We Don’t Need to Sacrifice Endangered Fish to Provide Water for Californians
- Doug Obegi
- Staff Attorney, Western Water Project, San Francisco
- Blog | About
- Posted February 18, 2009 in Living Sustainably
In recent days, there have been various news stories about efforts to weaken environmental protections for fish in the Delta, in order to make more water available for people. After dry years in 2007 and 2008, the low rainfall total this year has resulted in low water levels across the State. But pointing fingers at environmental protection as the cause of the State's water woes isn't accurate, and represents a false choice between people and the environment.
There's no question that measures to protect delta smelt impacted water supply last year. However, DWR staff have acknowledged that the water supply impacts last year were substantially less than the 30% the agency estimated at the beginning of the year, closer to 17-18% total for the SWP and CVP (including both Table A deliveries and deliveries of "surplus" Article 21 water). Moreover, some of these pumping restrictions were made up by using environmental water from the CVPIA (b)(2) account.
More importantly, by and large the lack of water this year is a result of the lack of rain and snow over the past several years, not restrictions to protect threatened and endangered fish species like salmon or delta smelt. Since June of last year Delta pumping has not been limited by restrictions to protect delta smelt - there simply hasn't been enough water to increase pumping. Although the pumping plants are being operated consistent with the biological opinion for delta smelt, as the manager of the Central Valley Project recently stated in a sworn court declaration, "it is still the dry hydrology that is governing project operations and limiting Federal pumping." Admittedly, this may change later in the year if the projects begin sucking in large numbers of smelt, but thus far this year, there have been no actions to protect delta smelt that restricted pumping from the Delta. The fact that water districts across the State, including those, such as the Sonoma County Water Agency, that do not obtain water from the Delta, are imposing mandatory water restrictions demonstrates that the drought - not endangered species - is the primary driver of our current water supply situation.
On the other hand, protecting endangered species can protect water for people as well. Indeed, fishermen and Delta farmers agree that protecting delta smelt protects them, too, because it protects water quality for farming and help ensure there is enough water for salmon. Similarly, in order to ensure there is enough water for salmon to spawn, water managers should be required to maintain minimum levels of cold water in storage at the end of the year, as a type of "drought year insurance." That water can be used to provide cold water for salmon upstream and for pumping to people downstream. If such an insurance policy had been required in recent years, both people and fish might have been better off this year.
Even with the recent rain, it's shaping up to be a tough water year for people and fish. But while blaming endangered species for the water supply situation may score a few political points, it won't solve California's water woes (particularly when those restrictions aren't limiting pumping, anyway).
As we've written before, California can meet the water needs of fish and people by tapping into the Virtual River. Some of the most important solutions to our State's water needs will come from outside the Delta, including more efficiently using our existing water resources and creating new water resources, like water recycling plants and stormwater capture programs, which will help us meet our water needs without jeopardizing salmon, delta smelt, or killer whales. My guess is that Californians would rather choose a future that provides water for people while also protecting healthy salmon, smelt, and killer whale populations, rather than sacrificing the environment in order to meet our needs.
(bookmark or email this entry)
Comments are closed for this post.
We close comments on a blog post when it's clear the conversation has moved on -- click on the tags (above) or on our homepage to see if we've got fresh news and views on this post's topic.
Comments
Lloyd Waldron — Feb 22 2009 01:22 PM
SITTING ON TOP OF THE WORLD!
Recently Starbucks was in the news in Colorado because the water runs continuously in a small counter reservoir in their franchises all over North America. A tremendous waste of a limited natural resource, it made national news as well. Starbucks corporate woke up and said the situation would be addressed. Hooray!
A few months ago (October 8, 2009) I attended a community meeting in Grand County, Colorado to hear concerned citizen’s comment about a newly released Draft Environment Impact Statement from The Bureau of Reclamation office located in Loveland Colorado. The title of the EIS is the Windy Gap Firming Project. This EIS is to justify pumping more water out of the headwaters of the Fraser River and the Colorado River and sending it to northern municipalities and communities on the Colorado Front Range. This is the same water that sustains the local Grand County ecology and recreation economy, and eventually arrives in the Pacific.
The purpose of the Windy Gap Firming Project evening meeting was to allow public comment to be addressed to the Bureau of Reclamation as the Draft EIS is considered and existing ‘conditional water rights’ are ‘firmed up’ to provide irrevocable access to the water by the 14 local northern municipalities on the eastern side of the continental divide. Grand County does not have a seat on the board seeking to divert the water.
Many histograms and informative posters on easels were set up in a room adjoining the actual meeting area. Handouts of maps and color brochures explaining needs and benefits to Front Range citizens were available for the curious to take with and learn all about it. A few hundred county residents were present along with several government officials from the Front Range communities. Predictably, all of the government officials from the Front Range communities explained that projected growth necessitated diverting more water from the Headwaters and this amount being requested would only partially meet (10% of anticipated) future needs. One continuing request from community speakers was for an extension of the public comment period so more voices/opinions could weigh in on the water rights issues.
At the meeting, local business owners and concerned citizens were allocated an equal four minutes each to comment to the attentive Bureau of Reclamation government employees assigned to gather public opinion.
The second person to talk at the community meeting in Grand County quoted from the Los Angeles Time article on that day, on the current measures being taken in California to deal with severe water shortages. Water conservation is a much more integral part of the California citizen’s lifestyle than the lifestyle of Front Range Citizens. Two of the Colorado Front Range municipalities seeking additional water currently have a ‘flat rate’ water charge for residents. What this means is - for a set monthly charge – unlimited water is delivered to every citizen. There are many huge, rich, green lawns and golf courses in those communities.
Not a single local Grand County citizen who addressed the Bureau of Reclamation wants the project to go forward. Many eloquent, well reasoned statements were delivered to the assembled crowd. Requests were for more time to assess the Statement and gather additional information to document how the existing low water flow is causing increased silt deposits and algae growth in the streambeds, causing negative impacts on the fish, vegetation, wildlife, boating, and whitewater rafting as well as all other recreational use in the area.
One very salient concern expressed by several citizens making public statements to the assembled was the lack of co-ordination of this Windy Gap EIS with simultaneously occurring EIS by the Denver Water Board. As it turns out, the Denver Water Board has senior water rights to the Windy Gap project. The senior rights are first in line for the water. The Denver Water Board makes their diversion higher up the river on the Fraser than the Windy Gap diversion. Yes, Denver now takes the majority of the water and Denver wants to ‘firm up’ a few additional quantities of their water rights soon. Cheap water and beautiful golf courses are abundant in Denver and public water conversation efforts have not included limiting the growth of Kentucky Bluegrass..
A local, lifelong Grand County resident sitting next to me, assured me that once enough water is diverted and the river is dead – the river is dead. He also confirmed no out of state reporters have ever been present at the official meetings held several times in the county and on the Front Range each year. An extended comment period was granted after this community meeting.
At the end of the B of R extended comment period, the EPA and Trout Unlimited forwarded comments objecting to the EIS because it failed to incorporate the upcoming Denver Water Board Firming Project which will drain more water from the Fraser River headwaters and divert the additional water to the Colorado Front Range. The Denver Water Board is not a government entity that responds to an elected official. The Denver Water Board sells the water to Front Range municipalities.
So what does all of this mean to you who live on the West Coast in sunny California?
Starbucks is chump change.
The lack of money in this sparsely populated county (12,000 year round residents) is creating a David and Goliath drama. David is not likely to win alone in the 21st century up against the Goliath of the well funded Front Range governments. The politics of water is greater than all other politics in Colorado. And – all of the water that is likely to be diverted to the Front Range will eventually end up in the Gulf Of Mexico and not the Pacific Ocean. As you enjoy your morning cup of coffee, think about us up here on the top of the world, the Headwaters of the Fraser and the Colorado River.
We are dying up here. And once the river is dead for us – it is also dead for you. Dramatic? Yes, and it is real.
Please send help.
Will Tully is the point of contact for sending comments.
Bureau of Reclamation
11056 West County Road 18E
Loveland, CO 80537
Fax (970-663-3212)
wtully@gp.usbr.gov
The Denver Water Board EIS is due out sometime in the next sixth months. A public comment period is due to follow. Think local and act globally.
And if you happen to have a spare concerned reporter or lawyer available to attend the next meeting….
Hope to hear from you. Is your State Water Resources Control Board paying attention to the Headwaters?
Concerned citizen.
Lloyd
Grand County, Colorado
SITTING ON TOP OF THE WORLD!