[env-trinity] Trinity Journal: Science, sediments and strife: Debating the future of the Trinity River

[Tom Stokely]

Dr. Todd Buxton'sAugust presentation can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NP2kksA4qnQ
 

The TCRCDConservation Almanac has an article on page by the TRRP on pages 10 and 11 alsogives a pitch for lower summer flows here: https://tcrcd.net/almanac/pdf/nws-v32n2.pdf



 Science, sediments and strife: Debating the future of the Trinity River
      
   - By Francisco MartínezcuelloCalifornia Local News FellowThe Trinity Journal





https://www.trinityjournal.com/news/local/article_29a33cda-f945-11ef-a717-3b73c325deb5.html 
  
Todd Buxton, a hydrologist/geomorphologist with the Trinity River Restoration Program, gives a presentation on fine sediment in the Trinity River at the Trinity County Brewing Company Feb. 26.
   Francisco Martínezcuello | The Trinity Journal        
February’s Science on Tap event featured a talk by Todd Buxton about the sediments in the Trinity River and how they impact wildlife and the river’s natural flow. Buxton is a hydrologist and geomorphologist with the Trinity River Restoration Program.

“Fine sediment is an important component of stream ecosystems,” Buxton said. “It’s important for the health and productivity of these systems.”

Fine sediment consists of tiny particles of sand, silt and clay that are carried by water and settle on riverbeds, lake bottoms or other surfaces. These particles can come from natural erosion, runoff or anthropogenic activities like construction and logging. Fine sediment can affect water quality, aquatic habitats and fish populations by clouding the water, covering spawning areas and altering river flow.
 
According to Buxton, the Goldilocks principle applies to the amount of fine sediment in rivers. Too many or too little fine sediments can damage them. “But just the right amount of (fine sediments), and we usually have more healthy river ecosystems for salmon and other creatures,” he said.

Buxton has been involved with river and salmon restoration for 32 years. He received his bachelor’s and master’s degrees from Humboldt State and earned his Ph.D. in water resources from the University of Idaho. Forums like this are important to Buxton. He said although most people care for rivers, they may not know why river ecosystems are important. “Having talks like this is a way to educate people on things they may not know about,” he said.

Forums like Science on Tap are not only intended to educate an audience, but discussions and debates are a part of it as well. They are passionate scientists after all, they question everything — it’s part of the scientific method.

Scientific debates can be contentious

Last August Buxton gave a presentation on the stratification of water temperatures in pools on the Trinity River during a Science on the River presentation in Lewiston.

“I was reporting the results of research that they did on two river pools,” Buxton said.

One river pool was located above the reservoirs in the Trinity River that receives natural stream flows, Buxton said. The second river pool was located just upstream of the North Fork Trinity River, which receives unnatural summer flows released from Lewiston Dam.  

“And the results were essentially that where salmon used to migrate to before the dams, you have very low flow conditions,” Buxton said. “But these stratified pools stratified in the sense that the water flow through the pools is so slow that the different temperatures contributed to the pool throughout the day and night, enable the cold water to sit in the pool bottoms during the day and then release that cold water slowly throughout the day.”

According to Buxton, this enables temperature regulation downstream but also provides warmer water toward the surface of the pools that other creatures require. “So the adult salmon require that cold water in summer, the juvenile fish and the turtles and the frogs require that warmer water in the upper layers of the pool, and in stratified pool conditions, you have those different habitats available for those different species,” he said.

Buxton said the unnatural increase in summer water flow downstream of reservoirs speeds up the current, preventing temperature layers from forming. He said this disrupts the natural thermal stratification needed for aquatic life, negatively impacting the river ecosystem.

The Science on the River presentation in Lewiston prompted California Water Impact Network board member Tom Stokely to write a guest column titled “Trinity River summer flow cuts ill-advised,” which was published on Feb. 12 (www.trinityjournal.com/opinion/guest_columnists/article_767dfc0c-e8c4-11ef-b9f0-afc001065b07.html)

According to the op-ed, Stokely said Buxton’s logic was seriously flawed and cutting summer flows would significantly impact both spring chinook and the communities that depend on the Trinity River. “Dr. Buxton also failed to note that some of the highest adult spring chinook runs on record followed nine to 12 years after the 450 cfs minimum summer flow standard was established. Contrary to his claim that the 450 cfs is a relic of the 2000 Trinity Record of Decision (ROD), it began nine years earlier in 1991.”
 
Stokely’s op-ed struck a chord with Trinity River Restoration Program’s executive director Mike Dixon who opened the Science on Tap with a response. “I just want to make sure it’s clear that there is no plan to change summer-based flows in the Trinity River,” he said.

Dixon said the study Buxton was reporting on was just trying to convey what they’ve learned in a single study on a couple of pools. “So, if you were concerned, based on what (Stokely) reported in his editorial, there’s no plan to do anything with that right now.”

When asked about the guest column, Buxton said he was misquoted. “I explicitly explained several times in my talk, I was making no recommendations.”

Buxton said he was reporting the results of research on two single pools, and that, if there ever was going to be a recommendation for change in flows, much more work would need to be done, in addition to considering the impacts of any proposed change on power generation and recreation. “We’re not even close to looking at all those things,” he said.

Buxton said TRRP has expanded the study up to a dozen pools on the river. “We’re looking at how the thermal characteristics may be managed with flow regulation, but that’s as far as we’ve gone,” he said. “So (Stokely) saying that the program has made plans to change summer flows is just completely inaccurate.”

Delayed response

The Trinity Journal asked Stokely about the timing of the guestcolumn. If there was concern, why the five-month delay? In an email Stokely said he didn’t have time to write it in August or September and it wasn’t going to happen immediately.

“However, coincidentally, it was apparent that waiting until after the presidential transition was appropriate because the Trinity River is now under siege, and the protections of the past are at serious risk,” he said. “It was a public plea to the TRRP to stop dividing Trinity River interests so that various parties can come together to protect the river and the gains that have been made over the past 40-plus years.”

When asked why he didn’t bring his concerns during Buxton’s August presentation, Stokely said he didn’t specifically object to Buxton’s presentation, “but I did ask several questions. It wasn’t a forum for a debate and public input was not requested, nor was it encouraged.”

Stokely said he had conversations with TRRP staff and affiliates about summer flows in the past but not Dr. Buxton in particular. “Many thousands of dollars are being spent to complete the studies to make it happen,” he said. “If they aren’t serious about it then why are they spending money on it?”

In an email from TRRP spokesperson Kiana Abel, she said TRRP pursues studies of river function because it is important for them to understand how the river works in order to effectively apply restoration tools. “In the grand scheme, we are spending hardly any money on it. At the scale of the program’s budget, it is almost entirely in-kind (staff time) with some $100 to low $1,000 worth of equipment that was purchased. Additionally, an approximately $80,000 of internal Reclamation effort to develop and refine the three-dimensional hydrologic model.”

Stokely said it’s disingenuous for the TRRP to claim that he conflated plans to decrease Trinity River summer flows. He said if TRRP wasn’t thinking hard about it, they wouldn’t be doing studies on it and giving presentations.

Stokely also said many, but not all TRRP staff and program partners are already convinced that it’s a good idea. 

“Obviously, they have to do more studies to justify it, and I said so in my guest editorial, but they are moving in that direction, even if it takes several years. My guest editorial was an effort for them to drop it so that Trinity River advocates could come together to protect what we have. The Trinity River is in big trouble.” 

Editor’s note: Francisco Martínezcuello covers science, environment, and indigenous communities through the California Local News Fellowship initiative.
       
   -      

  Facebook      Twitter      Email  Print 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20250306/4868ecf2/attachment-0001.html>