August 1999 Issues Online June 2007 April 2007 February 2007 December 2006 October 2006 August 2006 June 2006 April 2006 February 2006 December 2005 October 2005 August 2005 June 2005 April 2005 February 2005 December 2004 October 2004 August 2004 June 2004 April 2004 February 2004 December 2003 October 2003 August 2003 June 2003 April 2003 February 2003 December 2002 October 2002 August 2002 June 2002 April 2002 February 2002 December 2001 October 2001 August 2001 June 2001 April 2001 February 2001 December 2000 October 2000 August 2000 June 2000 April 2000 February 2000 December 1999 October 1999 August 1999 June 1999 April 1999 February 1999 December 1998 October 1998 August 1998 June 1998 April 1998 February 1998 December 1997 October 1997 August 1997 June 1997 April 1997 February 1997 December 1996 October 1996 August 1996 June 1996 April 1996 February 1996 December 1995 October 1995 August 1995 June 1995 April 1995 February 1995 December 1994 October 1994 August 1994 June 1994 April 1994 February 1994 December 1993 October 1993 August 1993 Select any issue from the menu in this bar.

No More Whole Hog Hydro

Most of the state's hydropower projects were licensed 30-50 years ago, before their impacts on fish and flows became so apparent. Now that at least 50 projects are coming up for relicensing in the next few years, removing dams - or at least operating them for better instream flows - has environmentalists, whitewater enthusiasts, and anglers dreaming of fast-flowing, fish-friendly rivers again.

One strategy some river advocates have adopted to have a voice in the future of the state's rivers is to "intervene" in the relicensing process by filing a formal motion. "In the past, we weren't as accepted as stakeholders," says Friends of the River's Jen Carville. But things are changing, and now the group sits at the negotiating table with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and P.G.& E. The payoff, hopes Carville, will be more flexible river management plans that will improve conditions for fish and whitewater enthusiasts.

While any increase in instream flows is beneficial, says Friends of the River's Steve Evans, it will take more than minimal increases to truly restore a river. "We've seen incremental improvements in flows with most of the relicensing projects to date," says Evans. "But to call that restoration isn't quite accurate." Increasing flows from 5 cubic feet per second to 50 cfs while historical flows were closer to 300 cfs, isn't going to do the job, says Evans.

Others are frustrated with the bureaucracy of the relicensing process: relicensing of the Mokelumne's Salt Springs Dam has been going on for 25 years, for example. "As long as a utility is 'diligently' pursuing a new license, FERC will continue to grant annual licenses," says CalTrout's Jim Edmundson. After attending 20 meetings over the last 18 months, Edmundson is skeptical: "The utilities' ability to stay at the table is endless." Still, he cites several rivers that have been rehabilitated through the relicensing process. "The third stretch of the Pit River was a classic example of 'pig' hydro," he says. "FERC allowed P.G.&E to completely dry up the river, which once had flows of 2,000 cfs. The river was devoid of wildlife and fish. After a 1986 relicensing, which required continual releases of 150 cfs, the eagles came back, the native fish are in balance with the trout, and there's an economic payoff for the county as well."

FERC also has the authority to decommission dams, as it recently did to the Edwards Dam on the Kennebec River in Maine. There is no question that some dams just need to be removed, says Evans, like smaller, "run-of-the-river"-type dams such as the KR-3 on the north fork Kern. "The economic value of whitewater rafting on the Kern is greater than the value of the electricity that dam produces," says Evans. Edmundson suggests the Potter Valley Project on the Eel River, which "lights up three lightbulbs in Oakland," as another good candidate.

By law FERC is supposed to give the same consideration to fish, wildlife, and recreational interests as it does to hydropower, but in its cost-benefit analyses, the environmental benefits get short shrift, says Edmundson. While state and federal wildlife agencies recommend instream flows to FERC, the latter is not required to abide by those recommendations. "The FERC relicensing process is so unbalanced it's ripe for a redistribution of power - that may have to be done through a federal lawsuit," says Edmundson.

Meanwhile, three bills before the state legislature could also have an impact on dam operations. A bill by Senator Deborah Bowen proposes that the state acquire P.G.&E's facilities, which would give California's fish and game and recreation departments more leverage during the FERC relicensing process. One competing bill would allow the utilities to sell their facilities to any willing buyer while the other would give local agencies first dibs. According to California Energy Markets' J.A. Savage, P.G.&E would like to transfer 68 hydro facilities to its unregulated affiliate, U.S. Generating (now P.G.&E Generating), along with 136,000 acres of watershed lands. From there, PG & E Generating could sell the land to whomever it pleases - including timber companies.

Edmundson predicts that many hydropower projects will end up being jointly owned by the state, federal government and private utilities. Evans says that if the state ends up as a partial owner, another venue for restoring rivers could be the State Water Resources Control Board, since its 401 permits under the Clean Water Act must ensure beneficial use of a watershed: "That would give the state an in."

Contacts: Steve Evans(916)442.3155 or Jim Edmundson (805) 584.9248.

«To @@(newsletter_title)@@ Index

[ ABAG HOME | SFEP HOME ]

Copyright © 2002, San Francisco Estuary Project