 |
|
 |
| ||
|
Yuba Decision Delayed
The conflict between the state's unrelenting demand for power and its threatened fish seemed to reach a head this past March when the State Water Resources Control Board adopted its final decision on Yuba River waters rights. Although the decision would have increased flows for fish, particularly in dry years, the Board postponed implementation until April 21, 2006, citing the need to "provide flexibility during the current power crisis." The Yuba powers several hydroelectric dams.
The controversial decision was a long time in the making. Although Cal Fish & Game had prepared a fisheries management plan for the Yuba River in 1991, the state board had taken no real action on it until the South Yuba River Citizens' League threatened to sue. In the meantime, spring-run chinook were listed as a federal and state threatened species, and steelhead were added to the federal threatened list. In November 2000, the state board finally issued a draft decision. While enviros felt it was too weak to help fish, local water agencies claimed it would harm farmers, flood control, and hydropower, and began a campaign of intense opposition, filing suit when the final decision was released in March. While the the Yuba County Water Agency says the five-year delay is a "step in the right direction," it also claims that after five years, the decision will be disastrous for water supply, water transfers, and power production.
Enviros aren't pleased with the decision - and question the real reason for delay. "All in all, the decision is a great disappointment," says Larry Sanders with the citizens' league. "It lowered the minimum flows even further from those recommended by the experts and provides no temperature criteria whatsoever." Sanders says the result will be flow fluctuations that will cause salmon and steelhead nests to dry out. And, according to the league, increased flows for fish will not decrease power production but will actually have the opposite effect. "Every drop of water in the Yuba (except during floods) goes through at least one, and often two, power plants," explains Sanders. "So increased fish flows actually result in more energy produced."
Sanders says the real issue is not power but water sales. "The fish need higher flows in the spring and fall, while demand for water is highest in the summer," says Sanders. "The water agency simply does not want to put water in the river when they can't sell it. This summer they intend to raise flows to well above recommended levels (which may actually harm the fishery) in order to facilitate water sales."
The fight for more - or less - water for fish and other users is far from over. Over 11 groups have filed petitions for reconsideration, which have been rejected by the state board, setting off a 30-day window for the parties to file suit. Although both water agencies and environmental groups are talking about filing more lawsuits, they are also beginning to sit down to try to negotiate a decision that everyone can live with. LOV
[ ABAG HOME | SFEP HOME ]
Copyright © 2002, San Francisco Estuary Project