint than the tunnels, but these works of art would help enhance the City of Sacramento skyline. Any of these three projects would provide a boost to the construction industry, providing lots of temporary jobs while the "legacy" project is being built. Now the only problem is convincing Brown to embrace one of these three alternatives to his legacy rather than building the Delta Tunnels that he is so obsessed with constructing. Delta Tunnels Background Delta residents, fishermen, Indian Tribes, environmentalists and a growing number of elected officials oppose the $67 billion tunnels plan, renamed the "California Water Fix" this year, because it would hasten the extinction of Central Valley steelhead, Sacramento River Chinook salmon, Delta and longfin smelt, green sturgeon and other fish species. The public comment period for the widely-opposed plan's Environmental Impact Report closed on October 30. The tunnels also threaten the Klamath River system, since much of the water destined for the tunnels would come from the Trinity River, the Klamath's largest tributary. The Trinity is the only out of basin water supply for the federal Central Valley Project. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: brown_stone_likeness.jpeg Type: image/jpeg Size: 68918 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Fri Nov 13 14:55:18 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 22:55:18 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Jweek45 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C59373F@057-SN2MPN1-043.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hi All, Please see attached for the JWeek 45 update to the Willow Creek Weir. This week's update also shows the JWeek 44 update for the Hatchery. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW45.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 62097 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW45.xlsx URL: From derek_rupert at fws.gov Tue Nov 17 07:55:00 2015 From: derek_rupert at fws.gov (Rupert, Derek) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 07:55:00 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Mainstem Trinity River spawn survey update for November 13, 2015 Message-ID: Hello All, The US Fish and Wildlife Service along with the Yurok Tribe, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Forest Service, and Hoopa Valley Tribe have another weekly update for our Trinity River mainstem spawn survey posted on the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Fisheries webpage. Trinity River spawn survey update November 13, 2015. This week our crews mapped 101 redds (1,793 total for the year) in the Reaches from Lewiston Dam to Pigeon Point, and Big Flat to Cedar Flat. The graph below is clipped from our weekly report (limited to the river upstream of Cedar Flat). ? Although Chinook Salmon spawning is wrapping up in the Reaches upstream of North Fork Trinity, we continue to see fish building redds downstream of Big Flat. Chinook Salmon in the lower portions of the Trinity often spawn later in the year, than their upper stream counterparts. Cheers, Derek -- Derek Rupert Fish Biologist US Fish and Wildlife Service Weaverville, CA Office 530.623.1805 Cell 570.419.2823 Derek_Rupert at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WeeklyGraphicSmall.png Type: image/png Size: 9800 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Nov 18 10:16:41 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 18:16:41 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Proposed 2016 Bucktail Channel Rehabilitation Site Draft Environmental Document for Review In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <132489016.5686871.1447870601853.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Proposed 2016 Bucktail Channel Rehabilitation Site Draft Environmental Document for Review By Eric Peterson | Published: November 16, 2015 Document Links: - Draft EA/IS (14 MB) - Checklist (0.45 MB) - Excerpted Site Map (figure 3) (0.48 MB) - Public Meeting Display Ad (0.12 MB) - Other Relevant Documents: - Master EIR - Programmatic EIS/EIR - TRRP Foundational Documents Proposed 2016 Bucktail Channel Rehabilitation Site Draft Environmental Document for ReviewPublic Meeting: Public Meeting: Wednesday, December 2nd, 2015 at the Lewiston Moose Lodge, Lewiston, CA 6:30 to 8:30pmAs part of the Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) channel rehabilitation activities, 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 this December meeting to learn about proposed 2016 construction at the Bucktail Channel Rehabilitation site (Bucktail) and to provide your input. input. On Wednesday December 2nd, 2015, the Bucktail meeting will be held at the Lewiston Moose Lodge in Lewiston, CA from 6:30 to 8:30pm. Project information will be presented and comments on the project will be accepted.The Bucktail Site (River Mile (RM) 105.4 ? 107.0) is a 110.4 acre site that begins at the Bucktail Bridge and extends upstream approximately 1.5 miles to RM 107.0. The TRRP proposes to construct Bucktail in summer 2016 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 both terrestrial and aquatic habitat quality. The Project would increase habitat complexity via construction of slow water refuge habitats (e.g., side channels and wetland complexes) for juvenile salmon and steelhead, reconnection of the floodplain with the river, revegetation with native plants, and placement of wood/rock structures to react with flow and create/maintain habitat.The Draft Environmental Document that formally analyzes the impacts of these projects and which meets California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements will be available in November 2015 at www.trrp.net, and on the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation?s website: http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=23209 for public review and comment. The comment period will extend from the date of posting though January 4, 2016. Hard copies are available for review at the TRRP office (by Tops Grocery) or at the Trinity County library.For further information or to submit a comment, please contact Mr. Brandt Gutermuth, TRRP office, P.O. Box 1300, Weaverville, CA 96093 at 623-1806 or e-mail bgutermuth at usbr.gov. -- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Wed Nov 18 10:31:36 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 10:31:36 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] CBB: Climate Conference: Higher Temperatures For PNW New Normal No Matter What Happens With Greenhouse Gases Message-ID: <005701d1222f$5c6b7ad0$15427070$@sisqtel.net> Klamath Basin acting like Pacific Northwest? THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN: Weekly Fish and Wildlife News www.cbbulletin.com November 13, 2015 Issue No. 771 Climate Conference: Higher Temperatures For PNW New Normal No Matter What Happens With Greenhouse Gases A warming ocean that began long before the most recent El Ni?o is causing a West Coast drought, first in California and now in the Northwest. While the drought in California that began almost four years ago is the result of a lack of rain, the Northwest drought that began two years ago is due to a lack of snow, not precipitation. Relatively normal rainfall, but record low snowpack is causing drier than normal Northwest summers, impacting stream levels and stream temperatures, causing fish and wildlife to seek colder water or higher mountain pastures, and killing salmon and sturgeon in the Columbia River basin. That?s the dismal picture painted by scientists at the 6th annual Northwest Climate Conference in Coeur D?Alene, Idaho, November 4 through 6. Some 310 people from six states and British Columbia attended the conference to discuss the changing climate -- not debate it -- and how to adapt as the climate warms by up to 8 degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century and as winter snowpack and summer streamflows decline. They discussed how fish and wildlife could adjust in this century. Academics, non-profits, government, tribes and the public from Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Alaska and British Columbia were all represented at the conference. Precipitation in 2015 was about 9.8 percent below normal across the Northwest, but that doesn?t constitute a long-term trend, according to Phil Mote, director of the Climate Change Research Center at Oregon State University. It?s a ?wet drought? and the projected changes in precipitation are modest, he added. ?Rain is good, snow is better,? said Ron Abramovich of the U.S. Department of Agriculture?s Natural Resources Conservation Service Snow Survey. ?We are not having a precipitation drought, but with the temperature about 1 to 5 (C) degrees above normal, we?re having a snow drought.? Mote and Abramovich, along with Nicholas Bond, from the Joint Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and Ocean at the University of Washington, and Kathie Dello, assistant director of the Oregon Climate Change Research Institute at OSU, spoke about the reasons and impacts of warming on the Northwest climate in the conference?s opening session, titled collectively ?Water Year 2015: A prototype for the future climate of the Northwest?? Bond explained the reason for the warming seas along the west coast, saying that since 2013 there have been positive sea surface temperature anomalies in the Northeast Pacific, sometimes referred to as the ?blob.? In his conference abstract, he said: ?Anomalous air-sea interactions associated with a strong and persistent ridge of higher than normal sea-level pressure resulted in reduced seasonal cooling of the upper ocean during the winter of 2013-14. The ridge itself, at least in part, appears to have been part of a large-scale remote response to conditions in the far western tropical Pacific.? He said it looked similar to an El Ni?o at the time, but had its roots further west and during the 2014-15 winter it shifted eastward and brought a lower than normal sea level pressure over nearly the entire Northeast Pacific Ocean. Beginning in the summer of 2015, it brought warm water to the entire west coast of North America. ?The warm ocean temperatures have had major and wide-ranging impacts on the marine ecosystem,? he added. The impacts in the ocean? According to Bond: --Fish are found well-north of their usual ranges, --but even more important is the impact to the basic food web off the West Coast, with cold water high-in-fat copepods being displaced by warm water copepods with less nutrition, --massive die-offs of seabirds, --closure of commercial crabbing, --closure of clamming caused by massive neurotoxin blooms. Bond isn?t sure how the neurotoxins would affect salmon and steelhead, but said it?s possible that salmon don?t accumulate the toxins internally as do clams and other shellfish or that they simply feed further offshore. Speaking of the impacts on the Northwest, Mote said there are three ?flavors? of drought. The 1976-77 winter is still the driest winter on record with the lowest water year. 2003 was a dry summer, but was confined to west of the Cascade Mountains. Now, he said, we?ve had two warm winters and springs back to back. In April 2015, 81 percent of the Northwest snow sites were at record low levels. The Oregon snowpack in April, he said, was above 6,000 feet. In California, it was above 8,000 feet. ?The higher temperatures will become the new normal regardless of what we do now with our greenhouse gas emissions,? Mote said. He added that global emissions measured in 2012 were on a very high trajectory, although Oregon emissions peaked in 1995 and has declined about 12 percent since then. But not all of the recent warming in the Northwest has been due to climate change caused by the buildup of CO2 in the atmosphere, he said. Of the nearly 5 degrees Fahrenheit rise in average temperatures above the 20-year average, over the past two winters, he said, 3 degrees is likely due to being an exceptional weather year and just 2 degrees is due to warming from global climate change. The impacts on the Northwest? Conference presenters noted: --Farmers in Malheur County, Oregon had to change to more drought resistant crops this year at a $100 million loss. -- Seattle's two small water reservoirs approached empty this summer, with the City drawing on voluntary curtailments and wells to provide enough water for residents, according to James Rufo Hill of Seattle Public Utilities. The utility is exploring the option of beginning to refill the reservoirs early to ensure full water as they hit summer. --The John Day River, which has no water storage on the river, had record low water levels this summer. -- One-half million acres of forest and scrub burned in Washington State, costing the U.S. Forest Service as much as $3 billion dollars in firefighting bills. That rivaled 1910 in the number of acres burned in one fire season, said Richy Harrod of the U.S. Forest Service. --Detroit Lake on the Santiam River has nine boat launches, but all but one were unusable this summer, -- The early season projected run of endangered sockeye salmon to Redfish Lake in Idaho was 4,000, but just 50 of the fish made it all the way to the lake on their own due to higher than normal temperatures in the lower Snake River, said Chip Corsi of Idaho Fish and Game. --On the mid-Oregon coast, the small town of Yachats had no spring rain to speak of and was running out of water this summer, --On the southern Oregon coast, Brookings saw saltwater intrusion because the Chetko River was so low. -- Summer chinook and resident bull trout in Idaho found their entry to spawning areas blocked due to low or no water. -- A failed huckleberry crop in the Idaho mountains has driven black and grizzly bears into more urban areas in northern Idaho. -- Some deer were lost to "blue tongue," an illness that occurs when deer concentrate around water holes. Also see: -- CBB, November 6, 2015, ?Northwest Climate Conference: Not About Whether Climate Is Changing, But How To Adapt,? http://www.cbbulletin.com/435502.aspx -- CBB, July 10, 2015, ?Is ?The Blob? Off West Coast Responsible For NW Drought? Maybe, Looking for ?Science Volunteers,?? http://www.cbbulletin.com/434485.aspx -- CBB, April 10, 2015, ?Warm Blob? Of Water Off West Coast Linked To Warmer Temps, Disruption Of Marine Food Web? http://www.cbbulletin.com/433648.aspx -- CBB, Sept, 12, 2014, ?Warm Water Expanse From Pacific To Japan Likely Bringing Changes To Marine Food Web? http://www.cbbulletin.com/432074.aspx -------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vina_frye at fws.gov Wed Nov 18 15:24:30 2015 From: vina_frye at fws.gov (Frye, Vina) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 15:24:30 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Federal Register Message-ID: Hi Folks, The Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group has scheduled a meeting on December 10, 2015. I have attached the meeting details. Best regards, Vina Vina Frye Fish Biologist 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: Federal Register.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 167182 bytes Desc: not available URL: From derek_rupert at fws.gov Fri Nov 20 13:36:47 2015 From: derek_rupert at fws.gov (Rupert, Derek) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 13:36:47 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Mainstem Trinity River spawn survey update for November 20, 2015 Message-ID: Hello All, The US Fish and Wildlife Service along with the Yurok Tribe, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Forest Service, and Hoopa Valley Tribe have another weekly update for our Trinity River mainstem spawn survey posted on the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Fisheries webpage. Trinity River spawn Survey update November 20, 2015. This week our crews mapped 186 redds (1,979 total for the year) in the Reaches from Lewiston Dam to Pigeon Point, and Hawkins Bar to Weitchpec (mouth of Trinity River). The graph below is clipped from our weekly report (limited to the river upstream of Cedar Flat). ? Make sure to check out the video of two male Chinook Salmon fighting over the rights to a redd. You can really see how viciously these big boys can battle. The link is in the report above. Cheers, Derek -- Derek Rupert Fish Biologist US Fish and Wildlife Service Weaverville, CA Office 530.623.1805 Cell 570.419.2823 Derek_Rupert at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WeeklyGraphicSmall.png Type: image/png Size: 9776 bytes Desc: not available URL: From magallagher at usbr.gov Thu Nov 19 16:39:07 2015 From: magallagher at usbr.gov (Gallagher, Michele) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 16:39:07 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: MP-15-203: Trinity River Restoration Program Bucktail Draft EA-IS Message-ID: Michele Gallagher Project Coordination Specialist Trinity River Restoration Program Tel (530) 623-1804 Fax (530)623-5944 magallagher at usbr.gov ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Plain, Todd Date: Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 2:58 PM Subject: MP-15-203: Trinity River Restoration Program Bucktail Draft EA-IS To: BOR MP All Mid-Pacific Employees Cc: Joseph Fontana , Lauren Meredith , Daniel DuBray , Dionne Thompson , Mathew Maucieri , Patricia Aaron , Peter Soeth , Regina Weinstock , Robert Gabour , Robert Wolf , Sarah Webster Hello - The attached news release, "Reclamation Announces Draft Environmental Documents and Public Meeting on Bucktail Channel Rehabilitation Project" was distributed today, Thursday, Nov. 19. *Read online: http://on.doi.gov/1MXFqFo Thanks! -- Todd Plain Public Affairs Specialist Bureau of Reclamation 2800 Cottage Way, MP-140 Sacramento, CA 95825 916-978-5100 (Main) 916-978-5106 (Direct) 916-202-4263 (iPhone) tplain at usbr.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: MP-15-203 Trinity River Restoration Program Bucktail Draft EA-IS.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 195085 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Fri Nov 20 16:09:49 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 00:09:49 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River trapping_summary update JW46.xlsx Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C59CF58@057-SN2MPN1-042.057d.mgd.msft.net> Greetings All, Please see attached for the Jweek 46 Trinity River trapping summary update. Steve -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW46.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 62317 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW46.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Nov 23 12:17:41 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 14:17:41 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Troy Fletcher passed away Friday night Message-ID: <084402BD-58AB-46AD-BBCF-C65373AF6520@att.net> I'm very sad to report that Troy Fletcher passed away Friday night from a heart attack. He was executive director of the Yurok Tribe, a great man and a really good person. Our hearts go out to his family and the Yurok Tribe. He will be greatly missed! Sent from my iPhone From bgutermuth at usbr.gov Mon Nov 23 17:38:15 2015 From: bgutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F.) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 17:38:15 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Troy Fletcher passed away Friday night Message-ID: A short tribute to Troy Fletcher is available at: http://www.yuroktribe.org/documents/1Yurok_press_release_web.pdf Troy was a strong leader and will be missed by all. Brandt Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Scientist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S. Main ST. Weaverville CA 96093 530.623.1806 Voice http://www.trrp.net/ On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Tom Stokely wrote: > I'm very sad to report that Troy Fletcher passed away Friday night from a > heart attack. He was executive director of the Yurok Tribe, a great man and > a really good person. Our hearts go out to his family and the Yurok Tribe. > He will be greatly missed! > > 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 Nov 24 18:04:01 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 20:04:01 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] As wok Troy Fletcher Facebook page Message-ID: Information on services for Troy can be found if you scroll down on this Facebook page https://m.facebook.com/groups/1481519498822175/ Sent from my iPhone From tgstoked at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 18:06:02 2015 From: tgstoked at gmail.com (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 20:06:02 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] As wok Troy Fletcher Facebook page In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1FDD15E9-FFE7-4689-AFBE-700C3E3D1281@gmail.com> That was supposed to be "Aawok" Troy Fletcher. Darned auto spell! Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 24, 2015, at 8:04 PM, Tom Stokely wrote: > > Information on services for Troy can be found if you scroll down on this Facebook page https://m.facebook.com/groups/1481519498822175/ > > Sent from my iPhone > _______________________________________________ > env-trinity mailing list > env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/env-trinity From tgstoked at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 18:17:28 2015 From: tgstoked at gmail.com (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 20:17:28 -0600 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Troy Fletcher Memorial Service References: Message-ID: <60921E38-9460-4F3C-A953-26E7D90A88AE@gmail.com> Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: Gail Goodyear > Date: November 24, 2015 at 8:11:46 PM CST > To: Tom Stokely > Subject: Troy Fletcher Memorial Service > > Services will be held on Saturday, Nov., 28 at 10 a.m. at the Yurok Tribal office in Klamath. The family asks that in lieu of flowers donations be made to the Aawok Troy Fletcher Memorial Fund, through the Humboldt Area Foundation. HAF?s address is 373 Indianola Rd., Bayside Ca 95524. There will be an opportunity to make a donation at the Saturday service. > > > From: tgstoked at gmail.com > > Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 20:06:02 -0600 > > To: tstokely at att.net > > CC: env-trinity at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us > > Subject: Re: [env-trinity] As wok Troy Fletcher Facebook page > > > > That was supposed to be "Aawok" Troy Fletcher. Darned auto spell! > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > On Nov 24, 2015, at 8:04 PM, Tom Stokely wrote: > > > > > > Information on services for Troy can be found if you scroll down on this Facebook page https://m.facebook.com/groups/1481519498822175/ > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 Tue Nov 24 20:07:01 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 20:07:01 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Troy Fletcher, Yurok Tribe's Visionary Leader, Passes Away In-Reply-To: References: <6B50F44E-14F1-4CDE-9E8D-23BB3557821C@fwwatch.org>, Message-ID: <86ED7A10-EEFC-474B-BED7-4B3D0D36E2DD@fishsniffer.com> Troy Fletcher, Yurok Tribe's Visionary Leader, Passes Away Troy Fletcher, a visionary leader of the Yurok Tribe, passed away of a heart attack on Friday night, November 20. I first met Troy nearly 20 years ago at a Fish and Game Commission hearing when he was the director of the Yurok Fisheries Program. From that first time I talked to Troy, I watched him play the key leadership role in building bridges between the Tribe and commercial fishermen, recreational anglers, environmentalists, farmers, other tribes and federal and state government officials who were often in conflict with one another. Troy, who became the Executive Director of the Tribe, was one of the rare people who could truly see the "big picture" of fishery and environmental restoration - and what was necessary to restore the Klamath Basin and Pacific fisheries. He told me several times at protests and meetings, "Fishermen will always fight over the fish. Our goal is to see that there are more fish that we can fight over." He also talked to me a number of times about his vision of the way to accomplish restoration of the Klamath and other fisheries - by forming "blue collar" task forces rather than the "Blue Ribbon Task Forces" dominated by corporate interests and political appointees that oversaw the MLPA Initiative, BDCP and other environmental processes. Troy said these blue collar panels would be comprised only of those whose hands "touch the water" - farmers, recreational anglers, commercial fishermen and tribal gatherers and fishermen. Troy, along with Ron Reed of the Karuk Tribe, spoke at rallies and meetings in solidarity with recreational anglers and commercial fishermen fighting to bring back salmon on the Klamath, Sacramento and other watersheds - and fighting to defend their fishing rights. While Troy was a bridge builder, he also stood firm when the Tribe's sovereign rights were being infringed upon by a state or federal government agency. For example, at the Legislature's Fisheries Forum in 2010, he warned the legislators that Yurok Tribe members were willing to engage in civil disobedience if their traditional fishing and gathering rights were violated under the Marine Life Protection Act Initiative. My condolences go to the Yurok Tribe, Troy Fletcher's family, and everybody whose life Troy touched. Dan Bacher Below is the press release from the Yurok Tribe: http://www.yuroktribe.org FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Matt Mais (707) 482-1350 Yurok Tribe Mourns the Loss of Visionary Leader It is with deep despair and a heavy heart that we announce the untimely passing of Tribal luminary, Troy Fletcher. ?This is a tragic loss for the Yurok people, so tragic that words cannot express how we feel,? said Thomas P. O?Rourke Sr., Chairman of the Yurok Tribe. ?Troy accomplished things that many people thought were impossible. We will forever be grateful for Troy?s tremendous contribution to the Tribe. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family.? ?We are all devastated by the passing of our friend, brother and colleague,? added Susan Masten, the Yurok Tribe?s Vice Chair. ?Troy dedicated his life and put his heart and soul into his effort to protect and restore the Klamath River. He will be greatly missed by all.? Fletcher, a longtime Executive Director for the Yurok Tribe, passed away on Friday evening, after suffering from a heart attack. He started his career with the Yurok Tribe as the first Tribal fisheries manager in 1994. The Yurok Tribal member and visionary leader ran the day-to-day operations of the Tribal government. He played a prominent part in nearly every important Tribal policy decision, land acquisition, litigation and legislative effort in the last 20 years. Fletcher, a tenacious Tribal advocate, accumulated a long list of history-making accomplishments, such as sowing the seeds that started the Tribe?s natural resource protection programs, during his time working for the Tribe. While the truly humble human being would never take the credit, Fletcher was responsible for ending a generations- long conflict between many competing Klamath River-based interests, including: farmers, commercial fishers, a power company, environmental groups and other Tribes. Turning this group of fierce, former adversaries into a cooperative coalition, focused on removing four Klamath dams and creating a plan for equitable water use was just one the many achievements in his storied career. ?Troy?s integrity and innate leadership skills made him a magnet to all,? said Dave Hillemeier, the Yurok Fisheries Program Manager. ?We have lost a beloved friend, father, son, husband, mentor, leader, boss and a person respected by those from all walks of life.? The benevolent boss instilled many positive principles into his employees and empowered them to achieve greatness. He valued initiative and preparedness. Fletcher treated all of the staff fairly and with respect. He emphasized the importance of developing meaningful relationships with representatives of outside agencies. In Fletcher?s opinion, the Tribe had a right and an obligation to manage all of the lands within Yurok ancestral territory and places that affect the Tribe, such as upriver from its borders. He saw those who opposed him as an opportunity to build a bridge. Before making any decisions involving natural resources, he first asked, ?Does this work for fish?? The leading figure in the campaign to solve the Klamath water crisis also filled an irreplaceable role in the Tribe?s effort to reacquire substantial swaths of land within Yurok territory. His behind-the- scenes work paved the way for the Tribe to procure more than 35,000 acres in the Pecwan and Blue Creek watersheds. Both of these drainages, located in the Tribe?s traditional territory, are culturally invaluable and incredibly important for fish and wildlife populations. In 1999 Fletcher transitioned to the Executive Director position. As the Fisheries Manager and then as Executive Director, he established the Tribe?s, award-winning Watershed Restoration and Environmental Programs and expanded the Fisheries Program. Today, these programs have more 70 staff that are committed to improving environmental conditions in Yurok ancestral territory. The universally respected administrator managed more than a dozen departments and 300-plus personnel. Most recently, Fletcher was shepherding a strategy to spur the United States Congress into creating legislation that would broaden the Reservation?s boundaries to include the recent land purchases and increase the Tribe?s role in managing the lands within Yurok ancestral territory. He was also working with representatives of the federal government to release the remaining elements of the Hoopa/Yurok Settlement Act. The distinguished director worked his way from a fisheries technician to overseeing the fast-growing Tribal government. On behalf of the Yurok people, Fletcher testified before Congress, presented to numerous state and federal regulatory committees and travelled to Washington DC many times to advocate for Tribal rights and to improve conditions on the Klamath River. Fletcher was raised in Pecwan, which is where he spawned a life-long connection to the Klamath River. He committed his entire adult life to restoring the river, preserving Tribal culture and returning the Tribe to its rightful role in Yurok Country. He leaves behind his parents, Jacqueline and Don Winter, his sons Troy Fletcher Jr., Cody and Zachary, grandchildren Cody Jr. and Raa-yoy, as well as his wife Kari. Services will be held on Saturday, Nov., 28 at 10 a.m. at the Yurok Tribal office in Klamath. The family asks that in lieu of flowers donations be made to the Aawok Troy Fletcher Memorial Fund, through the Humboldt Area Foundation. HAF?s address is 373 Indianola Rd., Bayside Ca 95524. There will be an opportunity to make a donation at the Saturday service. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Tue Dec 1 11:34:48 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 11:34:48 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] TimesStd: Eel River flows still too low in peak salmon spawning period Message-ID: <004d01d12c6f$586856c0$09390440$@sisqtel.net> Eel River flows still too low in peak salmon spawning period http://mn4-njweb.newscyclecloud.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/storyimage/NJ/20151129/NE WS/151129865/AR/0/AR-151129865.jpg&maxh=400&maxw=667 A Chinook salmon swims up a river bar on a low flowing Eel River this month. Photo courtesy of the Eel River Recovery Project By Will Houston , Eureka Times-Standard Posted: 11/29/15, 4:02 PM PST | Updated: 10 hrs ago 0 Comments http://mn4-njweb.newscyclecloud.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/storyimage/NJ/20151129/NE WS/151129865/EP/1/1/EP-151129865.jpg&maxh=400&maxw=667Tire tracks running through riffles on the South Fork Eel River near High Rock show that the low flowing waters have allowed for crossings that are atypical for this time of year. Eel River Recovery Project board member Eric Stockwell said cars on the river could accidentally run over salmon eggs, which are lain at the head of these riffles. Photo courtesy of the Eel River Recovery Project This month's rainfall and cooler temperatures have helped lessen the strain on salmon migrating on the Eel River, but not near enough to ease the concerns of local researchers. And they have their reasons. Since Chinook salmon began entering the drought-stricken river this year, they were met with near-historic low flows preventing their upriver migration to spawning areas, a currently unexplained blindness and "zombie-like" behavior, poachers, and cars running over what spawning grounds they can find. "It's a hard thing to watch," Eel River Recovery Project board member and research diver Eric Stockwell said. So far, Stockwell said, there have been a reports of a few hundred fish having made it to the main stem Eel River and the South Fork Eel River about 20 to 30 miles south of Fortuna. National Marine Fisheries Service fish biologist Zane Ruddy said this time of year is a "peak" time for salmon spawning, but added that salmon would normally be much farther upriver and would have spread out among different tributaries. Instead, many of them have been forced to lay their eggs right on the river due to the low flows, which presents several uncertainties. "This is the time," Ruddy said. "It's not to say that they can't be successful in spawning in place. It all depends on the flows that occur after they spawn." If a large number of fish can't reach their preferred spawning ground, they'll lay the eggs on the river and essentially "put all their eggs in one basket," Ruddy said. These fish run the risk of having their eggs scoured should a strong winter storm touch down on the area and wash them away. Ruddy said the Chinook salmon are able to "diversify the risk" and increase the chance of their offsprings' survival by spreading out among different tributaries. Spawning success relies on a fragile balance with river flows. Ruddy said that salmon will not move upriver until triggered to do so by high river flows caused by storm events. While a few spurts of rain have allowed some fish to move, U.S. Geological Survey flow data shows the Eel River flows near Scotia are currently at only one-sixth of their normal levels of about 1,400 cubic feet per second. "If you look at storms last year, we had flows over 10,000 cubic feet per second and sustained storms from November and all the way through December," Ruddy said. "This year we haven't had any substantial storms." Ruddy said fish would normally be showing up at the California Department of Fish and Wildlife's Van Arsdale fish counting station near Willits around now, but none have made it as of Tuesday. Stockwell said the salmon that are currently spawning are those that entered the river in the late summer and early fall. During this long wait, some of the fish crowded in small pools that were filled with oxygen-consuming algae. As a result of these stressful conditions, many fish showed strange signs of blindness and lethargy to the point that researchers could hover their hand over the fish's face with no reaction. Fish samples are currently being assessed at the University of California Davis to determine the cause of these troubling symptoms. Some of these "zombie fish" have made it to the main stem about 20 miles south of Fortuna, though Stockwell did not know if they were spawning. For the fish that have just been entering the river from Fernbridge, Stockwell said the rains and cool temperatures will cushion them from these poor conditions. "I think that it's almost impossible that these fresher fish coming in are going to be affected by what got the fish with the lower flows and warmer temperatures," he said. That doesn't mean there aren't challenges. Evidence of poachers has been seen along the banks of the river, including one instance where a rearing female's eggs were found on the gravel, Stockwell said. Near High Rock on the South Fork Eel River, Stockwell said he and others have been noticing tire tracks going across the river. "When the river is low the places to cross are at the head of a riffle. But it's also the place that salmon spawn," Stockwell said. "Usually this time of year the river would have gone up so much that people wouldn't be driving on the river. This is one of the bad things about the drought." Will Houston can be reached at 707-441-0504. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 34260 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 31646 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dljackson at usbr.gov Tue Dec 1 14:19:57 2015 From: dljackson at usbr.gov (Jackson, Deanna) Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 14:19:57 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Restoration Program's Monthly Coordination E-mail - December Message-ID: Good Afternoon, Attached is our monthly coordination e-mail for December. -- Deanna Jackson Secretary Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 South Main Street Weaverville, California 96093 Phone: 530.623.1800 Fax: 530.623.5944 E-Mail: dljackson at usbr.gov Website: www.trrp.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: TRRP_Activities_2015_12.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 60372 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bgutermuth at usbr.gov Wed Dec 2 13:17:43 2015 From: bgutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F.) Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 13:17:43 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Public meeting tonight for - Proposed 2016 Bucktail Channel Rehabilitation Project Message-ID: Dear Trinity River interested parties: This is a reminder that we are holding a public meeting tonight at 6:30 pm (12/2/15 at the Moose Lodge in Lewiston, CA). We will be discussing the Proposed 2016 Bucktail Channel Rehabilitation Project. See the following link for additional information: Public Meeting Display Ad (0.12 MB) The 2015 Bucktail Channel Rehabilitation Site Draft Environmental document is located at: Draft EA/IS (14 MB) Hope to see you there. 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 http://www.trrp.net/ Proposed 2016 Bucktail Channel Rehabilitation Site Draft Environmental Document for Review | Published: November 16, 2015 Document Links: - Draft EA/IS (14 MB) - Checklist (0.45 MB) - Excerpted Site Map (figure 3) (0.48 MB) - Public Meeting Display Ad (0.12 MB) - Other Relevant Documents: - Master EIR - Programmatic EIS/EIR - TRRP Foundational Documents *Proposed 2016 BucktailChannel Rehabilitation SiteDraft Environmental Document for Review* *Public Meeting: Public Meeting: Wednesday, December 2nd, 2015at the Lewiston Moose Lodge, Lewiston, CA 6:30 to 8:30pm* As part of the Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) channel rehabilitation activities, 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 this December meeting to learn about proposed 2016 construction at the Bucktail Channel Rehabilitation site (Bucktail) and to provide your input. *input. On Wednesday December 2nd, 2015, the Bucktail meeting will be held at the Lewiston Moose Lodge in Lewiston, CA from 6:30 to 8:30pm. Project information will be presented and comments on the project will be accepted.* The Bucktail Site (River Mile (RM) 105.4 ? 107.0) is a 110.4 acre site that begins at the Bucktail Bridge and extends upstream approximately 1.5 miles to RM 107.0. The TRRP proposes to construct Bucktail in summer 2016 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 both terrestrial and aquatic habitat quality. The Project would increase habitat complexity via construction of slow water refuge habitats (e.g., side channels and wetland complexes) for juvenile salmon and steelhead, reconnection of the floodplain with the river, revegetation with native plants, and placement of wood/rock structures to react with flow and create/maintain habitat. The Draft Environmental Document that formally analyzes the impacts of these projects and which meets California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements will be available in November 2015 at www.trrp.net, and on the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation?s website: http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=23209 for public review and comment. The comment period will extend from the date of posting though January 4, 2016. Hard copies are available for review at the TRRP office (by Tops Grocery) or at the Trinity County library. For further information or to submit a comment, please contact Mr. Brandt Gutermuth, TRRP office, P.O. Box 1300, Weaverville, CA 96093 at 623-1806 or e-mail bgutermuth at usbr.gov. > _______________________________________________ > 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 Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Thu Dec 3 09:39:41 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 17:39:41 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping summary Jweek 47 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C59EA33@057-SN2MPN1-042.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hi All, Please see attached for the Jweek 47 trapping summary update for the Willow Creek weir and update to Jweek 46 for the Trinity River Hatchery. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW47.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 62406 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW47.xlsx URL: From sari at sisqtel.net Fri Dec 4 16:20:50 2015 From: sari at sisqtel.net (Sari Sommarstrom) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 16:20:50 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] CBB: Wild Chinook Study: Smolt Size When Leaving Freshwater A Determining Factor For Return Age Message-ID: <036301d12ef2$cc8fe240$65afa6c0$@sisqtel.net> THE COLUMBIA BASIN BULLETIN: Weekly Fish and Wildlife News www.cbbulletin.com December 4, 2015 Issue No. 773 * 10-Year John Day Wild Chinook Study: Smolt Size When Leaving Freshwater A Determining Factor For Return Age The age at which a salmon returns to its native stream to spawn is determined before the smolt-sized fish leaves freshwater, according to a study of John Day River wild chinook salmon. The huge study that tagged over 24,000 wild chinook salmon over a ten-year period, concluded that smolts that are smaller yet healthy when they leave their native stream more than likely will return as four and five year old adults to spawn. Those are the adults that are most fecund, which in turn boosts demographic productivity, according to the report. Conversely, larger smolts in freshwater tend to return as three-year-old adults, commonly known as jack salmon. "Our study adds to growing evidence indicating that the age at which each salmon or steelhead will eventually mature (provided that they survive migration and rearing) is established before leaving freshwater," said Ian Tattam, supervisory fish and wildlife biologist, Northeast-Central Oregon Research and Monitoring, with the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife. "Fisheries managers therefore have an opportunity to influence adult age via actions which change freshwater conditions." Furthermore, the study concluded that John Day River chinook salmon smolts from more abundant cohorts had a shorter average fork length than those from less abundant cohorts. "Allowing high spawner escapements, which can produce abundant smolt cohorts, will maintain older-aged chinook salmon in the John Day River," Tattam said, and that very likely would apply to populations of chinook salmon in other rivers. "We hypothesize that maintaining high spawner density will contribute to older aged chinook salmon in other populations as well." High spawner density results in a smaller smolt. Larger smolt sizes, according to the study, result in adults maturing and returning at younger ages. "Because age-3 Chinook Salmon are predominantly male (Scheuerell 2005), maturation at age 3 versus ages 4 or 5 has implications for population demographics," the study says. Age 4 adults (2 years in freshwater, two years in saltwater) dominated the return of chinook salmon on the John Day River in most years. Researchers also found that earlier, as well as larger, migrating smolts tend to return as younger adults, and that ocean conditions did not influence the age at which an adult returns. "Individual age-at-maturity trajectories appear to be established strictly prior to ocean entry," the report says. "Length and Condition of Wild Chinook Salmon Smolts Influence Age at Maturity" was published online Oct. 22, 2015, in Transactions of the American Fisheries Society (http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00028487.2015.1082503?journalCod e=utaf20#.VmBsFfmrTIU) Tattam's co-authors are Jim Ruzycki, Mid-Columbia program manager, Northeast-Central Oregon Research and Monitoring, ODFW; Josh McCormick, fisheries biometrician, ODFW; and Rich Carmichael (retired), program director, Northeast-Central Oregon Research and Monitoring, ODFW. "Larger smolts had an increased probability of returning at age 3 (commonly referred to as a 'jack') instead of age 4 or age 5," Tattam said. "Ocean conditions were an important factor in determining the number of returning salmon, but ocean conditions did not influence the age at which surviving salmon returned to spawn." "Freshwater rearing conditions (e.g., population density of juvenile chinook salmon) experienced by juvenile salmon prior to emigrating to the ocean did influence smolt size and, therefore, the age of chinook salmon which survived to return," Tattam concluded. The John Day River in Oregon is one of the few tributaries of the Columbia River (it enters the Columbia at river kilometer 351 or river mile 218) that is undammed. Hatchery chinook salmon have never been introduced to the stream and stray hatchery fish amount to less than 2 percent of spawning salmon. Some 2,000 to 7,000 wild chinook return to the river each year. The study looked at three populations of wild chinook salmon in the John Day River system: North Fork, Middle Fork and the upper Main Fork. Researchers counted redds on the spawning grounds and later seined further downriver to capture and PIT-tag a sampling of migrating smolts. Overall, they tagged 24,240 wild chinook salmon smolts. Tattam said it is possible that the results of the study could be applicable to other wild chinook salmon populations in other rivers of the interior Columbia River basin which have a predominantly yearling age at smoltification. But for steelhead there is evidence smolt size and age at maturation are inversely related. "Steelhead in the interior Columbia River basin (with the exception of a few Idaho populations) have a narrower maturation spectrum (i.e., they mature at two ocean ages, instead of three like chinook salmon), which may reduce the ultimate importance of smolt size on population demographics," Tattam said. Results in the study also have implications about how salmon populations survive in years when spawner numbers are down. "Our results lead to a hypothesis that during periods of low spawner abundance, John Day River Chinook Salmon shift towards younger adults (decreased cohort mean age). We theorize that this shift in age structure maximizes the odds of adult return by reducing the number of years in the ocean, thereby allowing a quicker population-scale response to low freshwater abundance," the report says. "Long-term monitoring studies such as this, while expensive and challenging to conduct year-after-year, are vital to the constant evolution of salmonid management," Tattam concluded. "This study captured and tagged more than 24,000 wild juvenile salmon across 10 years; during peaks and troughs in both population abundance and ocean productivity. Only with such a broad data set were we able to discern the influence of smolt size, cohort abundance, and ocean productivity on age at maturation. A study of only a few years in duration would not have encompassed a broad spectrum of conditions, nor allowed us to provide useful guidance for management of John Day River chinook salmon." The study was funded by the Bonneville Power Administration and the Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Dec 7 07:17:48 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 15:17:48 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Draft bill on Klamath water doesn't include dam removal References: <1795475869.7701635.1449501468315.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1795475869.7701635.1449501468315.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/news/wire-news/draft-bill-on-klamath-water-doesnt-include-dam-removal Draft bill on Klamath water doesn't include dam removal ADDRESS: GOSIA WOZNIACKA, Associated Press? 5:47 PM, Dec 3, 201512:39 AM, Dec 5, 2015Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.JEFF BARNARD/AP FILE PHOTOSHOW CAPTIONPORTLAND, Oregon - An Oregon Republican congressman has released a proposal to resolve disputes over scarce water in the Klamath Basin ? but it doesn't include the removal of four aging dams, a central point in historic settlement agreements.The agreements, hammered out by farmers, tribes, environmentalists and states, aim to restore the river for imperiled salmon and steelhead and give farmers more certainty about irrigation water. The Klamath Basin straddles Oregon and California.Congress must pass legislation to implement the agreements, but House Republicans have blocked it for years, fearing it would set a precedent for dam removal. The agreements expire at the end of December.The draft legislation, released on Thursday by U.S. Rep. Greg Walden, does not authorize or fund federal dam removal. It leaves that up to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which licenses hydropower projects, though it's unclear if the commission would ask the utility to tear down the dams.Several parties to the agreement said the lack of a dam removal provision makes the draft bill a non-starter. They say the dams thwart salmon migration, degrade water quality, alter water flows, and contribute to fish disease problems."If there is no dam deal, there is no damn deal," said Josh Saxon, a councilman with the Karuk Tribe.Three federally-recognized tribes depend on salmon for subsistence and ceremonial needs, and a fourth hopes fish will return once the dams are removed. One of the tribes already has obtained water rights through the courts, and the others could pursue that process, further limiting water to irrigators.Don Gentry, the chairman of the Klamath Tribal Council, said there's significant concern about where legislation without dam removal would leave the tribe."When we voted for the agreements... that vote included dam removal," Gentry said.PacifiCorp, which owns and operates the four dams, did not immediately return a call for comment. But the utility, a signatory to the agreements, supports dam removal, because it would be less costly than making upgrades to the hydropower system's infrastructure and operations.The utility is also concerned about liability when it comes to the impact of dam removal. The historic agreements shield PacifiCorp from such liability.Walden is a staunch dam removal opponent; his Oregon district includes one of the dams. His draft legislation does include the transfer of 100,000 acres of public federal forestland for timber production to Siskiyou County and Klamath County. That provision was not included in the historic agreements.In addition, the draft also calls for the transfer of 100,000 acres of public forestland to the Klamath Tribes in return for water for farmers. Under the original settlement agreement, the Klamath Tribes were promised private forestland ? part of the tribes' former reservation ? but that land has since been sold to a Singapore company.Oregon Democratic Sens. Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley called the draft "a step forward," but said it falls short of implementing the carefully-negotiated agreements."The giveaway of federal lands to counties is a known non-starter in the Senate," the senators said in a joint statement on the draft. "It also eliminates a provision on dam removal that is central to the bargain worked out over years with blood, sweat, and tears."Wyden and Merkley introduced their own bill earlier this year to put the Klamath agreements into play, including dam removal. The two said they'll work with colleagues in the House to refine Walden's proposal. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Dec 7 07:53:31 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 15:53:31 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] With Klamath bill uncertain, dam relicensing moves forward References: <1156801959.13365273.1449503611172.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1156801959.13365273.1449503611172.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/news/wire-news/with-klamath-bill-uncertain-dam-relicensing-moves-forward With Klamath bill uncertain, dam relicensing moves forward ADDRESS: GOSIA WOZNIACKA, Associated Press? 5:00 PM, Dec 2, 20155:21 PM, Dec 3, 2015Copyright 2015 Journal Media Group. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.In this Aug. 21, 2009 file photo, the J.C. Boyle Dam diverts water from the Klamath River to a powerhouse downstream Keno, Ore. The process to relicense the hydroelectric dam system on the Klamath River has restarted again as historic settlement agreements to remove four of the dams have thus far failed to make headway in Congress this year. The agreements to remove the dams, hammered out by farmers, tribes, environmentalists and states, are a compromise aimed to restore the river for imperiled salmon and steelhead, and give farmers greater certainty about irrigation water.?JEFF BARNARD/AP FILE PHOTOHIDE CAPTIONPORTLAND, Ore. (AP) ? The process to relicense the hydroelectric dam system on the Klamath River will likely move forward if Congress fails to act by the end of the year on historic settlement agreements to remove four of the dams.The Klamath River basin, which straddles Oregon and California, has long been the site of intense political fights over the sharing of scarce water between farms and fish. The agreements to remove the dams, hammered out by farmers, tribes, environmentalists and states, were a compromise to restore the river for imperiled salmon and steelhead, and give farmers greater certainty about irrigation water.Congress must pass legislation to implement the agreements, but House Republicans have blocked it for years, fearing it would set a precedent for dam removal.In October, U.S. Rep. Greg Walden ? a staunch dam removal opponent whose Oregon district includes one of the dams ? said he was close to drafting a bill in the House. He has not released any details. His office this week said the lawmaker would convene a meeting Thursday with key Congressional leaders to discuss "a way forward" on Klamath Basin water issues.If there's no legislation by the end of the year, when the agreements expire, several parties indicated they might abandon the settlement."It's not that we don't believe in the deal, it's that we've tried for years... and have not been able to get support in Congress," said Craig Tucker, Klamath coordinator with the Karuk Tribe, one of four federally recognized tribes that support the agreements. "If we can get tribal leaders and ranchers to come to an agreement to share water, it's shocking that we can't bring our Congressmen along with us."Relicensing of the Klamath dams with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which licenses hydropower projects for 30 to 50 years, has been on hold for several years while groups negotiated for a federal bill.As part of the relicensing process, the dams' owner and operator ? PacifiCorp ? must apply for water quality certifications in California and Oregon. This week, the California State Water Resources Control Board announced the public process was restarting; scoping meetings are scheduled for January. California's process formally resumed in 2013, when the water board started working with PacifiCorp on an updated application ? but no public meetings have been held.The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality said its process remains on hold.If the federal government were to issue a new license to the utility, it would impose mitigation measures to reduce environmental impacts, including modifications to the aging dams' infrastructure and operations such as fish ladders or water quality improvements.Those measures are needed because the dams thwart salmon migration, degrade water quality, alter water flows, and contribute to fish disease problems and algae bloom problems. Three tribes depend on the fish for subsistence and ceremonial needs, and a fourth hopes fish will return once the dams are removed.One of the tribes already has obtained water rights through the courts, and the others could pursue that process, further limiting water to irrigators ? which is partly why farmers and ranchers support the agreements. Klamath Basin agriculture is valued at about $670 million annually.Dam removal under the agreement is also a better option for PacifiCorp, spokesman Bob Gravely said. It's less expensive, offers the utility liability protection and caps the costs to PacifiCorp customers, he said. Several studies have shown that dam upgrades would significantly reduce electricity generation and would cost millions more than dam removal and replacement of hydropower with other sources."We're not ideologically for or against dam removal," Gravely said. "We need to make decisions that lead to the best available outcome for our customers."Despite the broad agreements, several attempts in recent years to pass federal legislation have failed. U.S. senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley of Oregon introduced a bill earlier this year to halt the relicensing process and put the agreements into play ? but it, too, hasn't moved forward."Time is of the essence to ensure long-term water certainty for the Klamath Basin," the senators said in a statement. "We look forward to hearing the House members' views about how we can get it done."Republican Walden told the Herald and News in October that there weren't alternatives to dam removal, unless the agreement was blown apart. But other Republicans, including California's Doug LaMalfa whose district includes three of the dams, oppose dam removal."The Congressman has been very clear in his belief that the dams are working as intended to generate electricity," spokesman Kevin Eastman told The Associated Press.If legislation fails to materialize and the dams are re-licensed, the utility could still choose to remove the dams if the costs of upgrades are too high.But without the broad settlement agreements, officials said, PacifiCorp customers would face higher costs for dam removal, also water sharing and river restoration benefits would be jeopardized. And that could increase fish kills and water shut-offs to ranches and farms. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Mon Dec 7 10:02:12 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 18:02:12 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] TAMWG Agenda December 10, Weaverville References: <1418094951.13508203.1449511332337.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1418094951.13508203.1449511332337.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.fws.gov/arcata/fisheries/reports/tamwg/2015/2015_12/TAMWG%20December%2010%202015%20Agenda%20DRAFT%20(v11-25-2015).pdf Trinity River Adaptive Management Working Group DRAFT AGENDA Meeting of December 10, 2015 NOTE: TimesSubject to Change ? Location: Trinity RiverRestoration Program office (1313 South Main St, Weaverville, CA 96093) ? | Thursday, December 10, 2015 | | Time | Agenda Item | Presenter | | 9:30 AM | Welcome, Introductions, Approve Agenda & Minutes ? | TAMWG | | 9:45 AM | Public Comment?? Note: In accordance with traditional meeting practices, TAMWG will not act on any public comment item during its current business meeting | ? | | 10:00 AM | Designated Federal Officer Items? | Joe Polos | | 10:15 AM | TMC Chair Update (includes update on TMC efficiencies sub-Committee) | Seth Naman | | 11:00 AM | Executive Director, TRRP staff, and Working Groups update | Robin Schrock | | 12:00 PM | Lunch | ? | | 1:00 PM | TRRP Lessons Learned Workshop ? Sediment Management (Recap) | Robert Stewart | | 2:00 PM | TRRP Goals, objectives, and definition of completion | TAMWG | | 3:00 PM | TRRP Watershed Restoration Goals | Tom Stokely/Sean Ledwin | | 4:00 PM | TMC ? current issues | TAMWG | | 4:15 PM | Public Comment | ? | | 4:30 PM | Adjourn | ? | ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From derek_rupert at fws.gov Mon Dec 7 12:16:05 2015 From: derek_rupert at fws.gov (Rupert, Derek) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 12:16:05 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Mainstem Trinity River spawn survey update for December 4, 2015 Message-ID: Hello All, The US Fish and Wildlife Service along with the Yurok Tribe, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Forest Service, and Hoopa Valley Tribe have another weekly update for our Trinity River mainstem spawn survey posted on the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Fisheries webpage. Trinity River spawn Survey update December 4, 2015. This week our crews mapped 119 redds (2,124 total for the year) in the Reaches from Lewiston Dam to Pigeon Point, and Hawkins Bar to Tish Tang. The graph below is clipped from our weekly report (limited to the river upstream of Cedar Flat). There was no weekly report published last week (11/23 - 11/27) due to to the Thanksgiving holiday. Only four reaches were surveyed. The data is included in the report above. Cheers, Derek -- Derek Rupert Fish Biologist US Fish and Wildlife Service Weaverville, CA Office 530.623.1805 Cell 570.419.2823 Derek_Rupert at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WeeklyGraphicSmall.png Type: image/png Size: 9835 bytes Desc: not available URL: From unofelice at gmail.com Mon Dec 7 12:18:14 2015 From: unofelice at gmail.com (Felice Pace) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 12:18:14 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] There's a new post at KlamBlog Message-ID: The new post is titled: Klamath Politics Tests KBRA Friendship Bonds Here's how it begins: *Those who pay attention to Klamath River Basin issues are by now very familiar with claims that former Klamath adversaries - Farmers, Tribes, Fishermen and Environmentalists - have overcome former conflicts, forged friendships and now support each other. Five years after the KBRA Water Deal was signed, those claims are still being made, not just by the "parties" that signed the Deal but by politicians, newspaper editors and a host of fellow travelers. A recent announcement by the Yurok Tribe , one of the KBRA's main architects, stating that it was withdrawing from the Deal because it was no longer possible to obtain the benefits for the Klamath River it had negotiated, has not stemmed the rhetorical claims that harmony now reigns among the Basin's tribes and irrigators. * And here's how it ends: *KlamBlog challenges the Klamath Water Users Association and the Family Farm Alliance to take a public position on Walden 's draft legislation. We challenge those reporting on Klamath issues to put the question directly to the two organizations: Do they support Walden's draft legislation or do they stand with the tribes in opposition?* Read the full post and leave a comment at KlamBlog . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Dec 9 14:47:16 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 22:47:16 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Working Draft Backgrounder on TRRP Goals and Completion In-Reply-To: <1455486463.19589.1449700910974.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1455486463.19589.1449700910974.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <1455486463.19589.1449700910974.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <921074120.46487.1449701237165.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> This is a working draft paper that I alone prepared for the TAMWG's 2 pm agenda item tomorrow on?TRRP Goals, objectives, anddefinition of completion. Comments are welcome.?Tom Stokely, Director?California Water Impact Network?V 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 goals legislative administrative history v5.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 83016 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Thu Dec 10 15:52:30 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 23:52:30 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary Update Jweek 48 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C5A6525@057-SN2MPN1-043.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hello Everyone, The weir trapping season has come to an end with the Willow Creek weir removed from the river last week. Please see attached for the Jweek 48 (and final for the season) update for the Willow Creek weir and the Jweek 47 trapping summary update for the Trinity River Hatchery. We will continue to send updates for the hatchery as they become available. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW48.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 62589 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW48.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Dec 11 14:15:19 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 22:15:19 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Agenda for TMC meeting Weaverville December 16-17 References: <596110400.863659.1449872119542.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <596110400.863659.1449872119542.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> ?TRINITY MANAGEMENT COUNCIL?Trinity River Restoration Program Office?Weaverville, CA?Agenda for December 16-17, 2015?Call in number: 866-721-5952?Passcode: 4702048?Wednesday, December 16, 2015?Time Topic, Purpose and/or Decision to be Made Discussion Leader?Regular Business:?9:30 Introductions: Seth Naman, Chair?? Welcome?? Approval of Agenda?? Approval of September minutes? 10:00 Open Forum: Comments from the public Seth Naman?10:15 Report from TAMWG Elizabeth Hadley?10:45 Federal/Regional Updates Federico Barajas, Co-chair?? FY-16 Funding update?? TRRP staffing update?? Mr. Wellock's well? 11:15 Break All?Information / Decision Items:?11:30 Report from Executive Director Robin Schrock?? Work Group Quarterly summary?? Science Update?? River Corridor Map?? Other? 12:00 Lunch All?1:00 Watershed Update Sean Ledwin?? Status of Funding Opportunity Announcement?? Projects Not funded in 2015?? Contracting issues?? Recommendations/Next steps? 2:00 Break All?2:15 Implementation Update Brandt Gutermuth?? 2016 planning update ? Status of 2015 restoration sites?? Status of Bucktail, Deep Gulch, Lower Dutch sites?? Status of Bucktail Bridge 3:00 Efficiencies Subcommittee Dave Hillemeier?? Themes discussed during meetings?? Recommendations?? Next steps/implementation? 4:00 Public forum?4:15 Adjourn?6:00 Group Dinner-Location TBD?Thursday, December 17, 2015?Regular Business:?9:00 Open Forum: Comments from the public Seth Naman?Information / Decision Items:?9:15 Scientific Advisory Board SAB members?? TRRP science process?? DSS?? TRRP adaptive management?? Replacement of Clair Stalnaker?? Recommendations? 10:15 Break All?10:30 2015 Chinook salmon returns Seth Naman?? Redd counts (Derek Rupert)?? Weir and hatchery totals (Wade Sinnen)?? Fish Work Group Analyses?? Recommendations/Next steps? 11:30 Lunch All?? Farewell for Robin-Trinity Alps Golf Course? 1:00 TCRCD Outreach Shiloe Braxton?? Current education & outreach program?? Building community support of the TRRP?? Next steps? 2:00 TRRP Website Seth Naman/Eric Peterson?2:30 TMC 2017 Elections All?3:00 2017 Meeting Schedule Seth Naman?3:30 Public forum?3:45 Action items Seth Naman?4:00 Adjourn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Dec 13 09:27:37 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2015 17:27:37 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?Drought_worries_weren=E2=80=99t_enough_to?= =?utf-8?q?_force_agreement_on_Calif=2E_water_bill?= References: <351949602.385733.1450027657676.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <351949602.385733.1450027657676.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Hooray!http://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/article49320015.html Drought worries weren?t enough to force agreement on Calif. water bill BY MICHAEL DOYLEmdoyle at mcclatchydc.comWASHINGTON?California lawmakers? repeated failures to agree on legislation to resolve the state?s seemingly endless battle over how to use its water resources raise new questions about whether they?ll ever be able to find a compromise.This year, the climate looked ripe for an agreement. The state endured another year of drought. The tracks seemed greased, with House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Bakersfield, conducting. The staffers worked tirelessly, and in Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Central Valley Republicans had an experienced negotiating partner.Now, cold rain and snow have returned to California, dampening the sense of urgency. McCarthy and Feinstein are denouncing each other in ways that won?t soon be forgotten, and frustrated lawmakers are left to either pick up the pieces or point fingers. Late Thursday, Republican representatives admitted defeat, acknowledging that no legislation would happen this year.?Sadly,? McCarthy said Friday, ?our senators have once again failed to rise and meet the challenge with us.?The No. 2 Republican in the House of Representatives, McCarthy joined 12 other California GOP lawmakers at a Capitol Hill news conference designed to both pressure Feinstein and shape public impressions about the water bill?s failure. They did not pull their punches, even as Feinstein said a compromise remained possible.?Our senators,? said Rep. Doug LaMalfa, R-Redding, ?have basically pulled the football away from us once again.?Northern California Democrats countered that Republicans have only themselves to blame for the failure to achieve a compromise.?It?s not a good bill, and it?s not good policy,? said Rep. John Garamendi, D-Walnut Grove. ?Beyond that, it?s dead because it was grossly mismanaged by Republicans.?At issue is the effort to address California?s drought with legislation. Proposals ran from new studies of water storage to funding for recycling and desalination programs. Central Valley Republicans wanted to expand the amount of water available for irrigation.?THE HOUSE HAS PROPOSED A COMPROMISE TO EASE THE CALIFORNIA WATER CRISIS ? ONE THAT SATISFIES THE SENATE'S DEMANDS ? AND ONCE AGAIN SENATE DEMOCRATS ARE REJECTING OUR EFFORTS BY PRIORITIZING FISH OVER FAMILIES.?Rep. Devin Nunes, R-VisaliaThe lawmakers wanted to fold what eventually became 92 pages of California water proposals into the $1.1 trillion so-called omnibus spending bill needed to keep the federal government operating. Republicans observed Friday that Feinstein herself had agreed with using the must-pass spending bill as the vehicle for the water legislation.But the Republicans could not win agreement from Feinstein and Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer in time for the water package to make it into the omnibus bill, which is set for congressional approval early next week.?There were at least a half-dozen items in the bill that I had rejected and that would have drawn objections from state or federal agencies; some of them would likely violate environmental law,? Feinstein said, adding that ?several more provisions were still being negotiated.?Feinstein said negotiators had ?come to closure on virtually all? the remaining disagreements, and she indicated that she hoped to have a bill finished as early as next week that can move through ?regular order.?Regular order would mean going through the standard committee process sometime next year. Multiple House Republicans said Friday that they were skeptical of the prospects, though they don?t rule it out.?I wish her luck,? said Rep. Ken Calvert, R-Corona.?The problems that sank this year?s effort were political, substantive, procedural and, to some degree, personal.Late last week, under circumstances that remain murky, a McCarthy staffer presented a water bill package as having been signed off on by Feinstein. In fact, Feinstein had not approved the final language. While Calvert complained that ?Feinstein took umbrage to what was at most a staffer error in a closed-door meeting,? the state?s senior senator resented the move.?The bill that Republicans tried to place in the omnibus last week ? in my name and without my knowledge ? hadn?t been reviewed by me, Sen. Boxer, the state or the White House,? Feinstein said Friday.Politically, the House GOP members had failed to secure support from Gov. Jerry Brown, the Obama administration and a slew of Northern California Democrats whose districts include the environmentally sensitive Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.?In a memo dated Dec. 1 and marked ?confidential,? Obama administration officials warned of ?the prospects of a fresh round of litigation? being prompted by the proposed legislation. The 10-page memo further said officials were ?deeply concerned? about new burdens being imposed.Substantively, negotiators did reach agreement in a number of areas, including consideration of new water storage projects and funding for recycling and desalination. Republicans say their proposal also preserved the Endangered Species Act, a crucial question for both sides.Negotiators, though, were unable to resolve key questions related to increased water pumping to farms.THESE UNFINISHED NEGOTIATIONS DID NOT RECEIVE FINAL SIGN-OFF FROM OUR SENATE AND HOUSE COLLEAGUES AND CERTAINLY DID NOT RESULT IN A FULLY VETTED BIPARTISAN PRODUCT.?Rep. Jerry McNerney, D-StocktonProcedurally, Democrats complained repeatedly that they were shut out of meaningful negotiations.?It was the same old stuff from the same interests who appear uninterested in getting to yes with Democrats like me and others, who have to be part of the conversation,? Rep. Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, said Friday.Republicans say the Democratic complaints of exclusion are overblown, and there was, in fact, Democratic participation for a time. Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Elk Grove, claimed that ?half of the provisions? in the final House proposal were taken straight from Feinstein.Garamendi said Friday that he had one meeting this fall with four senators and four House Republicans, which was followed by daily bipartisan staff discussions in McCarthy?s House office through mid-November.In the end, though, the respective parties collapsed back into their respective camps.?It?s like two bulls in a corral, and they?re trying to find out who?s the toughest and the meanest,? Garamendi said. ?There?s a lot of stomping and snorting and pushing each other around, and at the end of the day, what?s it all about? It?s throwing dust in the air.??Michael Doyle:?202-383-0006,?@MichaelDoyle10 Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/latest-news/article49320015.html#storylink=cpy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Dec 13 09:32:07 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2015 17:32:07 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] House passes five-day government funding bill, averting weekend shutdown References: <1045269562.389259.1450027927073.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1045269562.389259.1450027927073.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/12/11/house-passes-five-day-government-funding-bill-averting-weekend-shutdown/77140290/ House passes five-day government funding bill, averting weekend shutdown Erin Kelly, USA TODAYWASHINGTON?? The House passed a?bill Friday to keep the federal government funded until midnight Wednesday, averting a shutdown that would have begun Saturday?if Congress had not acted.The temporary spending measure, approved by voice vote,?gives lawmakers five more days to try to negotiate a deal on a $1.1 trillion spending package to fund federal agencies through the 2016 fiscal year. The Senate passed the short-term?extension by voice vote on Thursday."I hope we take this new time period to avoid a shutdown permanently rather?than just do it (temporarily)?again and again and again," said?Jared Polis, D-Colo., a member of the?House Rules Committee.Lawmakers voted in September?to set Dec. 11 as the deadline for passing a spending bill when they were unable to do it by the start of the 2016 fiscal year on Oct. 1. It?became clear last week that lawmakers would not be able to meet the Dec. 11 deadline because of disagreements over policy riders attached to the bill.Democrats object to efforts by Republicans to block new environmental rules?to reduce power plant emissions, weaken regulations governing the financial-services industry, and make it more difficult for Syrian refugees?to flee to the U.S."You don't bring government to the brink of a shutdown over policy riders," Polis said.Rep.?Tom Cole, R-Okla., a member of the Rules,?Budget and?Appropriationscommittees, said he believes lawmakers will be able to reach a deal?next week."Where we end up will undoubtedly be a compromise," Cole said. "If we all sit?here and wait til we get 100 percent of what we want, nothing will ever pass in the?U.S. House of Representatives...Give the American people what they deserve:?some peace, quiet and certainty in the Christmas season."USA TODAYAre we headed toward another government shutdown?Congress is?slated to adjourn for the year by the end of next week, and finishing the huge omnibus spending bill is the?last big?priority before lawmakers head home for the holidays.The House had been expected to vote before leaving town?on final passage of a budget bill that would have repealed key sections of Obamacare and stripped federal funding from?Planned Parenthood. However, it now appears?that the House will not take up that legislation until it returns from recess in January. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bgutermuth at usbr.gov Sun Dec 13 14:50:51 2015 From: bgutermuth at usbr.gov (Gutermuth, F.) Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2015 14:50:51 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Proposed 2016 Bucktail Channel Rehabilitation Project: Dec 2 presentations posted; Jan 4 Comment Due Message-ID: Dear Interested Parties - The two presentations from the Trinity River Restoration Program's - December 2nd Proposed Bucktail Project Meeting at the Moose lodge in Lewiston are posted on the TRRP's website. The first presentation is the background and schedule, presented by the TRRP's Brandt Gutermuth: http://odp.trrp.net/FileDatabase/MeetingAttachments/Bucktail%20Public%20Meeting%20Presentation_1202151.pdf The second presentation is the Project Design presented by Fred Meyer (McBain Associate's consultant to the Hoopa Valley Tribe) http://odp.trrp.net/FileDatabase/MeetingAttachments/Bucktail%20Final%20Design%20Revised%20Nov20151.pdf For more information on the project and to review the environmental document please visit: http://www.trrp.net/2015/2016-bucktail-environmental-document/ . Comments are due by Close of Business January 4, 2016. Contact Michele Gallagher (530.623.1804, magallagher at usbr.gov) or myself with questions. Again, Comments are due by Jan 4, 2016. Thanks! Happy Holidays- Brandt Brandt Gutermuth Environmental Scientist Trinity River Restoration Program PO Box 1300, 1313 S. Main ST. Weaverville CA 96093 530.623.1806 Voice http://www.trrp.net/ On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Gutermuth, F. wrote: > Dear Trinity River interested parties: > > This is a reminder that we are holding a public meeting tonight at 6:30 pm > (12/2/15 at the Moose Lodge in Lewiston, CA). We will be discussing the > Proposed 2016 Bucktail Channel Rehabilitation Project. See the following > link for additional information: Public Meeting Display Ad > (0.12 > MB) > > The 2015 Bucktail Channel Rehabilitation Site Draft Environmental document > is located at: Draft EA/IS > (14 MB) > > Hope to see you there. > > 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 > http://www.trrp.net/ > > > > > > Proposed 2016 Bucktail Channel Rehabilitation Site Draft Environmental > Document for Review > > > | Published: November 16, 2015 > Document Links: > > - Draft EA/IS > (14 MB) > - Checklist > (0.45 > MB) > - Excerpted Site Map (figure 3) > (0.48 > MB) > - Public Meeting Display Ad > (0.12 > MB) > - Other Relevant Documents: > - Master EIR > > - Programmatic EIS/EIR > > - TRRP Foundational Documents > > > > > *Proposed 2016 BucktailChannel Rehabilitation SiteDraft Environmental > Document for Review* > > *Public Meeting: Public Meeting: Wednesday, December 2nd, 2015at the > Lewiston Moose Lodge, Lewiston, CA 6:30 to 8:30pm* > As part of the Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) channel > rehabilitation activities, 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 this December meeting to learn about proposed 2016 > construction at the Bucktail Channel Rehabilitation site (Bucktail) and to > provide your input. *input. On Wednesday December 2nd, 2015, the Bucktail > meeting will be held at the Lewiston Moose Lodge in Lewiston, CA from 6:30 > to 8:30pm. Project information will be presented and comments on the > project will be accepted.* > The Bucktail Site (River Mile (RM) 105.4 ? 107.0) is a 110.4 acre site > that begins at the Bucktail Bridge and extends upstream approximately 1.5 > miles to RM 107.0. The TRRP proposes to construct Bucktail in summer 2016 > 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 both terrestrial and aquatic habitat > quality. The Project would increase habitat complexity via construction of > slow water refuge habitats (e.g., side channels and wetland complexes) for > juvenile salmon and steelhead, reconnection of the floodplain with the > river, revegetation with native plants, and placement of wood/rock > structures to react with flow and create/maintain habitat. > The Draft Environmental Document that formally analyzes the impacts of > these projects and which meets California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) > and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements will be available > in November 2015 at www.trrp.net, and on the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation?s > website: http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=23209 for > public review and comment. The comment period will extend from the date of > posting though January 4, 2016. Hard copies are available for review at > the TRRP office (by Tops Grocery) or at the Trinity County library. > For further information or to submit a comment, please contact Mr. Brandt > Gutermuth, TRRP office, P.O. Box 1300, > Weaverville, CA 96093 at 623-1806 or e-mail bgutermuth at usbr.gov. > > > > > > >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 derek_rupert at fws.gov Mon Dec 14 16:35:22 2015 From: derek_rupert at fws.gov (Rupert, Derek) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 16:35:22 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Mainstem Trinity River spawn survey update for December 11, 2015 Message-ID: Hello All, The US Fish and Wildlife Service along with the Yurok Tribe, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Forest Service, and Hoopa Valley Tribe have another weekly update for our Trinity River mainstem spawn survey posted on the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Fisheries webpage. Trinity River spawn Survey update December 11, 2015. This week our crews mapped 12 redds (2,136 total for the year) in the Reaches from Lewiston Dam to Pigeon Point. The graph below is clipped from our weekly report (limited to the river upstream of Cedar Flat). Heavy rain has hit Trinity County and lead to high water turbidity below the North Fork. We were unable to complete surveys below Pigeon Point. Next week will be our last surveys of the year. Cheers, Derek -- Derek Rupert Fish Biologist US Fish and Wildlife Service Weaverville, CA Office 530.623.1805 Cell 570.419.2823 Derek_Rupert at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WeeklyGraphicSmall.png Type: image/png Size: 9852 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Dec 15 08:12:03 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 16:12:03 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Environmental group gives California mixed marks for drought management References: <273103892.1263923.1450195923365.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <273103892.1263923.1450195923365.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-drought-nrdc-20151215-story.html Environmental group gives California mixed marks for drought management More than four years into a drought, California's efforts to manage the crisis have produced mixed results, according to a?report card?issued Monday by a leading environmental nonprofit organization.The state received high marks from the Natural Resources Defense Council for its urban conservation and water recycling but performed poorly in areas such as stormwater capture and restoring the San Francisco Bay Delta."The state is making decent strides in some areas, while completely falling down on the job in others," said Kate Poole, the report card's lead author and senior attorney for the council's water program. "The bottom line is that we can take steps to create enough water for the residential, business and agricultural needs of California, while protecting the healthy environment that Californians deserve."The council used a point system to issue the state letter grades across five categories. Each category, they said, represents a strategy the state can use to "achieve a sustainable and drought-resilient water future." The group gave California a B, B-minus, two Ds and an F.Felicia Marcus, chairwoman of the State Water Resources Control Board, called the grades "a little disappointing.""We've done more in the past two or three years than we have in the past two or three decades on water in California," she said. "It's nothing to sneeze at."See the most-read stories this hour >>California got its highest mark in urban water conservation. Since June, people living in cities and towns across the state have cumulatively reduced their water usage more than 25% compared with 2013, meeting a requirement set by Gov. Jerry Brown.The state received a B-minus for its efforts to recycle and reuse water. The report praised the state for increasing funding for water recycling and adopting regulations to help ensure that groundwater can be safely replenished with recycled water.Interested in the stories shaping California? Sign up for the free Essential California newsletter >>28 things to do to prepare for El Ni?o rains this seasonBut the state got Ds for water conservation in the agricultural sector and for stormwater capture and reuse. It got its lowest grade ? an F ? for what the Natural Resources Defense Council said was poor management of the delta ecosystem."We're looking at how the state did and hoping this can serve as a sort of interim progress report," Poole said. "If my kids come home with two Ds and an F, they're going to be spending a lot more time on those subjects going forward. That's what we hope the state will do here."Although agricultural water usage is about four times greater than urban use, the state "has not set goals or mandatory requirements" for agricultural conservation, the report said, and has not enforced existing laws that could improve the savings.Meanwhile, capturing runoff from storms could simultaneously increase water supply and reduce water pollution, the report said. The state is not on track to meet its stormwater capture goals, and the process of developing a long-term vision for stormwater management has been slow and short on specifics, according to the report's authors.Marcus said many farmers have been "feeling the brunt of?the drought?for ? years," and would argue that the water board has been "hurling water at fish."State regulators "totally agree with importance of stormwater," Marcus added, but there is a disagreement over which "tactics" to use to improve the situation.The council was most alarmed, though, by the condition of the San Francisco Bay Delta. It called the current proposal for two new water diversion tunnels "environmentally harmful" and pointed to the ongoing struggle of the delta smelt as an indicator of the watershed's poor health."Rather than taking steps to ease the impacts of the drought on the estuary and its imperiled fisheries, the state has repeatedly implemented actions during the drought that have made conditions worse," the report said.Marcus said she could not comment on some aspects of the criticism, such as the tunnels, because she reviews related appeals and permits. But she said "a lot of things are easier said than done."As for what grade she would give state water regulators, Marcus said: "I'd give us an A for effort and I'd probably give us a B for the drought.... My grandmother would say never give yourself an A ? it's bad luck."matt.stevens at latimes.comTwitter:?@bymattstevens -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Dec 15 15:07:23 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 23:07:23 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: Reclamation Releases Scoping Report on LTP for Protecting Late Summer Adult Salmon in the LKR In-Reply-To: <0e43e74c63174617ad9835f7eb4e62e4@usbr.gov> References: <0e43e74c63174617ad9835f7eb4e62e4@usbr.gov> Message-ID: <415929998.1413853.1450220843923.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 1:53 PM, Lisa Navarro wrote: Reclamation Releases Scoping Report on LTP for Protecting Late Summer Adult Salmon in the LKRMid-Pacific Region Sacramento, Calif.MP-15-228Media Contact: Shane Hunt, 916-978-5100, shunt at usbr.govFor Release On: Dec. 15, 2015Reclamation Releases Scoping Report on Long-Term Plan for Protecting Late Summer Adult Salmon in the Lower Klamath RiverShasta Lake, Calif. - The Bureau of Reclamation has released the Scoping Report on the Long-Term Plan for Protecting Late Summer Adult Salmon in the Lower Klamath River.The Scoping Report provides a summary of comments received and defines the major issues identified to be evaluated in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The comments will be considered by Reclamation in preparing the EIS.The Scoping Report is available at http://www.usbr.gov/mp/nepa/nepa_projdetails.cfm?Project_ID=22021. If you encounter problems accessing the document, please call 916-978-5100 or email mppublicaffairs at usbr.gov.For questions or to request a copy of the Scoping Report, please contact Julia Long at 530-276-2044 (TTY 800-877-8339) or jlong 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. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Dec 16 08:10:07 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 16:10:07 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal: County urged to address water use References: <107827844.1700027.1450282207508.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <107827844.1700027.1450282207508.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_58d426c2-a39b-11e5-a169-f35cd2c3b3bb.html County urged to address water use By Sally Morris The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, December 16, 2015 6:15 amSounding the alarm that Trinity County is experiencing less and less water to go around for all users relying on it, the Northwest California Resource Conservation and Development Council is seeking county buy-in to create new water use policies and permits for future development.The Trinity County Planning Commission has been directed by the Board of Supervisors to recommend a process for looking at potential updates and modifications to water policies in the county?s outdated General Plan, subdivision and zoning ordinances, some of which date back 40 years when water scarcity wasn?t viewed as an issue.More recent studies have indicated otherwise, and the Planning Commission last week received a report on the most current findings in a 2014 analysis by the Five Counties Salmonid Conservation Program of the non-profit Northwest California Resource Conservation and Development Council.The current report is an update of a study on water resources in the mainstem Trinity River below Lewiston Dam completed in 2009. Based on data collected prior to the recent drought, that study concluded some communities (Weaverville) were already at risk of not meeting all demand for beneficial uses of water and others (Lewiston, Douglas City) would be with population growth, even in years of normal precipitation.The 2009 study included 14 recommendations for updated planning efforts to address water use in the county. The latest version is more forceful. Director of the Five Counties Salmonid Program Mark Lancaster said last week time has run out since 2009 and action must be taken now to create sustainable water policy that places greater scrutiny on new permits and development.Included in the recommendations is an update of the county?s General Plan elements that contain any reference to water resources; expansion of the existing Critical Water Resource overlay zone and the conservation and development measures it prescribes; update of subdivision standards dating back to 1984, adding a proof of water requirement; and development of water conservation measures for landowners seeking discretionary permits to build.Lancaster said that of more than 14,000 residents in Trinity County, over half are served by a public water system, but 44 percent are not. Public systems are limited to a few communities and everyone else is relying primarily on surface water.The analysis looked at a wide variety of historical data, existing parcels and permitted water systems, subdivision potential, soils/vegetation types and precipitation records over the past 120 years.?What it told us is the weather has become more erratic over time and in the past 20 years, it?s become an increasing pattern of extremes. What it means for people and fisheries is that when we were planning our land use and reservoirs, we were looking at a weather record that was a lot more stable. By 2009 we were trying to tell everyone we had a problem. In the five years since, we have seen growth we did not anticipate and water conflicts getting worse,? Lancaster said.He said people who rely on surface streams have seen their creeks go dry as never before and fish kills have become more frequent. Out-of-district water purchases from the Weaverville and Hayfork water districts have increased significantly over the past two years by those needing to truck their water in. He added there?s also been a substantial increase in well drilling permits with more issued in one year than in the past 20. Increased water diversions and nutrient input to streams are creating additional impacts.Lancaster said the marijuana cultivation boom in Trinity County did not create the water supply and quality problems, ?but given the intensity with which they arrived, we simply haven?t been able to get best management practices out to the growers to offset the impacts. Ability to respond and regulate has not been as fast as the impacts, and the increase in homeowners who can?t get by without importing water does not make for sustainable agriculture or a sustainable community.?Under current conditions, he said ?we?re at risk of seeing coho salmon go from ?threatened? to an ?endangered? listing, and that?s why this is so critical.? The county would lose the fall fishing industry under an endangered listing.Trinity County Director of Transportation and Planning Rick Tippett said the water policy task was directed to the Planning Commission before other tasks were also directed to the planners including development of a commercial medical marijuana cultivation ordinance by March.?The water is important, but maybe we need to dive in around March or April during regular Planning Commission meetings,? he said, noting special meetings are being scheduled in January and February for marijuana workshops.?I disagree with you. This is more important than your marijuana discussions because this is the marijuana discussion. You can?t do one without the other,? Lancaster said, adding that because the county Planning Department is short on staffing capacity, the 5Cs program staff has already drafted some proposed water policy language for the commission to consider.Commissioners agreed to hear the water item again at their next regular meeting, Jan. 14, to view proposed draft policy changes and discuss a timeline for additional sessions on the topic.30-30-30 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Dec 16 08:26:58 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 16:26:58 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Chronicle: State sets minimum lake levels in attempt to save salmon References: <440926814.1704765.1450283218930.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <440926814.1704765.1450283218930.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> This decision will ensure the draining of Trinity Reservoir next year because there is no minimum water level established for Trinity, while there is for Folsom and Shasta. ?I guess killing all the fish in the Sacramento River wasn't enough and now the state water board wants to kill all the fish in the Trinity River as well (if the drought continues). TS http://www.sfgate.com/science/article/State-sets-minimum-lake-levels-in-attempt-to-save-6701174.php State sets minimum lake levels in attempt to save salmon By?Peter Fimrite? Updated 6:26?am, Wednesday, December 16, 2015 California regulators set a minimum level of water that should be held behind Shasta and Folsom lakes Tuesday in an effort to avoid another catastrophic die-off of Sacramento River salmon, but they reserved the right to change the limit if El Ni?o rains fill up the reservoirs.The?State Water Resources Control Board?unanimously passed an order that set a minimum target level of 200,000 acre-feet for Folsom Dam and 1.6 million acre-feet for Shasta Dam by the end of October 2016. One acre-foot is enough to cover an acre of land in a foot of water, roughly the amount needed to supply a family of four for a year.The board, however, inserted language that would allow adjustments and changes in the carryover targets after a stream of farmers, agricultural representatives and water district officials marched up to the podium during the meeting in Sacramento and criticized the order as unnecessary and premature.?It sets arbitrary targets that in and of itself will create controversy that is counterproductive,? argued Ara Azhderian, the water policy administrator for the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority, one of several representatives of water districts that primarily serve farmers. ?It is premature to take these actions today, plain and simple.? Virtually everyone agreed, nevertheless, that something needed to be done after about 97 percent of the winter-run chinook eggs, hatchlings and juvenile salmon died this year in the Sacramento River, which was too warm to support them. That?s millions of fish that didn?t make it out of the river, let alone into the ocean. RELATED STORIES - Creeks, waterfalls will be reborn - Drought-driven salmon deaths could have far-reaching impact - New survey finds 43 percent of salmon is mislabeled It was the second year in a row that most of the juvenile salmon died in the soupy water released from Shasta Dam, a problem caused by a lack of snow on top of four years of drought. There just wasn?t enough cold water left behind the dam to release during spawning season, biologists said.?I hate to use a sports metaphor, but the count is 0 and 2 on temperature management,? said water board member?Steven Moore. ?We can?t strike out.?The minimum levels set by the board are significantly higher than the amount the lakes dipped to in October ? a record low of 148,200 acre-feet in Folsom and 1.4 million acre-feet in Shasta. The federal plan for the preservation of salmon, known as a biological opinion, recommends a minimum of 2.2 million acre-feet be kept in Shasta.State resource officials are required by law to release enough cold water during spawning season to keep the Sacramento River at 56 degrees ? the ideal temperature for young salmon ? and the more water there is behind the dam, the colder the water gets.The levels at Folsom Lake are equally as important given that the reservoir got perilously close to dipping below 120,000 acre-feet, the level it needs for the intake valves to work. The lack of water had 500,000 suburban households on edge this summer and fall, including homeowners in Folsom, Granite Bay, Roseville and part of Sacramento.State and federal water resources officials coordinate releases from the two dams in an effort to maintain cold water and keep salinity levels down in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. If Shasta holds back water, other reservoirs, including Folsom, must release more water to prevent salty ocean water from contaminating the delta.The Sacramento River chinook salmon run is the last great migration along the giant Central Valley river system, which includes the San Joaquin River. The species, also known as king salmon, are born in the Sacramento River and pass through San Francisco Bay, roaming the Pacific Ocean as far as Alaska before returning three years later to spawn.Most of the salmon caught in the ocean and in the rivers are now bred in hatcheries, but there are still some wild fish, and those are the ones fisheries biologists are desperately trying to save. Winter-run chinook, which breed at a different time than other salmon, have been listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act since 1994.Peter Fimrite is a?San Francisco Chronicle?staff writer. E-mail:?pfimrite at sfchronicle.com?Twitter: @pfimrite -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Dec 16 22:34:03 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 22:34:03 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] TMC meeting starts at 8:30 not 9 am Thursday Message-ID: FYI the meeting is starting earlier than previously announced . Sent from my iPhone From tgstoked at gmail.com Wed Dec 16 22:32:25 2015 From: tgstoked at gmail.com (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 22:32:25 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Fwd: Delta Tunnels news: Fed Omnibus Bill Funds Tunnels Plan References: <06887fa70084fef8e939fef632ca461c02c.20151216202448@mail199.atl21.rsgsv.net> Message-ID: <83E4ED15-B151-4C7A-8A69-C63557DB17DE@gmail.com> Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: Restore the Delta, Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla > Date: December 16, 2015 at 12:25:46 PM PST > To: tgstoked at gmail.com > Subject: Delta Tunnels news: Fed Omnibus Bill Funds Tunnels Plan > Reply-To: Restore the Delta, Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla > > > For immediate release > Is this email not displaying correctly? > View it in your browser. > > December 16, 2015 > > Contact: > Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, Restore the Delta, 209-479-2053 > > DELTA TUNNELS > Federal Omnibus Spending Bill Includes More U.S. Taxpayer Funding > for Massive Water Export Tunnels > Water users, not U.S. Taxpayers, were supposed to fund the project > > STOCKTON, Calif. ? Deep within the 2009 page Omnibus Spending Bill up for a vote in Congress on Friday, is a provision called the CALIFORNIA BAY-DELTA RESTORATION starting on page 401 and referenced again on page 409 that would once again, allow some $37 million in federal tax dollars to help plan and build massive export tunnels that would take essential freshwater and export it to irrigators south of the Delta. Funding for the tunnels export project was to be paid for by water users, (i.e. the water districts that support industrial-scale crops for foreign export and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.) > > More than $257M spent so far on the delta water export tunnels, more than $73M has been funded by the federal taxpayers with the most recent federal grant of $17M received under false presences?for a habitat conservation plan that was dropped months before and now is a tunnels only project. > CA Obtains Fed Fish and Wildlife Funds for Delta Tunnels Under False Pretenses > > ?Archaic, outdated projects that will not serve ratepayers and taxpayers shrouded in 'restoration' language is meant to deceive, not to fund real solutions,? said Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla, executive director of Restore the Delta. "The President and Congress need to invest in sustainable, strategic and cost effective water strategies to effectively deal with the drought instead of continuing to invest in outdated projects that produce little water and lubricate water exports to a few rich industrial irrigators on the Westside of the San Joaquin Valley.? > > These riders that will have the U.S. taxpayers foot the bill to fund the water export tunnels, contained deep within federal omnibus spending bills flaunt California state law Water Code Section 85089 which requires beneficiaries to pay for the project, not taxpayers. > > Among the beneficiaries of this taxpayer-funded boondoggle are Stewart and Lynda Resnick. > ?The Resnicks are already looking to secure additional water sources. The couple could score big if a $15 billion water tunnels export project championed by Governor Jerry Brown is officially approved in the next few years.? > Amid Drought, Stewart And Lynda Resnick Are Richer Than Ever Forbes November 23, 2015 > > Opponents point out that the Delta Tunnels would grab more than 1/2 of the flow of the Sacramento River watershed, one of the last remaining sources of freshwater essential to the health of Delta estuary. Much of the freshwater is taken for export by industrial irrigators and delivered south to the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. About 70 percent of Delta estuary water is exported to these irrigating giants, some of the largest in the Nation where the water is, used to grow water intensive almonds and pistachios on unsustainable desert soils for lucrative overseas exports. > > Take action on federal drought bill HR 2898. > Last update: 12/14/15. > > DONATE | follow on Twitter | friend on Facebook | forward to a friend > Copyright ? 2015 Restore the Delta, All rights reserved. > You are receiving this e-mail because you signed up for our mailing list to receive updates and news about Restore the Delta. > Our mailing address is: > Restore the Delta > 42 N. Sutter Street, Suite 506 > Stockton, CA 95202 > > Add us to your address book > unsubscribe from this list | update subscription preferences > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Dec 18 14:57:40 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 22:57:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Fw: Watershed FOA posted In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1441931217.730205.1450479460098.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Friday, December 18, 2015 2:36 PM, "Schrock, Robin" wrote: Good Afternoon Everyone, For those of your who are interested, the FOA has been posted to?grants.gov. The easiest way to get to it is with the below link. Watershed FOA http://www.grants.gov/view-opportunity.html?dpp=1&oppId=280571 Robin M. SchrockExecutive DirectorTrinity River Restoration ProgramPO Box 1300, 1313 South Main StreetWeaverville, CA 96093TEL: (530) 623-1800FAX: (530) 623-5944CELL: (530) 945-7489www.trrp.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Dec 20 06:55:50 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 14:55:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Klamath Basin water accords crumble as Congress fails to act References: <892537440.1088937.1450623350813.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <892537440.1088937.1450623350813.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article50602055.html Klamath Basin water accords crumble as Congress fails to act BY RYAN SABALOW AND MICHAEL DOYLErsabalow at sacbee.comORLEANS?Ronnie Reed was born 53 years ago into the Karuk Tribe, whose ancestral lands stretch through the forested Klamath River canyon in Humboldt and Siskiyou counties. For years, he has held a sacred role as tribal fisherman, netting the salmon used in the tribe?s ancient ceremonies. And for much of that time, he saw the potato farmers and cattle ranchers who live almost 200 miles upstream in the Klamath Basin as villains.He saw their relentless demands for Klamath River water and the hydroelectric dams that stymied the river?s flow as part of the subjugation of native people in the West. And he blamed the farmers ? and their water diversions ? for the 2002 fish kill that left tens of thousands of salmon floating lifeless in the Klamath.So, it?s no understatement to say Reed was distrustful of the farmers at the other end of the table when he began formal negotiations with them two years later over how to manage the watershed.?But after years of tedious ? and sometimes heated ? negotiations, his outlook began to change.?When I first started going out to these meetings, we were archenemies,? Reed said this month outside the tribe?s office in Humboldt County. ?By the time we got done with that process, we?re drinking a beer, we?re eating salmon, we?re eating a potato, we?re eating some beef, and we?re having civil conversations about, ?How are we going to fix this world?? ?That spirit of compromise and collaboration that reshaped an entire river system?s water use ? from its source in the high desert of southern Oregon to where it washes into the Pacific in Northern California ? didn?t transfer to Washington, D.C.Fueled by partisan acrimony over the proposed removal of four hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River ? a crucial component in a trio of settlements that became known as the Klamath Agreements ? Congress has once again adjourned for the year without passing a bill to authorize and fund the accords.Without congressional approval, critical portions of the agreements will expire on Jan. 1.More than 40 groups, including the Karuk, signed the first of the agreements in 2010, striking a broad compromise among divergent factions that had been at odds for decades.?The accords promised a more secure future for Klamath Basin farmers by guaranteeing them a more reliable supply of water to irrigate their crops. The agreements also promised restored habitat for several species of threatened or endangered fish, and they granted water to wildlife refuges plagued by drought. The settlements hinged on removal of the four privately owned dams ? three in California and one in Oregon ? that were long seen by tribes, environmental groups and fishing associations as harmful to migratory fish.But dam removal was the major sticking point for opponents in the north state and Republicans in Washington, D.C. Western Republicans in both the House and Senate for five years have blocked efforts to advance legislation that included dam removal.??Tearing down four perfectly good hydroelectric dams when we can?t guarantee enough electricity to keep your refrigerator running this summer is lunacy,? Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Elk Grove, a leading opponent of dam removal, said last week in a written statement. McClintock described the dam-removal agreements as a ?greens-gone-wild episode.?Though at least one Republican congressman said he?s hopeful the legislation will be resurrected next year, many of those who signed the Klamath Agreements said that, with dam removal off the table, extending the deals would require a new round of negotiations among the original parties. And they say that?s unlikely.Already, the Yurok Tribe has pulled out of the process in frustration at congressional inaction. The Karuk and other tribes have signaled they?ll likely follow suit. At this point, many farmers in the community also are unlikely to return to the bargaining table, said Greg Addington, executive director of the Klamath Water Users Association, representing the interests of 1,200 family farms and ranches in the Klamath Basin.?We have districts in the Klamath Project basically saying, ?This approach didn?t work,? so what you?re seeing is more hard-liners surfacing and taking leadership roles,? Addington said.? Finding compromise amid acrimony? The failure to amicably reshape water use on the rural Klamath River doesn?t bode well for other disputes on more complex watersheds in California, whose overstretched water supplies are a source of tension among fisheries advocates, cities and powerful farming interests. The divide among a few thousand family farmers, tribal members and anglers on the Klamath seems simple by comparison.Plus, unlike the large water projects in California whose dams store millions of acre-feet for flood control, drinking water and irrigation downstream, these four Klamath dams are used primarily for hydroelectric power. They provide little storage for drinking water or agriculture. The farmers in the Klamath Basin receive their water from sources upstream of the disputed dams.?My thought is if they can?t get it done here, what hope is there down the road for California and the other places?? farmer and cattle rancher Jim Carleton said outside a bustling potato packing plant in Merrill, Ore. ?If they?re not going to get it done here on this scale, it seems like a pretty tall task to get it done on a larger scale, maybe impossible.?Those who signed the agreements say it?s all the more galling that Congress failed to enact them, given it was federal lawmakers who set the settlements in motion.?In the tough times of 2001 and 2002, when it was just bitter, bitter conflict, Congress actually told us to get a solution,? Addington said. ?They said, ?Quit banging on our desks. We can?t solve this for you. We need you to do it.? So we did it.?Years of tensions over water use on the Klamath boiled over in the drought of 2001, when federal regulators shut off the water to Klamath Basin farms in spring, amid concerns further irrigation would kill off coho salmon and two other endangered fish species. In response, nearly 10,000 farmers and their allies rallied in ?bucket brigade? protests. At one point, a small group of activists took a blowtorch and saw to a closed irrigation-canal head gate.MY THOUGHT IS IF THEY CAN?T GET IT DONE HERE, WHAT HOPE IS THERE DOWN THE ROAD FOR CALIFORNIA AND THE OTHER PLACES?Jim Carleton, Oregon farmer and cattle rancherThe next year, the administration of President George W. Bush reversed course and let farmers irrigate. Tribes, environmental groups and fishing associations were outraged, in turn, when tens of thousands of migrating salmon died in the low flows that followed the water diversions.Though lawsuits were pending, the various factions in 2004 agreed to begin talks that eventually changed how the watershed was managed.Under the agreements, Klamath Basin farmers agreed to take less water in exchange for more reliability, with guaranteed amounts set each year. The idea was to reduce the possibility of unexpected cutbacks in the middle of the growing season when conditions threaten fish.A related settlement signed in 2014 reshaped water allotments in the watershed?s upstream reaches. The Klamath Tribes, the federally recognized nation made up of Klamath, Modoc and Yahooskin Indians, have senior water rights, but they agreed to share water with upper basin farmers in exchange for habitat restoration and the retirement of thousand of acres of agricultural land.?The drought-plagued Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuge Complex, an annual stopover for millions of migrating birds, also was a winner. The agreements ensured refuges would receive a share of water nearly on par with local irrigators.For environmentalists, anglers and the salmon-dependent tribes living in impoverished rural communities along the Klamath, dam removal was seen as the biggest victory. They?ve long complained the dams block salmon and other migratory fish from critical spawning habitat, reduce water quality and contribute to the low flows that kill fish.They had an ally in the power company that owns the dams, Portland, Ore.-based PacifiCorp.The dams in question range from 50 to 100 years old and provide power to 70,000 homes. Spokesman Bob Gravely said that amounts to less than 2 percent of the power in PacifiCorp?s system, and removing them would have little impact on the power grid.?Our energy load in the Klamath Basin can be served from a gas plant in Salt Lake or a wind farm on the Columbia Gorge, so we don?t anticipate any issue with replacing the power,? he said.?NO ONE HAS SHOWN ME THAT TAKING DOWN THE DAMS IS BENEFICIAL TO FISH OR PEOPLE.U.S. Rep. Doug LaMalfa, R-RichvaleStill, dam removal and the associated habitat restoration efforts outlined in the settlements are expensive, estimated to cost at least $1 billion. The power company, which is owned by Warren Buffett?s Berkshire Hathaway, insisted on a provision that capped its share of dam removal costs at $200 million. The settlement also has a provision that helps shield PacifiCorp from legal bills should demolition of the dams cause problems.If the dams are to stand, Gravely said, they?ll need serious upgrades such as fish ladders for state and federal officials to relicense them. This costly prospect has some who signed the agreements wondering whether the dams? days are numbered, regardless of the settlements.?I think PacifiCorp would like to be rid of this asset,? said S. Craig Tucker, who advocates for dam removal on behalf of the Karuk Tribe. ?I don?t think we need to have an act of Congress to solve that problem. ... What we have is an arrangement where we could remove dams, restore fisheries and give ag a soft landing. The alternative is to remove dams and not have a soft landing.? Siskiyou voters say dams should stay? So why didn?t Congress sign off??Expense was part of it. Under the settlements, the federal government would agree to appropriate up to $800 million to fund the projects outlined in the accords, and California would pay up to $250 million for dam removal. Republican opponents said it amounted to a gift from taxpayers to farmers and to Buffett.The accords also met with loud opposition in Siskiyou County, home of three of the four dams. Though the Klamath River snakes through the county, only a small group of Siskiyou County farmers in the Tulelake area near Oregon were part of the settlement agreements. Most of the Klamath Basin?s farmers and ranchers are in Oregon.?In 2010, nearly 80 percent of Siskiyou County voters passed a symbolic referendum condemning dam removal. Some of the most vocal opponents were the conservative activists behind the movement to carve an independent State of Jefferson out of rural Northern California and southern Oregon. Along the curvy Highway 96 which follows the Klamath River?s path through Siskiyou County, the movement?s green and yellow double-X insignia pops up every few miles, sometimes beside signs protesting dam removal.The activists contend that removing the dams is yet another example of out-of-area regulators imposing their will on locals who will have to live with the consequences. They say the reservoirs behind the dams are vital for recreation and property values, and they cite concerns about environmental risks caused by dam removal and the loss of a local source of electricity.?I just don?t think ... people have the confidence that the right motives are being exercised here,? said Siskiyou County Sheriff Jon Lopey, an opponent of dam removal. ?And we feel that there are bureaucrats that work for the Department of the Interior and other regulatory agencies who are promulgating this policy without regards for the people of Siskiyou County.?U.S. Rep. Doug LaMalfa, R-Richvale, whose district includes Siskiyou County, has heard these sentiments from constituents, and he shares them.??No one has shown me that taking down the dams is beneficial to fish or people,? he said in a recent interview off the floor of the House of Representatives.Now that the deals appear dead, dam-removal advocates say they?ll renew efforts to have the dams torn down through other means, including the pending relicensing process. And some of those involved say they?ll try to salvage other pieces of the accords. But there?s a looming dread that a new round of lawsuits will be filed soon and tensions again will escalate.EVERYBODY ... HAD THE SAME GOAL AS I DO: THEY WANTED STABILITY FOR THEIR COMMUNITIES. THEY WANTED SOMETHING THERE FOR THEIR FUTURE GENERATIONS.Luther Horsley, Klamath Basin rancherKlamath Basin rancher Luther Horsley said it?s disappointing. He saw the accords as securing an agricultural future for his family.On a brisk fall morning in Midland, Ore., near the California border, Horsley stood on the back of a pickup tossing hay out to a herd of cattle. His 3-year-old grandson, Wes, sat in the driver?s seat. His feet, clad in miniature, scuffed cowboy boots, couldn?t touch the pedals, so the truck in its lowest gear crept along as Wes steered.?If we can?t irrigate our crops, then our farming operation?s not viable, then we won?t be here for my grandson,? Horsley said. ?That?s why I was so behind these agreements, and why it was so easy to throw in with the other parties.??Everybody, the other negotiators, the other stakeholders in the process ... had the same goal as I do: They wanted stability for their communities. They wanted something there for their future generations.?Four hours west at the Karuk tribe?s office in Orleans, the future of the Klamath River also is very much on Reed?s mind.Every fall, he heads down the canyon to a set of rapids called Ishi Pishi Falls. There, he balances on slippery rocks and scoops salmon out of the river using a small net strung between a pair of long poles, the same method used by his ancestors. The hundreds of fish he catches feed the tribe. These salmon also play an integral part in the Karuk?s annual World Renewal Ceremony.Reed says that his days as a negotiator may be over. He said he?s ready to become an activist again to ensure the dams come down so that his people can continue to have the fish they?ve relied on for centuries.??It?s a way of life,? he said. ?It?s not something the Karuk Tribe is willing to back off of.?Ryan Sabalow:?916-321-1264,?@ryansabalow Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/water-and-drought/article50602055.html#storylink=cpy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Mon Dec 21 15:01:27 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 23:01:27 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River trapping Summary JWeek 49 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C5A93B1@057-SN2MPN1-043.057d.mgd.msft.net> Season's Greetings Please see attached for the Trinity River Hatchery trapping summary update for Jweeks 48, 49 and one day in Jweek 50. Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW49.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 62689 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW49.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Dec 22 09:41:53 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 17:41:53 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Yurok Tribe bans GMO fish, crops References: <1680659634.1910473.1450806113513.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1680659634.1910473.1450806113513.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.times-standard.com/general-news/20151221/yurok-tribe-bans-gmo-fish-crops Yurok Tribe bans GMO fish, crops By?Will Houston, Eureka Times-StandardPOSTED:?12/21/15, 9:14 PM PST?|?UPDATED: 5 HRS AGO# COMMENTSThe Yurok Reservation is now a GMO-free zone after the tribal council approved what is claimed to be a first of its kind ordinance for tribal nations throughout the country.Implemented on Dec. 10 after several months of discussion, the ordinance was approved with ?pretty unanimous support? among tribal members, according to Yurok Tribal Chairman James Dunlap.?Our main concern is preserving the natural strains,? Dunlap said. ? ... We?d rather take the proactive approach in getting to a prevention measure rather than waiting until something happens and having to deal with it in a crisis mode.?The tribe?s Genetically Engineered Organism Ordinance prohibits propagation, raising, growing, spawning, incubating, or releasing genetically engineered organisms and took effect immediately upon passage. Any violations could lead to fines of $3,000 or more depending on the scope of the damage.?The ordinance is also a response to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration?s decision in November to approve an application for the sale of genetically modified Atlantic salmon as food in the United States.In its Nov. 19, the FDA approved AquaBounty Technologies? controversial application for their AquAdvantage Salmon ? a genetically modified salmon that reaches market size more quickly than unmodified Atlantic salmon. This decision marked the first time the FDA approved a genetically engineered animal intended for food, according to the?FDA?s Nov. 19 news release.Under the FDA?s decision, the salmon cannot be bred or raised in the U.S. and requires multiple, redundant barriers in the breeding tanks and plumbing to prevent any eggs or fish from escaping. Instead, the salmon are raised in FDA-overseen stations in Canada and Panama.The FDA states that the AquAdvantage Salmon are also sterile, ?so that even in the highly unlikely event of an escape, they would be unable to interbreed or establish populations in the wild,? according to the FDA news release.Dunlap views these federal oversight and protection requirements as well intended, but states the tribe would rather place an overall ban on the product rather than risk the ?unexpected consequences.??What are the consequences of them not fulfilling that promise?? Dunlap asked.AdvertisementThe California Legislature did not want to take the risk either.In September 2014, Gov. Jerry Brown signed a Assembly Bill 504 authored by former North Coast Assemblyman Wesley Chesbro (D-Arcata) that banned the commercial production, and stocking of genetically altered, non-native salmon in state waters.?If these ?Frankenfish? were to escape into our waters, they could destroy our native salmonid populations through interbreeding, competition for food and the introduction of parasites and disease,? Chesbro had said in a September 2014 statement.?California Department of Fish and Wildlife environmental scientist Sara Borok said that neither of the state?s two fisheries in the Klamath River Basin ? Iron Gate Fish Hatchery and Trinity River Hatchery ? produce genetically modified fish.?We don?t have anybody in the area producing any GMO fish,? Borok said.This non-GMO status also applies to all state-overseen fish hatcheries in the state, according to California Department of Fish and Wildlife spokesman Andrew Hughan.The tribe?s ordinance gives those entities already producing genetically modified organisms within their reservation a 12-month grace period to transition to GMO-free production. Dunlap said there is currently no known GMO production within the tribe?s territory.Humboldt County voters also approved a countywide GMO ban in November 2014 through Measure P. Under the initiative, all GMO production in the county must cease and all existing GMO products are required to be destroyed or disposed of by Jan. 1, 2016.Dunlap said that the tribe?s ordinance is part of a larger effort to restore the ecological balance on tribal lands, which will also address forest, wetland, and prairie restoration. In the meantime, Dunlap said the Yurok Tribe is currently working to bring forward an ordinance regulating pesticide usage.Will Houston can be reached at 707-441-0504. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Reach the author at?whouston at times-standard.com@times-standard.com?or follow Will on Twitter:?@Will_S_Houston. - Full bio and more articles by Will Houston - - - MOST POPULAR DAYWEEKNEWSSPORTSBIZA&EEMAILLIFE - CIF Football: St. Bernard?s beats Saddleback Valley Christian for Division V-A state title - St. Bernard's Crusaders state title game - CIF State Football: St. Bernard?s, Saddleback Valley Christian square off for state title - Tuesday forecast: Van Duzen set to flood; heavy rain coming - Arcata driver sustains major injury after crashing into tree - Fortuna police recover stolen vehicles at gas station - Eureka police find AR-15 rifle, pot, arrest two Sacramento men? - Fleming hires 2 new deputy DAs - - -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Tue Dec 22 12:38:14 2015 From: Danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 12:38:14 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] American River Steelhead Numbers Rebound From Last Year In-Reply-To: <96ECD3C4-05FF-43EF-ABD7-4BFD1BA378AB@gmail.com> References: <5ED69F30-824F-458B-8B94-FF81E0BA5411@gmail.com> <225E90B2-8C6F-4CEE-BB47-F5173A10349F@gmail.com> <49B0E59A-8E9E-48D7-9CEF-A19B66640846@gmail.com> <96ECD3C4-05FF-43EF-ABD7-4BFD1BA378AB@gmail.com> Message-ID: <6F3F2588-BB4F-4740-98E5-49A90DBC6726@fishsniffer.com> http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2015/12/22/1462882/-American-River-Steelhead-Numbers-Rebound-From-Last-Season Dan Bacher with a beautiful winter-run steelhead caught on the American River. Photo by Rodney Fagundes. American River Steelhead Numbers Rebound From Last Year by Dan Bacher Rancho Cordova) The number of steelhead showing now at Nimbus Fish Hatchery is greatly improved from last season, in spite of continuing low releases of 500 cfs from Nimbus Dam into the lower American River. This year is much different from last season, when a total of only 154 steelhead were trapped by hatchery staff from December through mid- March. In contrast, the hatchery has trapped over 148 steelhead as of December 22. Last season only 10 steelhead had been trapped by December 29. ?There are lots of steelhead in the hatchery, said Gary Novak, Nimbus Fish Hatchery manager. ?I?m floored.? The hatchery has spawned a total of 27 pairs to date compared with only 31 pairs all of last season. ?The males are above average size and the females are also large,? he said, leading to speculation that some of the steelhead may have stayed out in the ocean for an extra year and have come up the river as 4-year-olds. We won?t know for sure until scale samples of the steelhead are analyzed by biologists. Most steelhead return to spawn as three-year- olds on the American River. The number of eggs taken from the fish to date is 198,278. That?s more than the total for the entire season last year, 192,278 eggs. ?We averaged about 6,000 eggs per female last season,? he said. ?This season we?re seeing over 7,000 eggs per fish.? The numbers of fall-run Chinook salmon, including jacks and jills (two- year?old fish), showing at the hatchery are now also above those trapped last year. The facility has trapped 9,716 salmon, including 7,326 adults and 2390 jacks and jills, this season. Last year hatchery staff counted a total of 8,343 salmon, including 7,048 adults and 1,295 jacks and jills. The hatchery has taken 8 million eyed salmon eggs to date. ?Overall, the numbers of salmon are typical of those we?ve seen here in recent years,? said Novak. ?The water at the hatchery was warm in the beginning, but the cold snap we got cooled the water down and brought up fresh fish from the Sacramento,? he explained. He noted that they have already sent 2 million eggs to the Mokelumne River Fish Hatchery, in addition to the eggs they have on hand at Nimbus, as insurance against any unforeseen disaster. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 182930_10153845906635990_1594212458190604097_n-1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 98814 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Wed Dec 23 09:10:01 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 17:10:01 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal: Shasta target level could impact Trinity References: <1477160735.2278520.1450890601527.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1477160735.2278520.1450890601527.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/environment/article_d3486182-a90b-11e5-83a1-03c6750bce02.html Shasta target level could impact Trinity By AMY GITTELSOHN The Trinity Journal | Posted: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 6:15 amState officials have softened a proposed order that Lake Shasta hold a minimum of 1.6 million acre-feet of water at the end of October 2016 to protect endangered winter-run chinook salmon.The order could still impact Trinity Lake, which is operated in conjunction with Shasta and has no minimum storage restrictions.The order the State Water Resources Control Board issued Dec. 15 calls for the 1.6 million acre-feet as a target storage level, or that another target be met that will ensure temperature requirements are met to protect the winter-run chinook.?That?s a target for them to shoot for, but they?ve got some flexibility,? said Tim Moran, spokesman for the state water board. ?The goal is to get the temperature where it should be, and if they can do it some other way, that?s OK.?Because water from the Trinity reservoir is diverted via tunnels to the Sacramento River for Central Valley Project purposes, there is the potential that Trinity Lake will be tapped to make up the difference if more water is retained in Shasta.From the federal Bureau of Reclamation?s Northern California Area Office, Deputy Area Manager Don Bader said typically if the agency needed to keep Shasta full Reclamation would draw from Trinity, ?which we did last year.??Bottom line is if they do require Shasta be kept fuller during the summer months it?s going to be more of a draw on Trinity, if it?s available,? he said.However, he noted that the Trinity reservoir is still very low even with the recent rains.In addition to the target of 1.6 million acre-feet in the Shasta reservoir, a target level of 200,000 acre-feet at the end of October is called for in the Folsom reservoir. By comparison, Shasta reservoir was at 1.4 million acre-feet at the end of October this year, and Folsom was at 148,200 acre-feet.The Bureau of Reclamation and state Department of Water Resources have until March 15 to complete a Sacramento River Temperature Management Plan, at which point there will be more information on snowpack and precipitation.From the state board, Moran noted the order requires that the temperature plan not result in redirected impacts to other salmonid species in the Sacramento or Trinity River basins.According to the state Department of Fish and Wildlife, winter-run chinook salmon spawn almost entirely in the Sacramento River and its tributaries upstream of Red Bluff, arriving there as early as December, with spawning occurring from April through August.The state board raised concerns regarding extinction of the winter-run chinook, which has a three-year life cycle.The state board noted that winter-run chinook eggs and young salmon experienced almost total mortality in 2014 in the Sacramento River, which was too warm to support them. Despite efforts to protect them in 2015, the run appears to have experienced even higher mortality rates in 2015, state officials said.Water released to the Sacramento River is not supposed to exceed 56 degrees for the eggs and hatchlings, but without enough cold water behind Shasta Dam that limit was exceeded. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ecolaw at gmail.com Wed Dec 23 11:10:43 2015 From: ecolaw at gmail.com (Andrew Orahoske) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 11:10:43 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] E&E News: Tribes hold wild card in high-stakes supply game Message-ID: Brief Klamath mention, and a very relevant piece to our region... http://www.eenews.net/stories/1060029881 *WESTERN WATER:* *Tribes hold wild card in high-stakes supply game* Annie Snider, E&E reporter Greenwire: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 *First of two stories on tribal water rights.* It's not just modern engineering that made Arizona's desert bloom. Thirty miles south of downtown Phoenix sits dusty land that was once farmed by one of the most advanced agricultural civilizations of prehistoric times. As far back as 300 B.C., the Hohokam people hand-dug a network of canals through the Gila River's rich floodplains, diverting spring runoff to nourish their fields. But by the end of the 19th century, their descendants' fields were parched and dead, thanks to upstream diversions by white settlers. "That era among our people is called the time of starvation," said Gov. Stephen Roe Lewis, the top elected official at the Gila River Indian Community, home of the Hohokam's descendants, the Pima, and the Maricopa tribe. "Not only had our crops dried up because of lack of water, we were known as ranchers and a lot of our animals died because of lack of water," he said. "We were really on the brink of extinction." Over the next century, the federal government put its financial and engineering might to work developing water projects around the reservation to benefit surrounding communities, but rarely the tribes. Their fields dry, the Pima and Maricopa shifted from their traditional diet to a Western one, and the community's diabetes rate skyrocketed to one of the highest in the country. Gila River Indian Community Gov. Stephen Roe Lewis proclaimed 2015 the year of water -- his first act after taking office. He has been focused on building a plan that puts the tribe?s water right to use in a way that brings not just financial benefits to its members, but also nourishes its culture. Photo courtesy of Gila River Indian News/Communications & Public Affairs Office. Traditional ways -- weaving baskets of marsh grasses, using herbal medicines made from river sediment -- were lost, too. The painful irony: The tribes were technically the first in line for water. Thanks to a 1908 Supreme Court ruling, tribes almost always have the most senior claim to water in the West, where water rights are prioritized based on when the resource was first put to beneficial use and reservations dot the landscape. Rights mean little without a lawyer to defend them, though, and for generations, tribes were too poor to afford representation. But in recent years, in part because of groundwork laid by the Native American civil rights movement, tribes are increasingly heading to court to assert their rights. Advertisement There's a problem: While the high court was clear that tribes have rights to water, it did not say to how much. In many cases, tribes claim a share large enough that it could crowd out neighboring cities' and farmers' water supplies and stanch future development. Tribes along the main stem of the Colorado River in the Lower Basin have some of the few court-determined rights because of a 1963 Supreme Court decision covering larger battles over the river between California and Arizona. Today, just those few tribes have rights to roughly 20 percent of the Lower Basin's flow -- an amount that is more than five times the allocation for the entire state of Nevada. And in one recent attention-grabbing case, Oregon regulators decided the Klamath tribe's treaty right to salmon and other fisheries in Oregon's deeply contentious Klamath River basin meant it had a right to in-stream flows dating to "time immemorial." Attempting to head off another massive fish die-off like one that occurred a decade earlier, the tribe in 2013 issued a call on the river after a gripping drought set in. The move cut off water to hundreds of cattle ranchers and farmers in the heart of the state's agricultural breadbasket and sparked protests in the rural communities. Such events turned heads. "Everyone stood up and took notice, particularly the states and Western business," said John Echohawk, executive director and co-founder of the Native American Rights Fund, which has worked on tribal water rights since it was founded in 1970. "They saw that the tribes were asserting senior water rights, and if the claims were allowed, we would have the ability to displace business in times of shortage." [+] Many Indian reservations are located in or near contentious river basins where demand for water outstrips supply. Map courtesy of the Bureau of Reclamation. Now, as booming populations and extended droughts have stoked competition for water supplies across the West, the uncertainty around tribes' potentially massive claims to water in already overstretched river basins is posing real constraints on communities and businesses. "It's a very significant set of claims that tribes have on very limited and critical water supplies across the West," said Deputy Interior Secretary Mike Connor, who has worked on tribal water issues throughout his career. "It's uncertainty -- that's what water managers don't want." But lawsuits have largely proved fruitless for all sides. When tribes win, they receive only a legal right to the water -- dubbed a "paper water right" -- often without the infrastructure or funding needed to get the water to the reservation and put it to use. Meanwhile, endless appeals offer certainty for no one. Instead, many tribes and communities have opted to sit down at the negotiating table in an effort to hash out an agreement that can get the tribes what they most need -- wet water and sometimes other support for economic development -- while protecting nontribal users and absolving the federal government of liability for failing to protect tribes' rights. Moreover, with all parties at the table, settlements are increasingly providing an opportunity to take a holistic look at issues across the basin and address other sticky issues like endangered species management or land ownership. "I think generally we kind of look at these things as an opportunity to figure out how water in a particular basin's going to be used in the future because in these negotiations, everything's on the table, everybody's involved," Echohawk said. "The question is, how do we get that peace in the valley? How do we learn to live together in a sustainable basin?" he said. "It comes down to a master plan for water in a particular basin for time in eternity." But settlements tend to rely on an infusion of federal cash to help make the pie larger for everyone, and that funding is getting harder to fight for in Congress. Meanwhile, longer, deeper droughts and ongoing development in river basins across the West stand to make settlements more difficult in the future. Experts say the longer the questions go unresolved, the more expensive the solutions become. *Complex legal landscape* Two legal concepts drive conversations about tribal water rights. The first, known as the Winters doctrine, stems from a 1908 Supreme Court case, *Winters v. United States*, relating to water rights at the Fort Belknap American Indian Reservation in central Montana. It holds that when Congress set aside land for an Indian reservation, it also intended to reserve the water necessary to make that land a permanent homeland. The same doctrine has also been applied to other federal reservations, like national parks. But how much water does a homeland need? Courts have generally looked to the purpose that Congress identified in establishing the reservation, which was often agricultural, even for tribes with no history of farming. So to come up with a water right, experts would calculate how much reservation land could be farmed and how much water it would take to irrigate it -- a complicated, time-consuming process that can result in a large amount of water for the tribe. The second key legal concept relates to the federal government's responsibility to tribes. In a "trust responsibility," the government, through the Interior Department, has a legal obligation to protect tribal treaty rights, land and other assets, and carry out federal laws relating to tribes. Court rulings have made it clear that trust obligation includes protecting tribes' water rights in the face of outside development -- something the government frequently failed to do. Meanwhile, some experts contend that the lack of infrastructure development for tribes is also a breach of that trust responsibility. On the Navajo Nation, the country's largest, poorest reservation, which spans a broad swath of Arizona, New Mexico and Utah, an estimated 40 percent of households lack access to running water. There, families must travel dozens of miles to haul water from centralized wells or wait for the once-a-month delivery from a local church. Without water, economic development is nearly impossible. But exactly what that federal liability means in dollars and cents is another major open question. One of the highest-profile cases over breach of trust was a long-running class-action lawsuit relating to the Interior Department's mismanagement of income from tribal trust lands. That case, *Cobell** v. Salazar*, settled in 2009 for a whopping $3.4 billion. But for water rights, there's no solid precedent. In part, that's because neither side has wanted to take the risk to get a definitive answer. For one thing, due to a 1952 appropriations rider, federal water rights like tribes' can be adjudicated in state courts, which tribes tend to see as hostile to their interests. Meanwhile, the country's highest court is also seen as becoming less favorable to tribes. The last major Indian water rights case to land before the Supreme Court was an appeal of a Wyoming state court's decision that granted the Wind River Indian Reservation a large water right. Then-Justice Sandra Day O'Connor recused herself from the case at the last moment, having discovered that her family's ranch was part of a water adjudication that involved tribal water rights. Without her, the high court reached a split, 4-4 decision that left the state court's ruling in place. But when Justice Thurgood Marshall's papers were made public after his death, lawyers found a "ghost opinion" from O'Connor that would have overturned the Wyoming ruling and significantly revised the Winters doctrine. All that leaves tribes gun-shy about a return trip to the high court. "Tribes don't want to be litigating these and going to the Supreme Court because they came within a whisper of losing it all in '89, and in my view the Supreme Court has become a lot more hostile to tribal interests than the court we had at that time," said Stanley Pollack, assistant attorney general for the Navajo Nation and a leading expert on tribal water rights. *Motivation for negotiation* That complex legal playing field, coupled with the decadeslong process that water rights cases can face, heightens the interest in negotiations. To be sure, negotiating isn't easy, either. By definition, no one gets everything he or she wants in a settlement. And compromise can be difficult for tribal leaders, who often face fractured constituencies at home that have long memories of unfulfilled promises. "Indian Country only gets one try to be able to get this right with respect to their settlement because there's no coming back after you do it," said Michael Bogert, who served as Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne's negotiator on tribal water rights settlements during the George W. Bush administration. "It's the most difficult decision for tribal leaders to make, to say, 'This is as good as it's going to get, and we need to move on,'" he said. After years of litigation over water rights at the Gila River Indian Community south of Phoenix, Lewis, the community's top elected official, said the reservation ultimately came to see settling its claims as an opportunity to improve life on the reservation, where the per-capita income still hovers below $10,000 a year and eight young people recently committed suicide over the course of a single year. "This is a small part of righting all the wrongs that came out of that," Lewis said. "Without our water, we were almost completely dependent on the federal government, and using our water settlement as a leg to come out of this, to start to heal ourselves through our water, through bringing back our water to us and all that it means -- not just from an economic standpoint, but from a social, cultural, spiritual as well -- it is very important," he said. Major players in Arizona water were also highly motivated to reach a settlement. The Salt River Project, which supplies the lion's share of water and power to the Greater Phoenix area, had been worried about the tribes' rights since the 1970s. Water managers there knew that the Gila River Indian Community had a strong case for what could be a massive amount of water, and they wanted to at least know what they were dealing with so they could plan for the future. "The threat was, if we went to litigation, they might be able to prove a right -- a very substantial right -- to that water supply," said Dave Roberts, senior director for water resources at the Salt River Project. "That would have a substantial impact ... on the state of Arizona as a whole." But generations of animosity got the talks off to a rocky start. "Oh my goodness, we started in the late '80s and we were at each other's throats," Roberts said. But over time, the framework of a deal began to come together. Arizona was helped by a powerful asset that few others in the West have: extra water. The Central Arizona Project, a 336-mile-long canal completed in 1993, is designed to bring about 1.5 million acre-feet of Colorado River water to central and southern Arizona. In a deal related to repaying the federal government for the project, the state ultimately agreed to set a portion of that new Colorado River water aside to resolve Indian water rights claims. That allows tribes' water rights to be fulfilled without taking water away from nearby farmers and cities. The Gila River Indian Community ultimately agreed to a right of just over 650,000 acre-feet of water a year, a little more than a quarter of what it had originally argued for, plus $200 million in federal funding. Roughly half the water in the deal comes from the Central Arizona Project -- enough to make the community the single largest recipient of water through the project and a major player in Arizona water. *Adversaries become partners* Once a deal is reached, a fundamental shift occurs. Suddenly, people who had spent years on opposite sides of the negotiating table find themselves on the same side, needing to persuade Congress to approve and fund their settlement. Because settlements involve tribes taking rights to less water than they otherwise could have claimed, Congress has to sign off. Lawmakers also must approve deals that require federal involvement in new infrastructure projects. "Getting a settlement like this through Congress is very, very difficult," Roberts said. "So while we were very contentious opponents early on, we became very close and had mutual respect both ways." So much respect, in fact, that after the deal was approved as part of the Arizona Water Settlements Act in 2004, the Gila River Indian Community turned to the Salt River Project for help with what came next. It would take decades to build some of the key infrastructure necessary to put the newly won water to use on the reservation's farms, and the community wanted to find a way to benefit from it in the meantime. The settlement agreement allowed the community to market its water, either by leasing it out to nearby communities or by banking it in underground aquifers -- activities the Salt River Project had deep expertise in. At the same time, returning the flow to at least parts of the river was hugely important to the community for cultural reasons. The solution they came up with: diverting Colorado River water into the Gila River's dry bed to re-create stretches of the river's flow, then choosing spots where the soil is right to percolate the water down into the aquifer for storage. This "banking" creates credits that can then be sold to nearby water users. The pair of once-adversaries even created a joint business venture for the project, Gila River Water Storage LLC. The effort is still in its early stages, but both sides say it could bring a major revenue stream to the tribe, which is hoping to build up a cash reserve in anticipation of higher costs for delivering the Colorado River water to the reservation due to new environmental regulations that could affect the price of its coal-fired electricity. The banking and other deals the community has struck with the Salt River Project also offer a buffer to neighboring users during times of drought. That's good both for those other users and for the community, which could otherwise see overpumping threaten its reserves. "We do accept with this settlement a larger civic involvement within the community of helping to solve problems, not becoming a problem," Lewis said. Now the partnership between the two entities stands to grow even more. The community and the Salt River Project are in talks about energy opportunities on the reservation, including solar power and other green technologies, as well as potential transmission corridors that could touch the reservation. Roberts, who has worked on a number of tribal water rights settlements for the Salt River Project, said the relationships that form through the process are invaluable. "In every one of these water settlements, we've had some relationships develop over time that have been mutual, respectable relationships that lead to bigger things," he said. "That's the best thing about these settlements." To mark the 10th anniversary of the settlement's enactment last December, Lewis proclaimed 2015 the year of water -- his first act after taking office. The settlement, he said, is a "game changer" for the community that allows it to take back control over its own destiny. A turning point came when the water first flowed into the Gila River during tests of the banking system, he said. "Our elders had the opportunity to see the water actually, physically come back," Lewis said. "Not only did the water settlement guarantee it, but they could actually see it, smell it. Because all they've known is that reality that we've been denied this water and we are less than." *Want to read more stories like this?* E&E is the leading source for comprehensive, daily coverage of environmental and energy politics and policy. Click here to start a free trial to E&E -- the best way to track policy and markets. *WESTERN WATER POLICY* *RELATED HEADLINES* *WESTERN WATER:* *Calif. draws fire for offering $2.7B to storage projects* Greenwire: Friday, December 18, 2015 *DROUGHT:* *Interior launches website tracking Colo. River woes* E&ENews PM: Wednesday, December 16, 2015 *WESTERN WATER:* *N.M**. advances river diversion as greens protest costs, impact* Greenwire: Friday, December 11, 2015 *WESTERN WATER:* *House Dems ask Obama to keep drought language out of omnibus* E&E Daily: Thursday, December 10, 2015 *WATER:* *Walden proposes last-minute alternative to Klamath deal* E&E Daily: Friday, December 4, 2015 *LATEST SELECTED HEADLINES* *ClimateWire**&**nbsp* Wednesday, December 23, 2015 ? 8:03 AM *RENEWABLE ENERGY:* *China struggles to use wind power to avert toxic, 'red alert' smog* *AGRICULTURE:* *Keeping up crop production as climate shifts the country's 'bread basket'* *RESOURCES:* *Bank's analysts see Paris climate targets as 'nail in the coffin' for coal* *RESEARCH:* *Current models of forest carbon may be wrong -- study* *EnergyWire**&**nbsp* Wednesday, December 23, 2015 ? 7:29 AM *ELECTRICITY:* *For **NextEra**, Texas strategy reflects flight from traditional merchant plants* *CLEAN POWER PLAN:* *Mich. can meet initial carbon targets with no changes, officials say* *SECURITY:* *Military eyes how to beat hackers after a power outage* *OIL:* *U.S**.-global price gap erased on supply expectations* *E&**ENews** PM&**nbsp* Tuesday, December 22, 2015 ? 4:00 PM *HAZARDOUS WASTE:* *Company pleads guilty to duping **EPA** inspectors, fined $1.5M* *INTERIOR:* *Watchdog to assess **USGS's** work with biological collections* *WATER POLICY:* *Sierra Club asks to intervene in **WOTUS** challenge* *ENDANGERED SPECIES:* *Greens threaten suits to prompt **FWS** decision on 2 rare turtles* *Greenwire**&**nbsp* Tuesday, December 22, 2015 ? 1:10 PM *WESTERN WATER:* *Tribes hold wild card in high-stakes supply game* *CLEAN POWER PLAN:* *Wyo. warns climate rule imperils sage grouse conservation* *CLEAN POWER PLAN:* *Lawyers bicker over ground rules as legal brawl begins* *INTERIOR:* *Influential staffers set to craft a slew of new policies* *LATEST E&**ETV** VIDEOS* *ENERGY POLICY:* *ClearView** Energy's Book discusses impact of export ban lift on **U.S**. producers, oil markets* OnPoint: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 *ENERGY POLICY:* *Brownstein** Hyatt Farber **Schreck's** Gore talks omnibus winners and losers* OnPoint: Tuesday, December 22, 2015 *NEGOTIATIONS:* *C2ES's **Perciasepe** says **U.S**. to pay diplomatic price if next administration rejects Paris deal* OnPoint: Monday, December 21, 2015EnergyWire& nbsp ClimateWire & nbsp E &E Daily& nbsp Greenwire & nbsp E & ENews PM& nbsp E & ETV & nbsp The Premier Information Source for Professionals Who Track Environmental and Energy Policy. ? 1996-2015 E&E Publishing, LLC Privacy Policy Site Map -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From derek_rupert at fws.gov Wed Dec 23 14:12:24 2015 From: derek_rupert at fws.gov (Rupert, Derek) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 14:12:24 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Mainstem Trinity River spawn survey update for December 18, 2015 Message-ID: Hello All, The US Fish and Wildlife Service along with the Yurok Tribe, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, US Forest Service, and Hoopa Valley Tribe have another weekly update for our Trinity River mainstem spawn survey posted on the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Fisheries webpage. Trinity River spawn Survey update December 18, 2015. This week our crews mapped 24 redds (2,160 total for the year) in the Reaches from Lewiston Dam to Pigeon Point. The graph below is clipped from our weekly report (limited to the river upstream of Cedar Flat). This is the last update for 2015. We will be back in nine months for the 2016 spawning season. ? Cheers, Derek -- Derek Rupert Fish Biologist US Fish and Wildlife Service Weaverville, CA Office 530.623.1805 Cell 570.419.2823 Derek_Rupert at fws.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WeeklyGraphicSmall.png Type: image/png Size: 9872 bytes Desc: not available URL: From danielbacher at fishsniffer.com Wed Dec 23 11:39:48 2015 From: danielbacher at fishsniffer.com (Dan Bacher) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 11:39:48 -0800 Subject: [env-trinity] Yurok Tribe adopts ordinance banning Frankenfish and GMOs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <258DB61C-9464-4045-8252-BC58B0C22799@fishsniffer.com> https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/12/23/18781207.php http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/12/23/1463001/-Yurok-Tribe-adopts-ordinance-banning-Frankenfish-and-GEOs Yurok Tribe adopts ordinance banning Frankenfish and GMOs by Dan Bacher Wednesday Dec 23rd, 2015 8:12 AM "The Yurok People have the responsibility to care for our natural world, including the plants and animals we use for our foods and medicines," said James Dunlap, Chairman of the Yurok Tribe. "This Ordinance is a necessary step to protect our food sovereignty and to ensure the spiritual, cultural and physical health of the Yurok People. GMO food production systems, which are inherently dependent on the overuse of herbicides, pesticides and antibiotics, are not our best interest." yurok.jpg The federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on November 19 approved genetically engineered salmon, "Frankenfish," as being fit for human consumption, in spite of massive public opposition to the decision by fishermen, Tribes, environmental organizations and public interest organization. (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2015/11/20/18780189.php) While the FDA may have approved AquaAdvantage salmon for human consumption, these ?Frankenfish? and all Genetically Engineered Organisms (GEOs) are now banned on the Yurok Reservation on the Klamath River in northwest California. This ordinance is apparently the first of its kind in the U.S. to specifically address the AquaBounty Technologies? application for AquAdvantage Salmon, an Atlantic salmon that reaches market size more quickly than non-GE farm- raised Atlantic salmon, as well as all GMOs. A news release from the Yurok Tribe states: "On December 10, 2015, after several months of committee drafting and opportunity for public comment, the Yurok Tribal Council unanimously voted to enact the Yurok Tribe Genetically Engineered Organism (?GEO?) Ordinance. The Tribal GEO Ordinance prohibits the propagation, raising, growing, spawning, incubating, or releasing genetically engineered organisms (such as growing GMO crops or releasing genetically engineered salmon) within the Tribe?s territory and declares the Yurok Reservation to be a GMO-free zone. While other Tribes, such as the Dine? (Navajo) Nation, have declared GMO-free zones by resolution, this ordinance appears to be the first of its kind in the nation. This announcement comes on the heels of the Federal Food and Drug Administration?s (FDA) approval of genetically engineered 'AquAdvantage' salmon in November. On April 11, 2013, the Yurok Tribe enacted a resolution opposing genetically engineered salmon, and then secured a grant from the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) to support the Tribe?s work in continuing to protect its ancestral lands, including: waters, traditional learning and teaching systems, seeds, animal-based foods, medicinal plants, salmon, sacred places, and the health and well-being of the Tribe?s families and villages. GMO farms, whether they are cultivating fish or for fresh produce, have a huge, negative impact on watersheds the world over. The Yurok Tribe?s homeland is on the Klamath River, where massive algal blooms, exacerbated by agricultural runoff and antiquated hydroelectric dams, turn the river toxic each summer. The Yurok People have managed and relied upon the abundance of salmon on the Klamath River since time immemorial. The Tribe has a vital interest in the viability and survival of the wild, native Klamath River salmon species and all other traditional food resources. 'The Yurok People have the responsibility to care for our natural world, including the plants and animals we use for our foods and medicines. This Ordinance is a necessary step to protect our food sovereignty and to ensure the spiritual, cultural and physical health of the Yurok People. GMO food production systems, which are inherently dependent on the overuse of herbicides, pesticides and antibiotics, are not our best interest,' said James Dunlap, Chairman of the Yurok Tribe. The Ordinance allows for enforcement of violations through the Yurok Tribal Court. Yurok Chief Judge Abby Abinanti stated, 'It is the inherent sovereign right of the Yurok People to grow plants from natural traditional seeds and to sustainably harvest plants, salmon and other fish, animals, and other life-giving foods and medicines, in order to sustain our families and communities as we have successfully done since time immemorial; our Court will enforce any violations of these inherent, and now codified, rights.' The Yurok Tribe is working with other Tribes in a regional collaborative as part of the Northern California Tribal Court Coalition (NCTCC), and the Tribe and NCTCC are co-hosting an Indigenous Food Sovereignty Summit in Klamath in the spring of 2016. A signed copy of the ordinance can be found on NCTCC?s website:nctcc.org. For questions about the ordinance, contact Matt Mais at 707.482.1350, yuroktribe.nsn.us. Or Stephanie Dolan, Executive Director of the Northern California Tribal Court Coalition 530.575.5818, nctcc.org." The Tribal Council passed the ordinance at a critical time for West Coast salmon and steelhead. The Klamath River, the Tribe's homeland, is plagued by massive algal blooms, exacerbated by agricultural runoff and antiquated hydroelectric dams, that turn the river toxic each summer. The Klamath's salmon and other fish populations are also threatened by Jerry Brown's California Water Fix to build the Delta Tunnels to export water to corporate agribusiness interests, Southern California water agencies and oil companies conducting fracking and other extreme oil extraction methods in Kern County. A large proportion of the water of the Trinity River, the Klamath's largest tributary, is diverted from Trinity Reservoir to the Sacramento River basin via Whiskeytown Reservoir to irrigate almonds, pistachios and other crops on drainage impaired land in the Westlands Water District on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. The giant tunnels would imperil Chinook salmon, coho salmon, steelhead and lamprey populations on the Trinity and Klamath rivers, as well as hastening the extinction of Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, Delta and longfin smelt, Sacramento splittail and green sturgeon populations. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: yurok.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 75529 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Dec 24 13:21:10 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2015 21:21:10 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Chronicle Editorial: Klamath plan gets jammed in Congress References: <73918409.2625598.1450992070754.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <73918409.2625598.1450992070754.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Klamath-plan-gets-jammed-in-Congress-6718886.php Klamath plan gets jammed in Congress San Francisco ChronicleDecember 23, 2015 - ? - 0 - ? - ? - ? - ? - ? - Five years ago, a compromise package to remove four Klamath River dams straddling the California and Oregon border was saluted as a water-policy marvel. But the package now faces near-certain death as a year-end deadline for congressional action draws near.?The failure harms the river?s health and upstream farmers, killing a deal that drew in Indian tribes, high-country ranchers, conservationists and the owners of the power dams that date back a century. But the defeat is also a major trouble sign for solving other water wars in California where similar dreams of consensus and bridge building are fraying in an era of droughts and oversubscribed supplies.?The Klamath deal had nearly everyone on board. For nearly $1 billion, the dams would come down, restoring salmon-rearing areas in the upper reaches of what once was one of the West?s major fish-rearing rivers. Oregon farmers who long feared the loss of irrigation water were promised reliable supplies, a major pledge that brought them along. A nearby wildlife refuge was guaranteed water, too. Downstream, some 200 miles of river would be restored to health.?On the California side, tribes and fishing groups signed on. The dams? owners, faced with major repairs to the aging structures, went along with demolition. A complicated, multisided fight appeared over.This all-hands agreement should be a winner, showing a better way to achieve results than scorched-earth fights that produce more uncertainty, lawsuits and forced solutions. The complexity of ripping out dams, sharing water and placating so many interests groups took years of work.The deal?s demise can be blamed on factors large and small. The Republican-dominated Congress didn?t like the $1 billion bill, though the cost was spread across 15 years. Rep. Doug LaMalfa, R-Richvale (Butte County), didn?t accept the science that predicted revived fish numbers after the dams came down. Voters in Siskiyou County, where three of the dams stand, opposed removal, saying it would jeopardize property values. The ever-smoldering resentment of outsiders in a far corner of the state also played into local opposition to demolition. Still others feared losing the power output of the dams, though the owner, PacifiCorp, said other sources could make up the relatively small output of the dams.These short-sighted arguments can?t be the last word for a river that sustains communities across two states. If the deadline for congressional approval passes, the coalition behind dam removal must press ahead in other ways to restart the process, wearying and unfair as that is.One opportunity may be a dispute over new operating licenses for the four dams, which must be approved by Washington. One requirement would be new fish ladders that allow migrating fish around the dams, but the cost is predicted to be far more than taking out the concrete structures.That may lead PacifiCorp to take down the dams, but that outcome does nothing about water sharing or restoring the river downstream. All the old tensions will revive over tribal fishing rights, on-and-off fishing restrictions in the ocean, and diversions for farmers and wildlife refuges.A peaceable future for this major river won?t be assured simply by fixing or removing the dams. A rare opportunity for peace in the water wars can?t be allowed to slip away. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Fri Dec 25 09:30:11 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2015 17:30:11 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Endangered Species Act protection sought for rare frog in California, Oregon References: <950024454.2716226.1451064611105.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <950024454.2716226.1451064611105.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.times-standard.com/general-news/20151223/endangered-species-act-protection-sought-for-rare-frog-in-california-oregon Endangered Species Act protection sought for rare frog in California, Oregon By Steven Moore,?smoore at times-standard.comPOSTED:?12/23/15, 5:57 PM PST?|?UPDATED: 1 DAY AGO0 COMMENTSConservationists on Wednesday filed a notice of their intent to sue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service over whether to extend Endangered Species Act protection to the foothill yellow-legged frog, which thrives in North Coast rivers and creeks.The Center for Biological Diversity accuses federal officials of delaying their decision to protect the foothill yellow-legged frog, which has disappeared from more than half its historical streams in California and Oregon.Jeff Miller, a conservation advocate for the center, calls the Smith, Klamath, Trinity and Eel rivers and Redwood Creek ?the stronghold for the entire species.??These frogs have not declined in northwestern California the way they have everywhere else in their range,? Miller said via email. ?These stream-dwelling amphibians face a host of threats, including dams and water diversions, logging, mining, livestock grazing, roads, marijuana cultivation, off-road vehicles, climate change, pollution, invasive species and disease.?The 1.5- to 3-inch frogs, with distinctive lemon-yellow color under their legs, live in low-elevation streams from the Willamette River basin in Oregon to the San Gabriel River in Los Angeles County. They have disappeared in many areas of Oregon, Southern California, the southern Sierra Nevadas, the central California coast and the San Francisco Bay Area.The center petitioned in July 2012 for protection of the frogs, and in June, U.S. officials made a positive finding on the petition and initiated a status review. In August the Center submitted information on declines of frog populations, demonstrating that the species should be protected.The Fish and Wildlife Service is 2 1/2 years late in making its decision on whether the frog should be protected, Miller said.He said the frog could be helped by better management of dams and flow releases, limited logging along and near streams, restricted cattle grazing in and near frog streams, curtailed mining, restricted off-road vehicle travel, limited pesticide use and the control of invasive bullfrogs, bass and crayfish.Steven Moore can be reached at 707-441-0510. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Sun Dec 27 09:11:03 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2015 17:11:03 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] LA Times: Is the era of dam-building over? Backers of several major projects say it shouldn't be References: <1978154669.3072952.1451236263425.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1978154669.3072952.1451236263425.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.latimes.com/science/la-me-water-dams-20151227-story.html Sites is the most expensive of the three major reservoir proposals under review, including raising Shasta Dam to enlarge its reservoir and constructing Temperance Flat dam above Friant.The total tab for the trio could amount to $10 billion. But they would collectively boost the average annual water supply for farms and cities by less than 1% of Californians' overall water use, according to state and federal assessments. In dry years the supply increase would be a bit greater, but still less than 1.5% of statewide use.Everywhere Jeffrey Michael goes in the Central Valley, he hears cries for more storage. "Everybody in the valley wants it," said Michael, director of the Center for Business and Policy Research at the?University of the Pacific?in Stockton."Storage has been good for the valley historically," Michael added. "That generates a lot of support for it. But dams won't make it rain. And the best sites are developed. You're really getting into diminishing value for additional projects." Cowin says that "one new dam, two new dams .... would not have drought-proofed California going into these four years of historic dry conditions." Los Angeles Times Is the era of dam-building over? Backers of several major projects say it shouldn't be Jeff Sutton, general manager of the Tehama Colusa Canal Authority, stands in the valley that would be inundated by the proposed Sites Reservoir near Maxwell, Calif. (Max Whittaker / For the Times)Bettina BoxallThis tranquil ranching valley lies 15 miles west of the Sacramento River. A one-lane bridge spans a dried-up creek at the valley entrance. But when Jeff Sutton stands there, he imagines water, lots of it.Never mind that talk of flooding the Antelope Valley north of Sacramento and turning it into a reservoir is older than Sutton. The time has finally come, he says. "It's the right project at the right place."Drought, climate change and environmental curbs on water deliveries are fueling campaigns for more water storage in California. Sites Reservoir ? as it would be called after the tiny settlement it would wipe off the map ? is one of a handful of resurgent proposals challenging the notion that the era of big dam building is over.Central Valley growers especially are pushing dam projects as their salvation, despite multibillion dollar price tags and studies that show the new reservoirs would do little to boost the state's overall water supplies.Sutton, 43, is general manager of the Tehama Colusa Canal Authority, a group of Sacramento Valley water districts that contract with the federal Central Valley Project for irrigation supplies. The drought slashed their deliveries to zero over the last two years. Growers had to pump more groundwater and purchase expensive supplies from districts with senior water rights to keep their nut trees, olive groves and vineyards alive.Sites Reservoir, backers argue, would help the state get through the inevitable dry times by building water reserves during wet periods. When the Sacramento River is running high in the winter, flows would be diverted into two existing irrigation canals and a new, 13.5-mile pipeline system extending to the Antelope Valley."It's not your grandfather's reservoir," said Sutton, an attorney and descendant of a pioneering family that played a role in state politics and early water development in the Sacramento Valley.Long and narrow, Antelope Valley is tucked into the oak-freckled foothills of the Coast Range, a throwback to old California. Scattered herds of black cattle munch on grass the color of light brown sugar and meadowlarks whistle from fence posts. Dry-farmed fields of grain and hay and an occasional cluster of ranch buildings are scattered across the rolling valley floor.A series of 11 earthen, embankment dams, the tallest 300 feet, would rise in the notches and gaps of the cradling hills. The settlement of Sites, founded in 1886 by German-born John Sites, would lie under a couple hundred feet of water. Once a thriving village serving nearby quarries that were the source of sandstone for grand San Francisco buildings, much of the community was destroyed in a 1965 wildfire. Today fewer than two dozen people live there.The reservoir and associated facilities would claim 18,000 acres. The project would have to buy out about 50 landowners, not all of whom want to sell, said Jim Watson. He heads the Sites Project Authority, which was formed by local counties and irrigation districts to advance the project and rustle up funding.Watson has been working out of an old building in Maxwell, a dot of a town just off Interstate 5, about 10 miles east of Antelope Valley. A bumper sticker plastered to the building's front door pronounces California farmers "the Next Endangered Species." Another sign with a drawing of a royal crown urges, "Keep Calm and Build Storage."?Jim Watson, general manager of the Sites Project Authority, at the point in the Sacramento River where a pipeline would be built to fill the proposed Sites Reservoir near Maxwell, Calif. (Max Whittaker / For the Times)The fact that Sites would not dam a river makes it more palatable to many than proposals to raise Shasta Dam on the upper Sacramento River and construct a new dam and reservoir on the San Joaquin River just upstream of the existing Friant Dam and Millerton Lake near Fresno.But there are high hurdles in Sites' path, most notably the project's cost and the issue of who would pay for it. Watson's group pegs the price tag at $3 billion to $4 billion. The latest federal estimate is $6.3 billion.The Sites authority intends to apply for state funding under Proposition 1, the 2014 water bond that sets aside $2.7 billion for reservoir and groundwater storage projects. But even if Sites wins a pot of Prop. 1 money, the bond language caps state funding at 50% of a project's cost and limits the state portion to underwriting the public benefits of storage, such as flood control, ecosystem improvements and recreation.And federal coffers aren't about to burst open. A congressional drought-relief bill that included $600 million in funding authorization for western water storage projects went nowhere this year."Some of us Californians are still dreaming of that model where big government will come forward and pay for these projects," said Mark Cowin, director of the state Department of Water Resources. "It has to become clear that's not the model moving forward .... So put your money where your mouth is."Watson's group is looking for ways to cut Sites' price tag and is also wooing districts that would help pay for the project in return for water supplies, which would cost growers at least 12 times what they pay for subsidized deliveries from the Central Valley Project."If you would have asked our folks before the drought, I don't think they would have been interested in $600-an-acre-foot water," Sutter said. "The drought has changed that."Sites would store up to 1.8 million acre feet of water. (An acre foot is enough to supply two average households for a year.) But the average annual yield would at best be little more than a quarter of that.The reason is simple. The reservoir would be full in only one in five years, according to modeling. If the project received state money, a portion of the yield would also be reserved for ecosystem and water quality flows, meaning there would be less water for farms and cities.Jay Lund, director of the UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences, compares building more water storage to buying a bigger refrigerator. Unless you have more to put in it, it doesn't do much good.If Sites and the other proposed reservoirs were in operation now, Lund says they too would be depleted in the fourth year of drought. California, he noted, already has 1,400 reservoirs capable of holding more than half the state's average annual runoff."Some new storage might be worthwhile in some places," he said. "But is it worth the investment from the people of California and ratepayers and everybody else .... relative to the other investments they could make? It's a hard argument to make."It makes more sense, Lund said, to modify the operation of existing dams so they capture and release more winter flows for long-term storage in the ground, replenishing the state's overtaxed aquifers for use in future droughts.Sites is the most expensive of the three major reservoir proposals under review, including raising Shasta Dam to enlarge its reservoir and constructing Temperance Flat dam above Friant.The total tab for the trio could amount to $10 billion. But they would collectively boost the average annual water supply for farms and cities by less than 1% of Californians' overall water use, according to state and federal assessments. In dry years the supply increase would be a bit greater, but still less than 1.5% of statewide use.Everywhere Jeffrey Michael goes in the Central Valley, he hears cries for more storage. "Everybody in the valley wants it," said Michael, director of the Center for Business and Policy Research at the?University of the Pacific?in Stockton."Storage has been good for the valley historically," Michael added. "That generates a lot of support for it. But dams won't make it rain. And the best sites are developed. You're really getting into diminishing value for additional projects."Cowin says that "one new dam, two new dams .... would not have drought-proofed California going into these four years of historic dry conditions." But Sites, he said, would help water managers grab high flows from the state's largest river ? water that would otherwise wash out to sea during big winter storms."We truly are unique in how variable our hydrology is," Cowin said. "When we get opportunities to store water, you'd better take advantage of them because it might be a while before you see another one."The Temperance Flat project, long sought by farmers on the east side of the San Joaquin Valley, would cost an estimated $3 billion. Proposed for a river that is so dammed and diverted that 60 miles of it dried up after Friant was built in the mid-20th century, the new reservoir would on average produce less than 100,000 acre feet a year of water supply."We already have a reservoir that dries the river out. And you think building a bigger reservoir is actually going to make more water?" asked Tina Swanson, science director for the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group. "I think that's as close to insane as you can get."The average yield from the $1.3 billion Shasta Dam project would be even smaller. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which operates the dam, says enlarging Shasta Lake would help maintain cold water reserves necessary for salmon migration and spawning in the Sacramento River.But a 2014 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service report disputed the salmon benefits, finding that in most years, the project "would result in either negligible or slightly negative impacts to Chinook salmon survival overall."Adding another 634,000 acre feet of capacity to Shasta, California's largest reservoir, would also drown several dozen cultural sites of the Winnemem Wintu tribe."We already lost 26 miles of our sacred sites, of our fish camps" when Shasta Dam was built in the 1940s, said tribal Chief Caleen Sisk.The tribe had to move burial sites, including those of her great-grandparents, to escape the rising waters. Later Sisk, 63, remembers driving over the reservoir on the interstate bridge as her grandmother pointed out drowned tribal spots."Why would it be OK for our people to go through this again?" she asked.bettina.boxall at latimes.comTwitter:?@boxall? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 37201 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 43853 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1586 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Tue Dec 29 06:17:53 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 14:17:53 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] WSJ: California Faces Lost Decades in Solving Drought References: <412294807.3705132.1451398673457.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <412294807.3705132.1451398673457.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.wsj.com/articles/california-faces-lost-decades-in-solving-drought-1451002429 | | | | The Wall Street Journal California Faces Lost Decades in Solving Drought As the state grapples with drought it confronts the decades of inaction by state and federal officials in expanding its water system Original article at WSJ. 12/24/15 By?JIM CARLTON?and?ALEJANDRO LAZO ? SHASTA LAKE, Calif.?One of the seemingly easiest ways to expand California?s water supply would be to raise the height of the 602-foot Shasta Dam by 18.5 feet, adding the equivalent of another reservoir to the drought-stricken state. The federal Bureau of Reclamation has been studying the idea to some degree since 1980. But regulatory delays and pushback from critics?including a Native-American tribe that has performed war dances at the dam?prevented it from happening. Raising the dam, which is a fairly common procedure though not on this magnitude, would cost about $1.3 billion. Getting the project funded through Congress and other sources, however, would be a challenge. The hurdles in expanding the Shasta Dam underscore a broader problem in the nation?s most populous state as it grapples with a devastating four-year drought: state and federal officials haven?t significantly upgraded California?s water infrastructure in decades. Building water projects amid divisions among residents in Northern California, where most of the water can be found, and Southern California, where most residents live, is a challenge. There are about 1,400 dams under state and federal control in California and roughly 1,300 reservoirs, officials said. Since the last major state or federal dam was completed in 1979, California?s population has grown to 39 million people from 23 million. ?We?ve added millions of people and yet we?re operating on a 1960s infrastructure for the entire state,? said?Jeffrey Kightlinger,?general manager of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, which serves 19 million residents. The heyday of large-scale projects to move water to farms and urban areas in California ended during the tenure of Gov. Edmund G. ?Pat? Brown in the 1960s, and little has taken place since his son, current Gov.?Jerry Brown,?first led the state in the 1970s and early 1980s. The Democratic governor championed a $7.5 billion bond measure passed by California voters last year that includes $2.7 billion for water storage projects. Mr. Brown has staked his political capital on a $15.5 billion plan to build twin, 30-mile-long tunnels beneath the San Joaquin Delta in the center of the state to bypass crumbling levees and an ecologically sensitive area, and move water more reliably to the parched south. ?The total project is absolutely crucial to maintain our economic strength, not only in Northern California but throughout the whole state,? Mr. Brown said in a recent interview. But that plan has divided farmers, environmentalists and Democratic politicians, and opponents have put a measure on the November 2016 ballot to require approval from California voters. A drought-relief bill introduced this summer by Democratic U.S. Sens.?Dianne Feinstein?and?Barbara Boxer?would have authorized $600 million for dam projects in the Golden State, which could include Shasta. It followed a bill by Rep.?David Valadao,?a Republican from the agricultural Central Valley, that would help streamline approvals for such projects. As Congress wound down its legislative year, a compromise bill hadn?t been produced. Critics argue that new or expanded dams are a waste of money, and a threat to fish and other wildlife. They contend conservation efforts already have yielded significant water savings. Among other issues, opponents contend that building new dams doesn?t make economic sense, saying more water can be stored under ground for less money and through conservation. ?Where are we going to get the best bang for our buck?? asked?Tom Stokely,?an analyst at the California Water Impact Network, an environmental group based in Santa Barbara, Calif. ?You?re not going to get that with new dams.? Dam supporters, however, say above-ground facilities can store water much faster and that conservation alone can?t meet future demand. They say new dams can capture water in wet years that existing reservoirs can?t, something that will become even more necessary as climate change affects precipitation patterns. The new dams are being proposed in places farther downstream than the existing reservoirs, so they would capture more rain. The current dams were designed mainly to capture melting snow, and that is why most of the big reservoirs are nestled at the base of mountains. ?We will have more water come down as rain, as compared to snow, and so that will mean these reservoirs will fill up and we won?t have a place to store the water,? said?Ajay Goyal,chief of infrastructure investigations for the state?s Department of Water Resources. Mr. Brown has been working on plans to move more water though the San Joaquin Delta since his first gubernatorial tenure, when he pushed for a peripheral canal. State voters shot down that idea in a 1982 referendum. The current tunnel plan seeks to transport water beneath an area where the presence of endangered fish often forces pumping to be curtailed, severely restricting water shipments. State officials argue a tunnel only would change how much water is being diverted from the delta by 5% to 10%, and would buffer water supplies in the low-lying region from a potential rise in sea levels due to climate change. Opponents say rerouting fresh water would allow seawater to infiltrate the delta and destroy fisheries, farms and communities. ?The tunnels are an immediate death to the delta,? said?Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla,executive director of Restore the Delta, a coalition of 30,000 farmers, fishermen and other opponents. The governor called those arguments ?propaganda,? and warned that the earthen levees that line many of the delta tributaries could fail to due to sea level rise or a severe storm, cutting off a significant part of California?s water supply for months. ?It will cost hundreds of billions, a total catastrophe,? Mr. Brown said. If tunnel opponents succeed, ?it will be a very dark day for millions of people in California.? New state and federal dam projects have been stymied as well. Completed in 1945 on the Sacramento River, the base of the Shasta Dam was designed to hold water up to 200 feet higher than it does now, said?Michelle Denning,?a regional planning officer for the Bureau of Reclamation, mid-Pacific region. After a 1976-1977 drought shriveled Shasta Lake, the bureau began looking at expanding the dam. It settled on a plan to raise it a modest 18.5 feet, which would increase Shasta Lake?s 4.6 million-acre-foot capacity by 13%. Even at that sharply reduced size, the project has been delayed for years in part because of changing environmental regulations for salmon and other endangered species, Ms. Denning said. Bureau of Reclamation officials believe salmon would benefit from a raised dam because much of the new water would be set aside to keep their habitat downstream of the dam at an ideal cold temperature. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, however, disagreed in preliminary comments in a November 2014 environmental review, saying that raising the dam ?does not provide any benefit? to salmon downstream. Officials believe there would be adverse impacts to the salmon, including additional losses of habitat for spawning, by further restricting high water flows. The issue is paramount to the 125-member Winnemem Wintu tribe, whose traditional homeland largely was flooded in 1948 when Shasta Lake first filled. If the dam is elevated, the tribe will lose much of the rest of its most important property, said Chief?Caleen Sisk,who led a war dance in opposition last November. ?We feel the dam is a weapon of mass destruction,? said Ms. Sisk, standing on a bank of the McCloud River which has been used for generations as a puberty ceremony for the tribe?s girls. Write to?Jim Carlton at?jim.carlton at wsj.com?and Alejandro Lazo at?alejandro.lazo at wsj.com ? | | | | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Dec 31 08:13:04 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2015 16:13:04 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity Journal editorial: Resolutions for a better, stronger Trinity County References: <1453582441.4433139.1451578385000.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1453582441.4433139.1451578385000.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.trinityjournal.com/opinion/editorials/article_b7ad066e-ae8b-11e5-b0e5-f38856b64bef.html Resolutions for a better, stronger Trinity County Posted: Wednesday, December 30, 2015 6:15 amThe recent snow and rain have provided a good start in an effort to refill the reservoirs and aquifers of the county in 2016. We can only hope Mother Nature continues this pattern, leaving a nice, deep snowpack in the mountains, particularly above Trinity Lake.But we have little control over that. We do have control over the myriad other issues facing Trinity County. With that in mind here are some New Year?s resolutions for 2016.Clean up the crime. The increased burglaries, vandalism and petty theft throughout the county have left many residents frustrated. While gathering evidence worthy of conviction is more time-consuming and exacting than the easy scuttlebutt and hearsay going around town, taking a bigger bite out of crime would make residents lives significantly better.Address the growing methamphetamine, heroin epidemic. The marijuana issue may consume county staff time and get the bulk of the headlines, but use of both meth and heroin, by all accounts and following a nationwide trend, are on the upswing locally.Watch attempts to steal more Trinity water. This is a never-ending issue for us in Trinity County, but recent recommendations to keep more water in Lake Shasta means the Bureau of Reclamation and others will be looking toward Trinity to make up whatever shortfall results. Setting a minimum pool level for Trinity Lake would be helpful. Compensation for additional water going over the hill or water being resold even better.Defining leadership. This may prove to be an interesting political season with three supervisorial positions up for election and a new county administrative officer to be hired. The makeup and philosophies of those four individuals will go a long way toward determining the future of Trinity County.Improve efforts to attract, retain, support businesses. Trinity County often stumbles when new businesses seek to locate or existing businesses seek to expand/rebuild. County officials need to be more welcoming to any business providing jobs. Expansion of employment opportunities will be key to the county?s growth and ability to provide services. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov Wed Dec 30 16:32:56 2015 From: Steve.Cannata at wildlife.ca.gov (Cannata, Steve@Wildlife) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2015 00:32:56 +0000 Subject: [env-trinity] Trinity River Trapping Summary update Jweek 52 Message-ID: <80DEC27EBD72E1499BC575089F328C570C5A9B61@057-SN2MPN1-043.057d.mgd.msft.net> Hi All, Please see attached for the Jweek 51 and 52 Trinity River trapping summary update. Happy New Year!!! Steve Steve Cannata Environmental Scientist Trinity River Project California Department of Fish and Wildlife 5341 Ericson Way Arcata, CA 95521 (707) 822-4230 steve.cannata at wildlife.ca.gov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW52.xlsx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet Size: 62721 bytes Desc: 2015 TRP_ trapping_summary update JW52.xlsx URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Dec 31 08:14:50 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2015 16:14:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] =?utf-8?q?NY_Times=3A_Farmers_Try_Political_Force_t?= =?utf-8?q?o_Twist_Open_California=E2=80=99s_Taps?= References: <1315441122.4365055.1451578491805.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1315441122.4365055.1451578491805.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> A water utility on paper, Westlands in practice is a formidable political force, a $100 million-a-year agency with five lobbying firms under contract in Washington and Sacramento, a staff peppered with former federal and congressional powers, a separate political action committee representing farmers and a government-and-public-relations budget that topped $950,000 last year. It is a financier and leading force for a band of?29 water districtsthat spent at least another $270,000 on lobbying last year. Its nine directors and their relatives gave at least $430,000 to federal candidates and the Republican Party in the last two election cycles, and the farmers? political action committee gave more than $315,000 more.Aggressive, creative and litigious ? minutes of a board meeting this year cited 11 continuing or anticipated lawsuits ? the district has made enemies of environmentalists, rival politicians and other farmers whose water it has tried to appropriate. But it has also repeatedly made deals and won legislative favors to keep water flowing to itself and to farms across the?San Joaquin Valley, California?s agricultural heartland. New York Times U.S.? http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/31/us/farmers-try-political-force-to-twist-open-californias-taps.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=photo-spot-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news Farmers Try Political Force to Twist Open California?s Taps Few in agriculture have shaped the debate over water more than the several hundred owners of an arid finger of farmland west of Fresno.Cover PhotoThe Westlands Water District's western edge borders the parched Diablo Range in California's Central Valley.?Credit?Damon Winter/The New York Times?By?MICHAEL WINES?and?JENNIFER MEDINADEC. 30, 2015?FIVE POINTS, Calif. ? The message that Maria L. Gutierrez gave legislators on Capitol Hill was anguished and blunt: California?s historic drought had not merely left farmland idle. It had destroyed Latino farm workers? jobs, shuttered Latino businesses and thrown Latino families on the street. Yet Congress had turned a deaf ear to their pleas for more water to revive farming and farm labor.So Latinos ? the nation?s fastest-growing ethnic group, she noted pointedly ? were sending a warning that politicians could not ignore.?We created an organization that?s called?El Agua Es Asunto de Todos?? Water Is Everybody?s Business ? so the Latino voice can be heard,? Ms. Gutierrez, who described herself as an El Agua volunteer, said in October 2013 at the meeting with lawmakers. ?Don?t devastate our economy. Don?t take our jobs away.?The group has since blanketed California with demands for more water on Spanish-language television, on the Internet, even on yard signs. But for whom it speaks is another matter: El Agua is bankrolled by more than $1.1 million from the?Westlands Water District, the nation?s largest agricultural irrigation contractor, a state entity created at the behest of ? and largely controlled by ? some of California?s wealthiest and most politically influential farmers.For almost five decades, Westlands has brought its farmers a torrent of water from the reservoirs and aqueducts of the federal?Central Valley Project, the vast public work that irrigates half of California agriculture.?Drought?has reduced that torrent to drops, and El Agua is one part of Westlands? wide-ranging effort to open the spigots again.PhotoMaria Salazar, right, shopped at a yard sale held by Selena Rodriguez, left, at an apartment complex in Huron, Calif., near farmland that is part of the Westlands Water District.?CreditDamon Winter/The New York Times?Photo?The main intersection of Five Points, a farming town in the district.?Credit?Damon Winter/The New York TimesCalifornia has?more than 81,000 farms, and farmers claim four-fifths of all the water its citizens consume. But no one in agriculture has shaped the debate over water more ? or swung their elbows wider ? than the few hundred owners of an arid, Rhode Island-size finger of farmland west of Fresno.A water utility on paper, Westlands in practice is a formidable political force, a $100 million-a-year agency with five lobbying firms under contract in Washington and Sacramento, a staff peppered with former federal and congressional powers, a separate political action committee representing farmers and a government-and-public-relations budget that topped $950,000 last year. It is a financier and leading force for a band of?29 water districts?that spent at least another $270,000 on lobbying last year. Its nine directors and their relatives gave at least $430,000 to federal candidates and the Republican Party in the last two election cycles, and the farmers? political action committee gave more than $315,000 more.Aggressive, creative and litigious ? minutes of a board meeting this year cited 11 continuing or anticipated lawsuits ? the district has made enemies of environmentalists, rival politicians and other farmers whose water it has tried to appropriate. But it has also repeatedly made deals and won legislative favors to keep water flowing to itself and to farms across the?San Joaquin Valley, California?s agricultural heartland.?4141152152Westlands?Water DistrictFresno51801809999CantuaCreekFive PointsHuronCaliforniacalif.SacramentoPaso?RoblesSan FranciscoArea of?detailLos Angeles10 MILESBy The New York Times?California?s snowpack testing on Wednesday was more encouraging than last year, but officials were far from certain that the drought was ending. And the prolonged drought has laid bare the patchwork way water is parceled out.Farmers here have become a target not just of city dwellers forced by conservation decrees to shorten showers and let their lawns go brown, but also of other farmers. In the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta in Northern California this year, growers grudgingly cut production to free up water for Central Valley farms, driven less by charity than by fear that the state would demand even more water if they did not.But while California?s farmers could conserve more ? fewer than half use low-flow irrigation methods ? the reality is more complex. Agriculture makes up just 2.2 percent of California?s economy, but this area remains the nation?s green grocer, and farming is still the economic lifeblood of the state?s arid center. Both locally and nationally, farmers pack a political punch well above their weight.?The federal government?s involvement in water is more influenced by what goes on with Westlands than any other single entity,? said Daniel P. Beard, who was the commissioner of the?Interior Department?s?Bureau of Reclamation?? the agency overseeing Western water ? under President Bill Clinton. ?They?re not wrapped around the axle on politics or ideology; they?re pragmatists. What they want is water, a continuation of the flow of money from agricultural programs, and more water.?And for good reason. Since 2005, on average, Westlands farms have annually sopped up one and a half times as much water as all of Los Angeles, most of it ? some years, almost all of it ? from federal deliveries. The water, largely siphoned from the?Sacramento River Basin?in Northern California, fuels a prodigious harvest, reported to be?more than $1.5 billion last year: almonds for export; tomatoes for paste and sauce; wine grapes; cotton; produce sold under labels like Heinz and Dole.But as drought?s grip tightened, the Sacramento River Basin?s reservoirs ebbed and the district?s federal Central Valley Project water allotment dwindled to zero for the last two years. Farmers have turned to aquifers, pumping so much groundwater that in some places, desiccated fields have?collapsed like fallen souffl?s.In turn, Westlands has redoubled efforts to increase its share of federal water. It wants new and bigger reservoirs to bolster Central Valley Project reserves. It is backing a much-disputed plan by Gov. Jerry Brown to?bore two 35-mile tunnels?that would shunt Sacramento River water directly to San Joaquin Valley farms.But most of all, perhaps, it is seeking to persuade Congress to loosen the federal rules that now set aside Sacramento basin water for salmon fisheries and endangered species like the delta smelt. It is a cause that El Agua, the lobby group propped up by the district, has?endorsed with enthusiasm. Thwarted this year, the water district will be battling over the same issue when Congress returns next year.PhotoFishing in the San Luis Reservoir in the Central Valley, which stores water from the?Sacramento-San Joaquin?River Delta.?Credit?Damon Winter/The New York Times?Westlands officials say the?allocations have cut deeply into their allotments?of Central Valley Project water. And shortages, they say, are an existential threat to both their farms and the nation. The Central Valley hosts 1 percent of American farmland, but more than 15 percent of all irrigated fields ? and it?grows a quarter of the nation?s food.?We?ve been feeding people with this food for generations,? said Shawn Coburn, 47, whose 1,200-acre farm here in Five Points is scarred with fields that lie fallow for lack of water. ?You want to pay more for food? Or you want all your food from China? Fine. Don?t come complaining to me.?Critics call that a smokescreen. The farmers? real goal, they say, is to find the cheapest water possible ? and Central Valley Project water, taxpayer-subsidized,?is far cheaper?than water bought on the open market, much less the water sold to homes and industries.?They have an amazing amount of money to spend, and yet they plead hardship,? said Patricia Schifferle, a Truckee, Calif., environmental consultant who is perhaps Westlands? most dogged critic. ?We?re all paying for this largess that goes to the select few.?Westlands? size and its broad influence make it a prime target for detractors like Ms. Schifferle. The district calls the attacks unfair, and says that its clout is overrated. ?It?s easy to pick on Westlands, because Westlands is big,? the district?s deputy general manager, Johnny Amaral, said in an interview. But Westlands? principal water source ? the Central Valley Project ? has been cut off for two straight years, he noted, despite its best efforts.?I don?t know anybody who wouldn?t work for their share in the same situation,? he said. The Battle for Water Twenty dams big and 500 miles of canals long, the Central Valley Project offered area farmers a boundless supply of Northern California water for decades. But as a second canal system, the State Water Project, began tapping the same northern rivers in the 1970s, problems emerged.Commercial salmon fisheries collapsed. East of San Francisco, where the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers unite in an estuary, striped bass, sturgeon, shad and smelt began precipitous declines.Congress?s solution ? a 1992 law reserving at least a minimum amount of water for wildlife ? touched off a long-running political backlash by San Joaquin Valley farmers. For 23 years, Westlands has led the mostly losing battle to get that water back: in courts, in Washington and along California roads, where placards condemning a ?Congress-created Dust Bowl? blame the government, not drought, for water shortages.The district comes to the fight well prepared. Mr. Amaral was until this fall the top aide to Representative Devin Nunes of nearby Fresno, a Republican. Mr. Amaral?s predecessor, Jason Peltier, oversaw Western water issues in the Interior Department under President George W. Bush.Westlands? pre-eminent lobbyist, David Bernhardt, was the Bush Interior Department?s solicitor before joining a Denver law firm that Westlands retained after President Obama was elected in 2008.Others have also helped Westlands court federal decision makers. Vin Weber and Denny Rehberg, former Republican representatives from Minnesota and Montana, have been paid more than $550,000 since 2013 to lobby Congress.PhotoA large canal that leads to one of several pumping stations on McDonald Island in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.?Credit?Damon Winter/The New York Times?PhotoThe California Aqueduct, near the San Luis Reservoir, carries water from the?Sacramento River Basin.?Credit?Damon Winter/The New York TimesAt least $530,000 more was spent from 2009 to 2013 for lobbying on endangered-species issues by Julie A. MacDonald, formerly Mr. Peltier?s assistant at the Interior Department. Ms. MacDonald resigned that post in 2007; an internal inquiry later concluded that she had improperly disclosed information about Endangered Species Act deliberations to critics of the law. Ms. MacDonald, who has denied wrongdoing, was not charged with any legal violation.The farmers? political action committee and the Westlands board have given generously to the campaigns of friendly federal legislators, contributing at least $120,000 to Central Valley House members in the 2014 election. But one of the district?s most notable contributions was made decades ago, not long after Congress?s allotment of water for wildlife set off a backlash from farmers. In 1994, Westlands? thoroughly Republican leaders spurned their party?s best hope for the Senate, and instead held a fund-raiser for the first-term Democratic incumbent,?Dianne Feinstein.Ms. Feinstein has a strong environmental record. Yet she has also labored repeatedly to secure water for California agriculture, and especially for Westlands farmers. For the last two years, Ms. Feinstein has led the effort to push federal drought legislation through the Senate. And perhaps never has the tug-of-war between those competing priorities been so visible.As federal water supplies to California farmlands dried up in 2014, the Republican-dominated House of Representatives ? where Kevin McCarthy, from a San Joaquin Valley district adjacent to Westlands farmland, is the majority leader ? swiftly passed a bill to undo environmental restrictions on greater transfers of Northern California water to farmers.Ms. Feinstein?told the bill?s California backers?that suspending environmental protections was both a political and a scientific mistake. Her own legislative effort, crafted in secrecy that year, nevertheless sought to ship more northern water to Southern California farmers and cities while still hewing to the letter ? although, critics argue, not always the spirit ? of the environmental safeguards.The most influential farm voice in that process was Westlands, represented by its lobbyist, Mr. Bernhardt, and by its general manager and top executive, Thomas W. Birmingham.The confidential draft Ms. Feinstein?s staff produced that fall offered something for everyone: calls for new and bigger dams, money for water conservation projects and tweaks to existing rules that would send more northern water to southern farms.That autumn, as Ms. Feinstein?s staff raced to strike a compromise with House negotiators, portions of the secret draft were leaked. Northern California politicians and environmentalists erupted in outrage over the bill?s attempts to wring more water out of northern rivers, and in November 2014, Ms. Feinstein?scotched the effort.She tried again this year, with a drought bill that restored some environmental protections for endangered species to assuage fellow Democrats and Northern Californians. But that collapsed in an acrimonious confrontation this month with Republicans in the House, who wanted those safeguards relaxed.PhotoAlmond trees in the district. Once in the ground, tree crops need water each day.?Credit?Damon Winter/The New York Times?Ms. Feinstein has promised to try again in 2016. But with Republicans in control of both houses of Congress, no drought legislation is likely to pass without help from Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska.Ms. Murkowski, who leads both the Energy and Natural Resources Committee and the Appropriations subcommittee on the environment, visited Fresno in April to see the drought?s impact. She also paused to raise $100,000 in political donations?at a lunch with farmers?from Westlands and surrounding areas.George Miller, a former Democratic representative from Northern California, sponsored the 1992 law that mandated a minimum amount of water for the region?s fish. He was Westlands? fiercest adversary in Congress before retiring last year.?You?ve got to give them an ?A? for effort,? he said in an interview. ?These boys are committed. They play at the highest level, and they never sleep ? ever.?But Westlands farmers are unapologetic. Mr. Coburn, the Five Points farmer, not only says that effort is necessary, but he also plays his part in it as an unofficial ambassador to journalists and policy makers. ?Big Ag polls poorly, family farms poll well,? he said. ?Nobody wants to hate on Shawn the farmer.?Two of Mr. Coburn?s main crops ? almonds and pistachios ? also?occupy a third of Westlands? fields, up from a fifth in 2010. The reason is not that Americans would starve without them ? many if not most are exported ? but that they are extremely profitable compared with other crops.Since California?s drought began in 2012, the district?s farmers have?added more than 18,000 acres of nut groves?that require constant watering, displacing crops like onions and tomatoes that can be fallowed when water is short. Graphic A Shift Toward Luxury Crops Luxury crops are replacing staples on some California farms.OPEN Graphic?Some farmers, as well as California residents who blame farming for the state?s water woes, shake their heads at that. Westlands farmers note that their fields are among the most water efficient anywhere.?We just have to stay in line until we get someone in the White House who is going to listen to us,? Mr. Coburn said. ?This is about politics, not rain.? Bargaining With Regulators Indeed, even as efforts to cajole more water from Congress stalled this autumn, Westlands?s managers and their lawyers were sealing a very different bargain with water regulators at the Interior Department.Westlands?s first farmers won Congress?s blessing to tap the Central Valley Project, knowing that their fields had a flaw: Beneath them, a layer of clay kept water from draining away. Irrigating the fields would release salts and toxic elements like selenium and boron ? which, trapped in the soil, would eventually turn the ground barren.The 1960 law that extended federal water to Westlands included a solution: a 188-mile canal, built by the government and later to be paid for by Westlands, to carry the irrigation runoff away. But in the early 1980s, local opponents stopped the ditch at mile 85 amid a federal wildlife refuge, where selenium-laden irrigation runoff quickly wiped out birds and fish.Since then, Westlands and the Bureau of Reclamation have battled over how to handle the toxic runoff. The safest and most cost-effective fix, buying and fallowing fully half of the Westlands fields, was rejected. But the remaining options, which would fallow less land and build?desalination?plants to purify the runoff, would cost billions ? more than Westlands or the Bureau of Reclamation could afford or were willing to pay.In September, the two sides settled their three-decade dispute. But the agreement has only spawned more contention among supporters and critics of Westlands.Under the accord, Westlands frees the government of its obligation in the 1960 law to provide drainage, promising to solve the problem on its own. In return, the $350 million debt Westlands still owes for the infrastructure that delivered federal water would be written off. Its 25-year contract for a share of Northern California river water would be made permanent, and its rate would become among the lowest available.The negotiations took years. Three months after Mr. Obama took office, Westlands made a tactical switch, paying Tony Coelho, a former representative from California, to advise on the negotiations. Mr. Coelho, one of the most powerful Democrats in Congress in the 1980s, once represented the district that included Westlands and the wildlife refuge that was devastated by selenium pollution.He said that the notion of Westlands as a bully, flattening Northern Californians in its thirst for water, was a canard.PhotoA footprint in the mineral-crusted, dried banks of the San Luis Reservoir.?Credit?Damon Winter/The New York Times?Photo?A tractor kicked up dust in a field in the district, which is in California?s Central Valley.?Credit?Damon Winter/The New York Times?It takes two sides to have a fight,? he said in an interview. ?The people in the Bay Area haven?t been pansies. They?re more effective, I would say, than Westlands in preventing Westlands from doing things, and as a result, a lot of people are going out of business because water hasn?t been there.?That is not a universal view.?Every study I?ve seen, farmers make more money when there?s drought than when there isn?t,? said Mr. Beard, the Bureau of Reclamation director under President Clinton. ?I wouldn?t be at all surprised if they end up on the top of the heap again.? An Expensive Campaign The environmental curbs that San Joaquin Valley farmers blame for their water shortages might have been lifted by state and federal legislators years ago, but for one hitch:?Californians appear to support them.In early 2013, Westlands placed a million-dollar bet that it could change that calculus.That March, a retired Mexican diplomat, Martha Elvia Rosas, held a news conference in Fresno to introduce a new group, El Agua Es Asunto de Todos ? an effort, she said, to give Latinos a louder voice in the debate over drought.Ms. Rosas promised a campaign on Spanish-language radio, television, social media and in newspapers to show Latinos how important water was to their future.And she played commercials that would soon blanket Spanish-language media: ordinary Latinos in cars and on doorsteps, delivering a simple message: ?Sin agua, sin trabajo.? No water, no work.An account of the announcement?stated that El Agua was financed by donations from Ms. Rosas? friends, family and local community leaders. But Westlands records show that the group emerged from a $915,000 contract between the water district and a Manhattan political campaign firm, the?Fenenbock Group. A?Los Angeles casting agency?takes credit on its website for providing the Latinos in the commercials. The social media campaign and other emblems of support, from El Agua posters and stickers to El Agua hand fans, were produced by?a New York creative agency. The?San Francisco studio?that produced the commercials states that the campaign?s aim is to ?generate voter action? in the face of Northern Californians? efforts to cut off farm water supplies.Mr. Amaral, Westlands?s deputy general manager, denied that, calling El Agua ?purely an educational initiative.? As a quasi-governmental agency, he said, Westlands is barred from promoting political initiatives.PhotoCows grazing in parched hills along Interstate 5 in the Central Valley.?Credit?Damon Winter/The New York TimesMichael Fenenbock, the architect of the campaign, said it had vaulted water from a nonissue among California Latinos to a top concern. Moreover, he said, many Latinos now see environmental regulations as the cause of water shortages, and farmers as sympathetic figures.?It?s been explosive,? Mr. Fenenbock said, adding that many Latinos now ?very strongly support what we think is the centerpiece of the debate: a reliable water supply that is very much on the side of agriculture.?The Fenenbock Group has spent $700,000 on ads this year and could spend $3 million in 2016 as election-year interest in water heats up, said Daphne Weisbart, the firm?s chief executive and Mr. Fenenbock?s wife. Westlands financed most of the group?s operations in 2013, but Ms. Weisbart said that a number of agricultural water districts now pay for the ads.Westlands?s financial records indicate that it has paid nearly $250,000 since 2014 to?a consulting company?run by Ms. Rosas, and Westlands continues to pay virtually all of El Agua?s $14,000-a-month operating budget, Ms. Rosas said.Ms. Rosas insisted that Westlands received nothing in return.?They do not dictate what we say,? Ms. Rosas said. ?We have made it clear from the start that we are in charge of this. This is our project, they are not in control.?But Mr. Fenenbock said he was contemplating forming an El Agua political arm. Its contributions would carry weight with politicians, he said, because among many California Latinos, what El Agua says about water is taken as the truth.?The brand,? he said, ?is golden.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image012.png Type: image/png Size: 49513 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image009.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 91725 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image008.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 194032 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image005.png Type: image/png Size: 177097 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image020.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 69162 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image019.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 152982 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image021.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 159005 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image004.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 121399 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 259165 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image024.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 56154 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image023.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 97517 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image022.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 135397 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tstokely at att.net Thu Dec 31 08:48:50 2015 From: tstokely at att.net (Tom Stokely) Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2015 16:48:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [env-trinity] 2016 brings new mining rules References: <1901581563.3970709.1451580530908.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1901581563.3970709.1451580530908.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> http://www.redding.com/news/local/2016-brings-new-mining-rules-2805bd4c-fb05-3835-e053-0100007f6477-363779391.html 2016 brings new mining rules A new state law goes into effect after the first of the year that rolls back a seven-year moratorium on suction dredge mining and requires the state to begin issuing permits to miners who use the machines to get gold from streams and lakes.But the new law also sets up new conditions requiring gold miners to obtain permits from the state Department of Fish and Wildlife and the state Water Resources Control Board before they can start mining again.Chip Hess, who owns Miner's Cache, a mining supply store in Redding, said the new requirements are likely to prevent most people from resuming suction dredge mining because the costs of the permits will be too high."It destroys those of us that casually mine and those of us that supplement their income with mining," Hess said.Suction dredges are like large vacuums, sucking dirt and rocks from stream and lake beds. The material goes through a process to separate out the gold, which is heavier than the other material.Opponents of suction dredging say the process stirs up mercury and other toxic metals from stream beds, harming fish and wildlife. Miners, though, say the toxic metals are removed from the water by the dredges.The law requires the state wildlife department to issue permits for suction dredging, but miners would also be required to get permits from the state Water Board, a regional water board or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.The water board permit would have to make a finding that the proposed mining would not harm water quality or fish and wildlife, according to SB637, signed by the governor in October.The new permitting requirements are a welcome addition if they prevent suction dredge miners from harming water quality and prevent them from disturbing cultural resources, said Craig Tucker, a natural resources policy advocate for the Karuk Tribe of Happy Camp.In 2005 the Karuk sued the state over its environmental review process for suction dredging, which eventually required the state to do an environmental impact report on it. The 2009 moratorium prevented the state from issuing suction dredging permits until the environmental report was completed.The state determined the Department of Fish and Wildlife did not have authority to regulate water quality issues caused by dredge mining, so AB637 brings the water board into the process, according to legislative analyses of the bill.The Karuk are concerned about mining going on in areas where the tribe is holding its annual World Renewal Ceremony on the Klamath River. He said the permitting should also include sanitation standards for areas where members of the tribe collect material for traditional baskets."And for us, clean water and healthy fish are cultural resources," Tucker said.But Hess said the new law is likely to result in more lawsuits from organizations representing miners, which have claimed federal mining laws trump the state laws regulating water quality and fish and wildlife. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: