Chico Enterprise Record – 6/27/07
By Larry Mitchell, staff writer

About 200 spring-run salmon, swimming in Butte Creek just south of Chico, will apparently die this summer before they can spawn.

Action to try to save the big fish has been suggested.

However, Tracy McReynolds, a fisheries biologist with the state Department of Fish and Game, said her agency has decided it's best to leave the salmon alone.

The salmon in lower Butte Creek are certainly stressed, and they may be diseased, she said. If that's the case, encouraging them to join the rest of the run farther upstream, may infect healthy fish.

It seems best to let nature take its course, she said. Butte Creek's spring-run salmon are a treasured resource. They're designated a threatened species, for one thing. But also, Butte Creek is one of the few places in the Sacramento Valley where large numbers of the fish still spawn naturally instead of in fish hatcheries.

The salmon live for three years. They hatch in the late fall or winter in the upper parts of Butte Creek. In the spring, the baby fish migrate downstream to the Sacramento River and then on to the San Francisco Bay and the ocean. Three years later, in the spring, they return to Butte Creek.

By this time of year, the salmon that returned should be in deep, cold pools in far up the canyon. Right now, in fact, thousands of them can be found there. They'll wait out the hot summer and in the fall, spawn and die.

This year, for whatever reason, some of the salmon haven't gone into the canyon. They're swimming around in the creek south of Highway 99.

If they don't move up into the canyon, where there's colder water, they will die before they can spawn in the fall, McReynolds said. High water temperatures will kill them.

Allen Harthorn, executive director of Friends of Butte Creek, said he'd like to see something done to save the salmon in the lower part of the creek.

PG&E and a couple of farms could reduce their diversions temporarily, he said. That would cause more water to rush down the creek and might convince the reluctant salmon to go on upstream.

Harthorn and McReynolds both said the salmon might move upstream on their own, given some more time.

But McReynolds said the fish are already stressed from being in water that's too warm, and they may have become diseased. It could be a mistake to encourage them to join the rest of the run, she said.

Harthorn said there's no evidence the fish are diseased.

McReynolds said her agency's decision not to try to get the remaining salmon to go farther upstream is based on a couple of things.

One is the health issue. The other is it appears there are plenty of spring-run salmon in the upper part of the creek already this year.

Harthorn, whose organization seeks greater environmental protection for the Butte Creek watershed, said he questions the notion that there are "enough" spring-run salmon in the upper part of the creek.

"How can it be that there's too many fish, yet we can't fish for them?" he said.

The spring run of salmon on Butte Creek used to be huge. But by the 1970s, it had dwindled to just a few fish in some years.

That was apparently because of low flows, dams that blocked the fishes' way, unscreened diversion ditches, development and other human activities. Then efforts were begun to restore the run. Dams were removed. Diversions were screened. Harthorn, who lives in Butte Creek Canyon, said he thinks the most helpful changes were adding more water to the creek. In the 1970s, the creek, in the summer, was pretty much a network of pools connected by trickles of water.

In the 1970s, PG&E had to release 10 cubic feet per second of water into the creek above the Centerville Powerhouse. In the 1980s, that was doubled, to 20 cfs. The big change, according to Harthorn came in 1992, when the federal government ordered the power company to release 40 cfs to help the fish.

"Since that flow was increased, we've seen remarkable returns," Harthorn said. Removing dams and fixing fish ladders, which occurred later, helped, too.

In 1992, the total number of fish that spawned in the creek was 750, he said. Three years later, 7,500 fish spawned.

The size of this year's run won't be estimated until after the fish spawn in the fall, but Harthorn said there may be 15,000 salmon in upper Butte Creek right now, waiting for the time to spawn.

If people swimming, boating or tubing in the creek encounter salmon in the summer, the best thing they can do is leave the fish alone, he said. The salmon are resting after their long trip home and saving their energy for spawning. It's bad for their health if they get scared and have to swim hard.

Limited fishing for spring-run salmon used to be allowed on Butte Creek, but it was discontinued in 1994. Harthorn, who is an angler, looks forward to the day it will be allowed again. He said better research needs to be done on Butte Creek's spring-run salmon. More information should lead to better management of the creek to benefit the fish.

There are unanswered questions, he said. For example, while Fish and Game insists that the spring-run fish can't survive in warmer water, he's heard anecdotal evidence to the contrary.

Although McReynolds denies it, he said he believes it's possible that some of the 200 fish downstream from Highway 99 might survive the summer and spawn in the fall. #

Ten rare adult green sturgeon were recently squashed by the gates of the Red Bluff Diversion Dam on the Sacramento River, marking what one official called a "very unfortunate" setback for another dwindling river species.

The sturgeon, all spawning adults, are believed to have been trapped by the dam's gates before May 24, with the most recent carcass being discovered June 10. The dam is operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

Jeff McCracken, a spokesman for the bureau, said the fish probably died after being caught in the dam's partially opened gates. When the gates were later closed, the fish were crushed or cut into pieces.

While sturgeon are the largest threatened fish in the Sacramento River, the species' loss comes amid a related crisis for the river's tiniest fish, the fingerling Delta smelt, also threatened. Both are imperiled by water diversion systems.

"If we want to have any native fish populations left, it's time to take a sober look at what we use water for in California and assess what are reasonable uses and what aren't," said Jeff Miller, conservation advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity.

The National Marine Fisheries Service last year listed Sacramento River green sturgeon as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. That resulted from a petition filed by Miller's group and two others.

Last year, the state Department of Fish and Game estimated there may be as few as 50 spawning-age green sturgeon in the river, so the 10 dead fish could represent 20 percent of the population.

All the dead fish were spawning adults, said Maria Rea, manager of the Sacramento office of the National Marine Fisheries Service. They ranged from 48 to 82 inches long. At least two were female and four were male.

Sturgeon are known to become more prolific spawners as they age, so mature fish are considered especially valuable.

"These were large, old fish, which makes this a significant and very unfortunate event," Rea said. "We think this could constitute a significant portion of the spawning population."

Rea said there is no sign the deaths resulted from wrongdoing. As an interim measure, her agency ordered that when gates at the dam are opened, they must be open at least 12 inches so sturgeon can pass without being trapped.

The dam, built in 1964, is a long, low structure that diverts water from the Sacramento River near Red Bluff into the Tehama-Colusa Canal. The canal provides water to farmers on the west side of the Sacramento Valley.

McCracken said the timing of dam operations was unusual this year because of the dry winter and requirements to accommodate migrating spring-run Chinook salmon. This may have contributed to the deaths of the sturgeon, which also must migrate past the dam to spawn upstream.

He said only one sturgeon has been killed by the gates before, in 2002.

"It's just really weird why all of a sudden there seems to be a plethora," he said. "We've never seen this before in all the years that we've operated that dam."

Green sturgeon are one of the oldest known fishes in North America, believed to date back 200 million years. Like salmon, they spawn in freshwater but spend a large part of their lives in the salty waters of San Francisco Bay and the ocean. They do not reach spawning age until at least 13 years old, then they spawn every two to five years and often live to be 70 years old.

The state Department of Fish and Game recently banned anglers from keeping green sturgeon and imposed new catch limits on its even larger cousin, the white sturgeon. Both are threatened by poaching, water diversions, competition from non-native species and water contamination.#

Stockton Record – 6/19/07
By Alex Breitler

Tens of thousands of farms are illegally exempt from laws requiring the monitoring and reporting of toxic water runoff, environmental groups said in a lawsuit filed Monday.

The lawsuit targets the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board's "ag waiver" program, which allows farmers to join coalitions rather than test their own runoff.

Millions of pounds of pesticides and fertilizers are applied to these farmers' lands, later washing into creeks and streams and, ultimately, into the Delta. There, the toxins imperil threatened fish such as the Delta smelt, environmentalists say.

What it means

• The lawsuit filed Monday targets an "ag waiver" program that allows farmers to avoid individually monitoring and reporting toxins in the water discharged from their lands.

• Under the program, many farmers join coalitions and pay a fee "” $1.75 per acre in San Joaquin County "” for group monitoring and reporting.

• Critics say there is no evidence that the waivers have improved water quality and coalitions are a shield protecting farmers from clean water laws.

They first sued in 2003, when the waiver program began. That lawsuit was dismissed. The waivers were extended last year, and a new lawsuit was filed Monday in Sacramento County Superior Court by the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance and San Francisco-based Baykeeper.

Water officials still don't know the answers to basic questions, the lawsuit says, such as how many discharges are taking place, which chemicals and how much of them are released into the environment, and whether the coalitions have made any improvement in water quality.

"These coalitions are not responsible," said Sejal Choksi, program director for Baykeeper. "They're a shield or a cover to (farmers) not being held individually accountable."

Farmers' advocates called the latest lawsuit a "frustration."

Coalitions allow farmers to avoid a costly sampling, monitoring and reporting process that can approach $30,000 to $40,000 per year, said Mike Wackman, a consultant who represents the San Joaquin County and Delta Water Quality Coalition.

About 80 percent to 85 percent of the irrigated farms in this area belong to that coalition, which charges farmers $1.75 per acre for water-quality monitoring services, he said.

"The coalition is trying to make the program work," Wackman said. "Now we're getting sued again."

The coalition conducts testing of farmers' runoff and talks to growers about ways to lessen their impact on water quality, such as avoiding the use of certain pesticides when a coming storm is likely to wash them into waterways.

"I think we're moving ahead and doing pretty well," Wackman said.

The lawsuit claims that extending the waivers last year violated state environmental law as the Delta's ecosystem sinks from "bad to catastrophically bad." Record-low numbers of smelt have been surveyed this spring, triggering a shutdown of the state's water export pumps near Tracy.

Regional Water Quality Control Board officials could not be reached for comment Monday.#

Contra Costa Times – 5/20/07
Mike Taugher, Staff Writer

In an apparent conflict of interest, a former high-ranking Bush administration official helped remove a fish from the list of threatened and endangered species in a decision that eased an economic threat to her farm near Dixon.

Julie MacDonald resigned April 30 as deputy assistant secretary of the Department of Interior, a month after the department's office of inspector general issued a scathing report that accused her of altering scientific reports in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's endangered species programs and improperly leaking internal reports to industry groups and friends.

The report said nothing about MacDonald's participation in the decision to remove the Sacramento splittail from protection under the Endangered Species Act.

But documents show she edited the decision on the fish, at one point softening scientists' conclusion that the species "is likely" experiencing a population decline to say it "may be" in such a decline.

The Sacramento splittail, which was classified as a threatened species from 1999 to 2003, appears to be the only fish -- other than those that have gone extinct -- ever removed from the list of threatened and endangered species.

Documents show MacDonald was deeply involved in crafting the language used to justify the final decision.

The decision to withdraw the protective status of the fish was first made in the Fish and Wildlife Service's Sacramento office, leaving the extent of MacDonald's involvement in those earlier stages unclear.

But her participation in the decisionmaking at any stage of the process may have violated conflict of interest rules because MacDonald owns an 80-acre farm in the Yolo Bypass, a floodplain of wetlands, pastures and row crops north of the Delta that is key habitat for the fish.

In almost all circumstances, federal law prohibits federal employees from participating in decisions in which they have a personal interest.

MacDonald did not return repeated phone calls seeking comment to her Washington and Dixon homes. Her husband, who answered the door at the Dixon farm this week, said she was in Washington.

In response to Times inquiries, the Department of Interior issued a written statement.

"To our knowledge, senior departmental officials were unaware of these issues," the statement read. "The Department of the Interior Inspector General investigated former Deputy Assistant Secretary MacDonald's role in administering the Endangered Species Act and issued a report. We rely upon the Inspector General's investigation and counsel. If it turns out that former Deputy Assistant Secretary MacDonald acted inappropriately regarding the Sacramento splittail, we will conduct an appropriate review of the regulatory process that led to the final decision."

The splittail is more dependent on floodplains than any other fish in the Delta. And the Yolo Bypass is the last big floodplain in the Central Valley.

That's why landowners in the bypass have been concerned about the splittail's status: A mandate to boost the splittail's population could lead to more flooding in the bypass, which could inundate crops and equipment. Farmers also worry that measures to enhance splittail populations could force them to install costly fish screens at water intakes and submit to stricter regulations on their use of pesticides.

"In the Sacramento drainage, the most important spawning areas appear to be the Yolo and Sutter bypasses, which are extensively flooded during wet years," according to a 2004 white paper on splittail biology.

According to financial disclosure reports, MacDonald's farm is worth more than $1 million, and she receives $100,000 to $1 million a year in income from it.

"At the very least, this certainly has the appearance of a conflict of interest," said Mary Boyles, spokeswoman for Common Cause in Washington.

"The government ethics rules clearly state that you're not supposed to participate" in decisions that affect you personally, Boyles said. "We need enforcement of these rules that are on the books."

In addition to influencing the agency's decision on the splittail, MacDonald has come under fire for meddling with scientific reports on other endangered species, including the California tiger salamander.

The March 23 inspector general's report concluded that MacDonald, an engineer with no background in biology, "has been heavily involved with editing, commenting on, and reshaping the Endangered Species Program's scientific reports from the field."

The wildlife agency's deputy director, Marshall Jones, described MacDonald to the inspector general's investigator as a Bush administration "attack dog."

Though the report found no evidence of a crime, it said she broke rules against granting preferential treatment and distributing internal agency information.

The report said MacDonald:

— Released an internal draft of regulations on designating critical habitat for endangered species to the Pacific Legal Foundation, a Sacramento-based law firm that regularly sues to weaken endangered species rules.

— Asked subordinates to gather internal information about Delta smelt that was requested by a California Farm Bureau lobbyist and then passed that information to the lobbyist.

— Forwarded to a California Farm Bureau attorney an e-mail she had sent to the Sacramento field office complaining about biologists' determination to keep Delta smelt on the list of protected species. MacDonald opposed that conclusion, and the Farm Bureau attorney immediately filed the e-mail in an ongoing lawsuit as evidence that the government was in disarray. Although MacDonald did not know it, Delta smelt populations were plummeting to perilously low levels at the time of her e-mail in 2004.

— E-mailed large internal files from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, including one on plans for water quality regulations, to e-mail accounts ending in chevrontexaco.com.

— Sent an internal document on Delta smelt to a friend she met during online role-playing games, through the e-mail address of the friend's father.

The report noted that the director of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Dale Hall, said MacDonald was particularly interested in endangered species issues in her home state of California. But the report did not draw direct connections between endangered species and her farm.

Before MacDonald went to work in Washington, she participated in development of a "Yolo Bypass Management Strategy." She is listed as a "landowner" in the report's list of participants.

Several of the other participants were contacted for this story, but none could recall much, if anything, about her involvement.

But the strategy document, completed in 2001, reflects a number of concerns that landowners in the bypass had regarding ecosystem restoration projects to benefit fish, including splittail.

The fish is also of deep concern to water users elsewhere in the state because it could add a new layer of complexity to the increasingly difficult task of maintaining the state's water supply for farms and cities, and protecting its ecosystems.

That is because splittail's dependence on floodplains is unique in the Delta, and that opens up a new set of potential impacts on water supply.

Splittail are large minnows that can grow to more than 12 inches long and live five to seven years. Their populations tend to drop substantially during long droughts and rebound dramatically in response to wet weather.

There is an honest disagreement among scientists about whether the fish belongs on the list of protected species, with some arguing that splittail are well-suited to bounce back from depressed population numbers and others contending the population is on a worrisome downward trend.

In response to concerns that splittail were in decline, the wildlife service added it to the list of threatened species in 1999.

Central Valley farmers sued to overturn the listing and, in June 2000, they won a court order that required government scientists to review their decision in light of new data.

When the court ordered the listing decision redone, it set off a highly unusual series of reports in which biologists in the wildlife service's Sacramento field office concluded repeatedly that splittail should be kept on the list of threatened species.

But none of those reports was sent to Washington for final approval.

Then, in January 2003, the head of the Sacramento office, Steve Thompson, called a meeting to hear the latest presentation from the splittail team. After hearing a report from Jason Douglas, the lead biologist, every scientist in the room except Thompson agreed that splittail should remain on the list, according to notes from that meeting.

Shortly thereafter, Douglas was replaced as the lead biologist.

"I thought it was clear we weren't going to be able to list it. In the face of uncertainty, you err on the side of the species," said Douglas, who now works in the agency's Tucson, Ariz., office.

The splittail report -- concluding that the fish be taken off the list of threatened species -- was then sent to the agency's Washington headquarters.

The rest of the roughly 100-page report, however, was largely intact, and that inconsistency angered MacDonald, according to a participant on a conference call with MacDonald at the time.

"She's hopping mad and saying this thing reads like a listing package," said the participant, a wildlife service official in Washington who requested anonymity out of fear of retaliation. "She said something to the effect that she would just have to do this herself."

The official added that although the recommendation to take the fish off the list was made in Sacramento, "without a doubt the decision was made the way it was because of pressure from Julie MacDonald. She was the one that forced the decision."

Thompson, the head of the Sacramento office who made the recommendation, said he did not specifically recall speaking with MacDonald about the splittail listing but added that he was sure the issue came up.

"Certainly, Julie MacDonald called me on a regular basis, and I'm sure she talked to me about it," Thompson said.

On Sept. 15, 2003, eight days before the decision to take splittail off the threatened species list was made final, the Washington office faxed to Sacramento six marked-up pages of the new rule with the cover page notation, "re: Julie MacD's latest comments/edits."

In it, MacDonald made numerous changes and comments, most of which appear to have been aimed at softening the language of the rule. In addition to changing the conclusion that splittail "are likely" declining to "may be" declining, she wrote that, "At this point, none of the threats individually or collectively rise to a level of concern that warrants listing."

That sentence does not appear in the final report.

MacDonald also took issue with the statistical methods employed by her agency's biologists.

At the time of the decision, there was a debate about how to perform statistical calculations to determine whether the splittail population was declining. The stricter method favored by some scientists, including biologists working for the state of California, did not offer a clear picture of a fish in decline.

But the relaxed method preferred by federal biologists did.

That dispute might have been rendered moot by a third statistical method that appeared to conclusively show that splittail was in decline.

The wildlife agency ignored the third method in its final rule, however.

In a memo filed in June 2003, former agency field supervisor Wayne White wrote that the new statistics reinforced what agency biologists had been saying since 1994: that the fish was in decline.

But, he noted, the new statistics had not been subject to public comment, and the officials who made the decision to take splittail off the list of threatened species were aware of the new data.

In the end, the agency concluded that even if the fish were in decline, new programs were in place to improve the fish's habitat.

Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez, a senior member of the House Committee on Natural Resources, said MacDonald's actions regarding the splittail listing were very serious and cast doubt on every endangered species decision she touched.

"This is like a police department where they tamper with evidence. You have to go back" and re-examine decisions that might be compromised, he said.

"It's clearly worthy of a criminal investigation," said Miller. "This was not an accident. She knowingly did this. She aggressively did this." #

Redding Record Searchlight – 5/16/07
By Kimberly Ross, staff writer

Urban stream renewal and salmon-run restoration in the Stillwater Creek and Churn Creek watershed will be among the topics of a public workshop Monday.

Most of the city of Shasta Lake lies within the watershed, which stretches almost to Anderson and encompasses 77,735 acres, said Lee Delaney, watershed coordinator for the Western Shasta Resources Conservation District. The public is invited to share ideas at a roundtable workshop, he said. The district will put the ideas into a draft outline and create a management plan to improve conditions in the watershed.

“We’re not specifically going to debate or discuss. We’ll say, ‘Hey, if you think that’s an issue, we’ll take it on,’” he said.

One of the issues to be addressed is renewing natural streams through town, Delaney said. Many of the area’s streams flow under city streets, keeping

fish and other wildlife from their natural habitats. For example, Little Churn Creek disappears about a quarter-mile east of Hartnell Avenue and Churn Creek Road as part of a flood control project.

“Part of Churn Creek is really running underground. We need to daylight it again,” he said.

In other areas, like east of Churn Creek Road, the stream has been directed down straight concrete chutes. The result is fast-moving water that doesn’t soak into groundwater. It eliminates riparian-loving willow trees for nesting birds and spawning gravel for salmon and steelhead.

“They did this with all the best of intentions, but you’re really creating another problem,” Delaney said.

Local stream restoration could be modeled after cities like Seattle, where changes helped streams flow more naturally, he said.

“They have salmon that run right up into town now,” Delaney said. “It can be done. It won’t be cheap, by any means, but it can be done.” #

Riverside Press Enterprise – 5/10/07
By Jennifer Bowles, staff writer

A Superior Court judge ruled that the California Department of Fish and Game must analyze what happens to native fish and frogs, some of which are already in low numbers, when the state stocks streams with hatchery raised trout.

The judge said there is "substantial evidence" supporting the argument by environmental groups that the stocking program has significant impacts on aquatic ecosystems.

Steve Martarano, an agency spokesman, said Thursday the department had set in motion the review before the lawsuit was filed last year.

He said the judge is allowing the stocking program to continue while the study is being conducted.

Noah Greenwald, with the Center for Biological Diversity, one of the plaintiffs, said the trout compete for food and space with native species, and they can also prey on them.

In a review he conducted of the agency's documents, Greenwald found that trout were stocked in 47 water bodies where 36 imperiled fish and amphibians live.

In the Inland region, they include the Santa Ana River and Strawberry Creek, a tributary of the San Jacinto River. #

Diversion to supply Sacramento area and the East Bay
San Francisco Chronicle – 5/8/07
Glen Martin, Staff Writer

Freeport, Sacramento County -- Government officials and environmentalists broke ground Monday on a new Sacramento River water diversion system, deeming it a historic project that sets a precedent for state water distribution in an era of global warming and drought.

The Freeport Regional Water Project ends a 35-year legal and political battle. When finished in 2010, it will provide 85 million gallons of water a day to Sacramento County Water Agency (SCWA). Additionally, during drought years, 100 million gallons a day will be delivered to the East Bay Municipal Utility District.

"This is the moment we've been waiting for," said Douglas Wallace, the environmental affairs officer for EBMUD. "It's a good deal all around."

Lt. Gov. John Garamendi said the project ends one of the longest battles in California's water wars.

The project "only happened because ... communities decided to work together instead of fighting it out in court," he said.

Plenty of contentious legal skirmishing preceded the project, however. The original dispute grew out of a 1970 contract between EBMUD and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation that would have permitted the utility to divert 150,000 acre feet of water a year from the American River, a relatively pristine tributary of the Sacramento.

Two years later, two environmental groups, Environmental Defense and the Save the American River Association, sued the utility to block the deal.

The county of Sacramento later joined the environmentalists' suit. Years of litigation followed, with rulings by both the state and U.S. supreme courts. Ultimately, an Alameda Superior Court decision significantly limited EBMUD's options. Negotiations then ensued, with the Freeport project representing a compromise agreement.

The project essentially "takes the straw out of the American and puts it in the Sacramento, where the environmental impacts are fewer," said Tom Graff, the regional director for Environmental Defense.

Graff said the project accomplishes two main goals of the environmental community: protection of the lower American River and the promotion of water conservation and wastewater recycling.

Ron Stork, the senior policy advocate for Friends of the River, said the project could also help restore salmon runs on the nearby Cosumnes River.

Sacramento County and the Nature Conservancy have agreed in principle to pipe water to the Cosumnes so fall-run Chinook salmon can get up the river in October when water levels typically are low, Stork said. The Freeport project should provide the county with enough water to meet that goal, he said.

The spirit of cooperation that drove the project worked right down to the neighborhood level.

Sacramento City Councilwoman Bonnie Pannell said residents near the Freeport construction site were originally opposed to the project because they were worried about noise, chemical contamination and falling property values. But an outreach program and community feedback resulted in commitments to move the site farther downstream than originally proposed and reduce operational noise, Pannell said.

"It's a much better project now, and the community is happy," she said.

Stork said the project largely succeeded because SCWA and EBMUD "became infected with the notion of radical common sense. I believe they feel they have stewardship over California's water, and the obligation to use it responsibly."

The biggest benefit to EBMUD is protection from water shortages during drought or low-water years. The utility provides water to more than 1.2 million East Bay customers.

Garamendi said the project points to new methods for equitably distributing the state's water during a period of shifting global climates.

"Climate change is real," he said, "and it will change everything we know of water in California. The snowpack will be 30 to 70 percent less. Our snow melt today is two weeks earlier than it was 10 years ago. We'll also have greater floods (from precipitation falling as rain rather than snow at high elevations)."

Garamendi predicted that climate change ultimately will force a vast retooling of California's water storage and delivery system, costing taxpayers billions. The Freeport project, he said, sets the precedent for that inevitable revamping.#

Los Angeles Times – 5/7/07
By Eric Bailey, staff writer

TULE LAKE, CALIF. — Under the rolling cloud-scape of the Klamath Basin, a curious rite of spring is underway.

Migratory birds are flocking to the basin's necklace of federal wildlife refuges straddling Oregon and California — one of the most important stops on the Pacific Flyway. As usual, the geese, mallards and terns are sharing the sanctuaries with tractors.

Agriculture fields have elbowed onto what once were marshes and shallow inland seas, shrinking the basin's wetlands by nearly 80%. Environmentalists have long fought to stop that farming, saying the refuges belong to the birds.

But now, activists say, farmers in the Klamath Basin appear poised to cement their presence on the refuges, the basin's most productive farmland.

Farmers are gaining an edge in closed-door settlement talks over the fate of four dams on the Klamath River, which meanders across two states before pouring into the Pacific Ocean north of Eureka, Calif.

Environmentalists universally support dam removal, which would let endangered salmon reach upriver spawning grounds blocked for nearly a century.

Activists with a pair of Oregon-based groups, however, fear that a looming compromise backed by the Bush administration will come at an unacceptable cost: an agreement to forever allow farming in the refuges.

The 23-page settlement proposes up to $250 million to ease soaring electricity costs for irrigation pumps and possibly finance a renewable energy plant.

Farmers and other big landowners could also be shielded from endangered-species restrictions invoked to revive imperiled fish species: the salmon, two types of suckerfish in Upper Klamath Lake and the bull trout, which is found in upstream tributaries.

"The Bush administration has hijacked these talks about dam removal to advance unrelated policy goals bad for the environment and bad in the long term for the Klamath Basin," said Steve Pedery of Oregon Wild, a Portland nonprofit.

At this point, that resolute stand is a lonely one.

Other participants in the talks, including several national environmental groups, say it's too early to go to the mat over a deal that's anything but done.

"If folks are talking about one thing or another being sold out, we think that's very premature," said Amy Kober of American Rivers. "There's still plenty to be worked out."

The administration's top negotiator declined to discuss details but rejected any notion of pressure from Washington.

"I've had a free rein to do whatever I felt was right," said Steve Thompson, California-Nevada manager for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "I haven't felt any pressures, other than that Klamath is controversial from all sides."

Forging a consensus on the Klamath has proved extraordinarily complicated. Compromises, experts say, will be inevitable for the proposal to get federal and state support.

"It's a huge stretch to imagine that commercial agriculture is benefiting wildlife populations in the long run," said Nancy Langston, a University of Wisconsin environmental studies professor who has studied the Klamath crisis. "But getting buy-in from as many people in the basin as possible is critical in the long run."

After more than two years of discussions, 26 of the 28 groups — U.S. water and wildlife agencies, the states of California and Oregon, fishermen, four tribes and an array of environmental groups — have agreed to push forward to settle details in the agreement.

Meanwhile, Oregon Wild and WaterWatch of Oregon, the two groups vocally objecting to what they describe as concessions to farmers, have "essentially been voted off the island," said John DeVoe, WaterWatch's executive director.

In addition to pushing for reduced water demand in the basin and higher river flows, the two groups ran aground in their quest to protect the refuges — and lighten the footprint of agriculture.

Before the arrival of settlers in the West, the Klamath Basin's wetlands totaled nearly 360,000 acres, a mix of shallow lakes and marshes under skies filled with migratory birds. Besides harboring wildlife, the marshes naturally carried clean Cascade runoff that emerged like a volcanic broth on its way to the Klamath River.

Change came in 1905, when the precursor to the federal Bureau of Reclamation began to drain marshlands for homesteading farmers.

That same year, a pioneering conservationist named William Finley visited the basin and came away awed by the abundant bird life and vast wetlands. His reports helped persuade President Theodore Roosevelt to establish the first of the basin's refuges in 1908.

In less than a decade, wildlife began to suffer. Completion of a railroad levee in 1917 cut off the biggest refuge's marshy connection to the Klamath River, and within five years a vast expanse had dried up.

Early attempts to farm around the refuges mostly flopped as wildfires burned across parched peat soil.

But the federal Reclamation Service pressed ahead, rerouting whole rivers and building dams and canals. In the 1940s, it bored a mile-long tunnel through Sheepy Ridge to help drain Tule Lake.

Homesteaders settled in the basin, most of them veterans of the two world wars. They built communities and successful agricultural enterprises in a cold, dry land where the growing season barely lasts more than three months.

As Tule Lake receded over the decades, farmers fought to have the fertile lake bottom opened for sale as farms. In 1964, Congress barred homesteading but allowed leased farmland on the refuges.

Today, nearly 15% of the 240,000 farm acres in the Klamath Basin is leased land on two federal wildlife refuges.

A quarter of the Lower Klamath Lake refuge is farmed. At the Tule Lake wildlife refuge, crops sprout on nearly half the land, growing in the rich soil of what used to be lake bottom.

"That's the heartland of the basin," said longtime farmer Sid Staunton, 50. "To shut us out of the refuge would wipe out Tule Lake."

Staunton and his brothers, Marshall and Ed, have farmed the Klamath Basin for decades, just as their father and grandfather before them. They grow potatoes, onions and barley, routinely planting upward of 1,000 acres on the refuge.

Like other farmers, the brothers talk of how agriculture's grains provide feed to migratory birds, about how they've changed their practices to better accommodate wildlife.

They've gone heavily into organic farming, spreading far less fertilizer and pesticide, which can end up in wetlands and rivers.

Meanwhile, crop rotation on the refuge now means flooding farm parcels every couple of years, which allows marshland to sprout anew for a few seasons before being returned to agricultural production.

Agribusiness enthusiastically supports more water for the refuges, which have been parched in recent droughts, said Greg Addington, executive director of the Klamath Water Users Assn., which represents basin farmers.

Addington said reduced farming on the refuges would be a regional economic disaster, knocking out not just growers but the infrastructure that supports them — the seed merchants, fertilizer and pesticide sales, tractor dealerships.

Staunton said Oregon environmentalists don't want to hear such things — they want all the farmers out.

"It's their ultimate goal," he said. "If they can force the farmers to bail, they can flood it all."

Environmentalists counter that agribusiness has gotten its way too long. The pendulum seemed to be swinging back in favor of wildlife during the last years of the Clinton administration, which conducted a formal review that might have curtailed refuge farming. That possibility faded after President Bush took office.

The basin remains home to the largest population of bald eagles in the lower 48 states as well as three of the West's last surviving white pelican breeding colonies. But scientists say the annual migration to the Klamath, which 50 years ago filled the sky with 7 million ducks and geese, has decreased by more than two-thirds.

Environmentalists blame myriad problems: farm equipment that can destroy nests, silt from agricultural runoff, pesticides. But mostly it's a matter of farm fields replacing wetlands. A federal study found that a typical farm acre produces about 200 pounds of waste grain that birds can eat, while a bountiful wetland acre can yield 2,600 pounds of rootlets and tubers.

Pedery of Oregon Wild said restoration of refuge wetlands could help Klamath River salmon rebound, with marsh plants filtering pollutants to improve water quality.

"It's irresponsible to treat these refuges like trading stock," he said. "It's land that was set aside for geese and eagles, not potatoes and onions." #

An Eel River Run - The importance of the Eel

Ukiah Daily Journal – 5/4/07
By Ben Brown, staff writer

Editor's note: This is the second of two stories by Ben Brown on his two-day tour of the Eel River with the Mendocino County Farm Bureau.

According to reports from the California Department of Water Resources, one-third of the rain in California falls in the north coast, which is defined as the area between Sonoma County and the Oregon border.

The various forks of the Eel River run through a good portion of that and, on average rain year, carry and distribute much of that water in Mendocino, Humboldt and Trinity counties.

"It supplies a tremendous amount of water from Potter Valley south," said Janet Pauli, Chairwoman of the Mendocino County Inland Valley Water Commission.

Water from the main branch of the Eel River is diverted through a tunnel, through the Potter Valley Project and into the East Fork of the Russian River. >From there it flows into Lake Mendocino and then downstream all the way to Sonoma County.

Along the way a number of communities, including Ukiah, draw water for drinking and agriculture from streams that originated in the Eel.

"We are dependent on it," Pauli said. "Everything north of the confluence of Dry Creek is dependent on it."

In a good water year, the system delivers the water, but on a bad one, everyone suffers. Some go looking for someone to blame, and there is no shortage of people and agencies for that.

A good portion of the land in the Eel River watershed is owned by the National Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management, other parts of it are in the hands of Indian tribes and some still remains privately owned by farmers and ranchers.

Private landowners like Ross Burgess blame the government and the "ologists" he has no respect for, for restricting the cutting of trees that overgrow the land and suck up all the water, making the river uninhabitable for fish.

Environmentalists blame logging companies, ranchers and private landowners, for cutting down the trees, filling the river with silt and leaving the fish with no place to spawn.

Other agencies, like the fisheries division of the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration, the California Department of Fish and Game, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and even Pacific Gas and Electric, also get their share of the blame for regulating one part of the river or another to fulfill their duties.

In addition the Eel River, no respecter of human boundaries, runs through Mendocino, Humboldt and Trinity counties and brings the residents of those counties and their locally elected officials into the mix.

Nature itself also plays a role. While roads do run through the wilderness in the Eel River watershed, much of the river is only accessible by travel on foot in a rugged landscape, making it difficult to observe or understand what is going on in the river itself.

Thus far, attempts to regulate the river generally seem to help one area while hurting another. Recent examples include PG&E's announcement that they would reduce flows out of the Eel River and into the Potter Valley Project by 33 percent in order stay in compliance with their FERC license.

Keeping more water in the Eel River is expected to help flagging fish populations but it also prompted a flurry of activity from local government and the Mendocino County Inland Valley Water Commission to ensure there will be enough water in the East Fork of the Russian River for frost protection in Potter Valley.

Additionally, reduced flows through the project have been cited as one of the reasons, along with below-average winter rainfall, that water levels in Lake Mendocino are expected to reach historic lows.

More recently, the Sonoma County Water Agency has said they plan to reduce the flow of water out of Lake Mendocino down the Russian River in order to preserve water for the fall Chinook runs which will mean less water in the Russian River this summer.

Regulating the river at one point means that someone up or downstream suffers. A holistic view of the river might make for better regulation, but the sheer size and complexity of the watershed seems like it would render a full understanding of the river the next thing to impossible. #

Eureka Times Standard – 5/3/07
By John Driscoll, staff writer

The Klamath River's dams are a nuisance and create a threat to public health, American Indian and fishing interests are alleging in a major federal lawsuit against the dam's owner Pacificorp.

The suit filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco Wednesday looks to stop the company from operating its dams in a way that proliferates toxic algae blooms and threatens the river's fisheries and people who swim or hold religious ceremonies in its water. The law firms of Kennedy and Madonna -- run in part by Robert Kennedy, Jr. -- and corporate law heavy hitter Joseph Cotchett of Cotchett, Pitre and McCarthy filed the suit.

The plaintiffs are members of the Yurok and Karuk tribes, a commercial salmon fisherman who runs a boat out of Half Moon Bay and a riverside business owner, as well as the nonprofit group Klamath Riverkeeper.

They claim that Pacificorp and regulators have failed to reverse deteriorating water quality in the river and its reservoirs.

Operation of the dams warms water and accentuates toxic algae blooms, they claim, which have crushed the river's fisheries and pose a serious threat to public health.

”We've been doing our due diligence trying to get authorities to deal with the issue,” said Leaf Hillman, vice chairman of the Karuk Tribal Council and a priest who spends long periods of time in the river for religious ceremonies each year. “As time has gone on it's gotten a little more frustrating.”

Hillman spoke by cell phone from Omaha, Neb. where tribal and fishing interests are protesting the Klamath dams at the shareholders meeting of Pacificorp parent company Berkshire Hathaway. The groups are asking Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett to push Pacificorp to remove the dams.

Pacificorp spokeswoman Jan Mitchell said it's the company's policy not to comment on pending litigation. She said Pacificorp has been working with a group of stakeholders to come up with a resolution of the dispute over the river's hydropower dams, and has been working with federal regulators on a parallel course to relicense its operations.

The Karuk Tribe recently asked the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board to impose restrictions on the discharge of toxic algae from Pacificorp's reservoirs. The board turned down the request last month, saying its authority is trumped by the Federal Power Act.

Board Executive Officer Catherine Kuhlman said mandatory closures of lakes or water bodies -- like those the state of Oregon imposes -- during big algae blooms would require state rule-making action. She said the board, the tribes and local health officials are coming out with voluntary guidelines meant to guard against exposure to harmful algae this summer.

The suit says the dams unnaturally heat water in the reservoirs, prompting algae blooms and delaying cooling of the river as fall run chinook salmon begin their run to spawning grounds. It also claims that the reservoirs slow water from warming in the spring, stunting the growth of young salmon which can make them susceptible to parasites and predators.

In 2004, the U.S. Geological Survey found the dams do the same thing, and suggested that removing the dams might make the river more friendly to salmon in the fall.

Well-known trial lawyer Kevin Madonna said in a phone interview that the case is about standing up for people who are politically powerless against a company who has diminished the resource it profits from.

”It's a fundamentally undemocratic situation,” Madonna said.

Madonna wouldn't comment on why the suit was brought by individual litigants instead of as a class action.

Cotchett's firm is well-know for its huge lawsuits against corporations, savings and loan organizations, and even against Vice President Dick Cheney over the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's name. #

Modesto Bee – 4/29/07
By Clea Benson, staff writer

SACRAMENTO — For as long as anyone can remember, medicine men in Northern California's Karuk tribe have bathed as often as 10 times a day in the Klamath River while praying during their renewal ceremonies.

But now, toxic algae blooms caused by stagnant water have polluted their rituals, tribal members say. Last year, one medicine man had to leave his camp in the midst of his prayers to be treated at a hospital for an ear infection, said Chook-Chook Hillman, a Karuk priest who was at the state Capitol on Friday.

Groups: River should flow flee

Members of the Karuk and Yurok tribes and a group of commercial fishermen stopped in Sacramento on their way to Omaha, Neb., to crash billionaire Warren Buffett's annual meeting next Saturday with shareholders of his company, Berkshire Hathaway. They want a Berkshire Hathaway subsidiary, PacifiCorp, to remove four hydroelectric dams it operates on the Klamath River.

A freely flowing river would improve water quality and help restore the dramatically declining salmon population, the tribes and fishermen believe.

"Mr. Warren Buffett has the opportunity to make right a lot of the wrongs that were done to native people on the Klamath River," said Frankie Joe Myers, a member of the Yurok tribe.

The effort to lobby Buffett is the latest step in a long-running disagreement between PacifiCorp and about two dozen groups, including the tribes, who oppose the dams.

The company's 50-year licenses to operate the dams are up for renewal by federal regulators.

The Bush administration has told the company it must build fish ladders that could cost hundreds of millions of dollars if it wants to keep the dams. A recent California Energy Commission study concluded it would be cheaper for the company to demolish the dams than to build the ladders.

At this point, PacifiCorp is simultaneously continuing its efforts to renew its federal licenses while considering taking out at least some of the dams.

Bill Fehrman, PacifiCorp's president, said Friday that the company has been trying to reach an agreement with 26 groups that have a stake in the health of the river.

"As long as a solution involves an outcome that respects our customers' rights and our property rights, we're OK with that," he said. "If that includes some dam removal, that would have to be part of a more global solution."

Over the decades, the river's salmon runs have declined because of dams, pollution and water diversions for agriculture.

Population of the fish dropped last year to almost the lowest levels in two decades.

The tribes say they are losing not only their livelihood and a food source, but also a vital part of their culture.

Meanwhile, the Karuk priests have started to bathe in small creeks rather than the Klamath River during their ceremonies, Hillman said.

"All of us swam in that river growing up as kids," said Hillman, 22. "Now we tell the kids, 'Don't go in that water.'" #

Contra Costa Times – 4/27/07
By Mike Taugher, staff writer

FRESNO -- The federal agency responsible for protecting endangered species ignored information that showed the Delta smelt population crashed to its lowest level before approving a plan to increase water pumping out of the Delta, lawyers for environmental groups charged Thursday.

By disregarding that information, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service allowed farms and cities across the state to take water that was needed to help prevent the fish from going extinct, environmentalists contend.

The charge came during a court hearing in which environmentalists appeared to gain ground in their attempt to overturn a critically important permit that allows massive water-delivery projects near Tracy to operate, even though the pumps kill endangered smelt. In a separate lawsuit, they also are challenging a permit to kill salmon.

Lawyers for state and federal water agencies contend the permit is valid and should be upheld.

The hearing Thursday was the latest in a series of fast-moving court actions that are eroding the legal foundation upon which California's major water-delivery systems are allowed to operate.

Earlier this month, a judge in Alameda County Superior Court ruled that the larger of the two water projects, the State Water Project, is operating illegally because it lacks smelt and salmon permits required under the state's endangered species law.

Sensing that they are likely to lose another lawsuit, lawyers for water agencies urged U.S. District Judge Oliver Wanger not to immediately revoke the permit for the operations of the state pumps and the federal Central Valley Project.

"We would not like to see these two projects turned into a criminal enterprise because of the lack of an endangered species permit," said Gregory Wilkinson, a lawyer for the State Water Contractors, an association of water agencies that deliver water from the state-owned pumps to 25 million people from the East Bay to San Diego.

Wanger hinted strongly that he would rule in favor of the environmental groups, but he added that he did not intend to do anything "draconian," perhaps signaling he would not immediately revoke the permit or order pumps to be shut down.

Nevertheless, a finding that the federal permit is inadequate would deal a major blow to state water officials who are trying to stave off a looming court order in the Alameda County case that threatens to force them to cut off water deliveries around June 9.

"If he says this thing is invalid, it will be very embarrassing" to state water officials, said Trent Orr, a lawyer representing the Natural Resources Defense Council and other environmentalists in the lawsuit.

The state's plan to avert the shutdown is to get a determination from the state Department of Fish and Game that federal endangered species permits are sufficient.

But Fish and Game officials, who have said it will be difficult to endorse the federal permits because of widely acknowledged flaws, will have an even harder time if the federal permit is struck down.

"What does it mean to say this thing is consistent with something a federal judge has said is invalid?" Orr said.

Because of the phenomenal economic damage that would ensue, few believe the court actions will result in an extended cutoff of water deliveries. However, Thursday's hearing did appear to strengthen the hand of regulators if they want to obtain water for the Delta ecosystem that now goes to farms and cities.

Outside court, Wilkinson said state regulators could still endorse the federal permits. In part, he said, they appear to be working better this year because of adjustments in water operations. That could justify such a move on the part of state regulators, he said.

At the time the federal permit was issued in February 2005, biologists were circulating among themselves and to water managers information showing that Delta smelt and other fish in the Delta's open waters were in a worrying free fall.

And, they were reporting, the pumps were believed to be at least part of the cause of the emerging ecological crisis, along with invasive species and pollution.

Environmentalists also charged in the lawsuit that the permit did not take into account the future impact of climate change. And the permit relies too much on the discretion of agencies instead of imposing strict requirements to protect the fish, Orr argued.

Water agencies argued Thursday that the flexibility allows agencies to conserve fish while balancing competing demands for water.

But Wanger appeared skeptical.

"It appears that what has been done hasn't been effective, and therefore the answer is trust us?" he asked. "Is that what the law calls for?" #

With no rain expected to fall soon, the gates of the Red Bluff diversion dam are going to drop early this year to boost irrigation supplies in Tehama and Colusa counties.

A pumping plant has been releasing 465 cubic feet per second (cfs) of water into the main irrigation canal since the start of the month, but it hasn't been able to keep up with demand, said Jeff Sutton, general manager of the Tehama Colusa Canal Authority.

"Demand can be 900 to 1,700 cfs," he said.

Sutton called the early dropping of the gates an "emergency dam closure." The diversion should put 1,000 to 1,300 cfs into the canal that feeds 18 water districts encompassing 160,000 acres in the two counties, he said.

"It's to provide water that we can't pump," said Paul Freeman, the dam's division chief for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

The dam will be closed for one to 10 days between Sunday and May 8, according to the bureau. The closure will temporarily form Lake Red Bluff, a byproduct of the diversion, along the Sacramento River.

But don't get attached to the lake just yet.

Federal regulations that protect salmon and green sturgeon in the river require the 18-foot steel gates to be raised again for five days before Lake Red Bluff is formed officially for the season May 15.

The gates and the popular recreation lake will then be in place until Sept. 15.

Although it's the site of the Nitro Nationals Drag Boat Festival -- which draw about 30,000 spectators each Memorial Day weekend -- the lake's days could be numbered.

The federal government has proposed shortening or eliminating Lake Red Bluff's existence, adding more pumps to supply the canal, and lessening the time the dam's gates are down each year or getting rid of the dam completely.

Red Bluff city officials have opposed the plan, saying pulling the dam could sink recreation at the lake and the boat races -- costing the city an estimated $4.2 million.

Sutton said city officials also need to account for the economic impact the water users have in Tehama and Colusa counties, which produce $100 million in crops each year.

This year's emergency dam closure underlines the need for a permanent solution that will provide more reliable water early in the growing season to the canal, he said.

"It's too much to keep gambling on," Sutton said. #

Associated Press – 4/18/07
By Samantha Young, staff writer

SACRAMENTO -- Brushing aside state objections, a judge Wednesday reaffirmed his March decision that California must stop pumping water out of the delta within 60 days unless it complies with environmental laws protecting fish.

Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch filed an order reiterating his position that the Department of Water Resources lacks the proper permits or authority to run a key station that pumps water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta into the California Aqueduct.

"They submitted volumes of documents and declarations. The judge took one look at it, read it and said nothing has changed," said Bill Jennings, executive director of the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance.

The Department of Water Resources will appeal the decision, spokesman Ted Thomas said after the ruling became public.

In court filings, the department said it had the authority to run the Harvey O. Banks pumping plant, a station west of Stockton that sends water to Southern California, the San Francisco Bay area and the Central Valley.

Environmentalists and fishing groups have complained for years that the pumps suck in and kill threatened or endangered fish, including the chinook salmon and delta smelt, which are protected under the California Endangered Species Act.

The smelt, which average 3 inches long, are considered a key indicator of the health of the delta. Their numbers have been dwindling over the past few years as pumping has increased.

State officials have argued that the smelt are falling prey to other habitat changes and maintain that the department operates its pumps in a manner that does not lead to excessive fish kills.

The water department also has applied for authorization from state wildlife officials to run the pumps. A decision is expected within the next month, which could satisfy the judge.

If the pumps are shut down, state water deliveries couldn't continue without the Banks pumping station, according to the court order. It is the heart of the state water project and funnels 10,688 cubic feet per second of delta water through 11 pumps into the 444-mile long aqueduct.

More than 23 million Californians and 750,000 acres of farmland get water that passes through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. State officials have warned any interruption of its water deliveries would cause severe economic harm. #

Eureka Times Standard – 4/18/07
By John Driscoll, staff writer

American Indians, commercial fishermen and conservation groups plan to take their concerns about salmon-blocking dams on the Klamath River straight to the owner's ultimate chief -- billionaire investor Warren Buffett.

Representatives from the North Coast will head to Omaha, Neb., in early May to plead with Berkshire Hathaway Inc.'s CEO to take notice of the struggle over the fate of Pacificorp's dams. The company's shareholder meeting is the forum, and the tribes and fishermen plan to put on a brush dance in the vicinity of the gathering and perhaps bend the ear of investors.

Berkshire Hathaway's MidAmerican Energy Holdings bought Pacificorp nearly two years ago, after the Yurok, Hoopa, Karuk and Klamath tribes twice brought similar messages to previous owner Scottish Power.

”They didn't fix a damn thing,” said Hoopa Valley tribal member Merv George, who intends to bring a traditional redwood canoe to Omaha. “They just sold it to someone else.”

George said that he's optimistic that Buffett may only be uninformed about the effects his subsidiary's dams are having on Klamath salmon stocks. The mission to Omaha is an educational one, George said, that he hopes will spur Buffett to make decisions from the top. Pacificorp and MidAmerican, he said, have not been very helpful.

The trip to the Midwest takes place as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission considers issuing another 30- to 50-year license for the hydropower dams. Settlement talks between the company and stakeholders along the Klamath River are also proceeding, but have yet to produce tangible results.

Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and Conservation Commissioner Ronnie Pellegrini and her two daughters Eryn, 17, and Michaela, 14, are also making the trip. A fisherman's wife, Pellegrini said she hopes to bring a message that a healthy Klamath River is for the good of the fishing industry and others who depend on it.

”Everybody seems to want to take out the dams except Pacificorp,” Pellegrini said. “Maybe we can go around Pacificorp and convince Warren Buffett of all the benefits of taking out the dams.”

A spokesman for MidAmerican said that Pacificorp does inform its parent company of the status of negotiations and the relicensing process. Allan Urlis said Pacificorp is in charge of the negotiations.

”This is being managed and handled by Pacificorp,” Urlis said.

He declined to say what the reaction of company leaders might be to the presence of the North Coast contingent in May. A call to Pacificorp was not returned by deadline.

But the group is hoping to make an impression.

”We're going to take case to Berkshire: This subsidiary is not representing them very well,” said Karuk Tribe spokesman Craig Tucker. #

Senator Dianne Feinstein today endorsed Governor Schwarzenegger's $6 billion water infrastructure plan at a meeting today in Washington D.C. The two met to discuss California's major environmental and water infrastructure issues and her introduction of a national Low Carbon Fuel Standard consistent with the Governor's call to implement this groundbreaking policy at the federal level.

"I am very pleased to receive Senator Feinstein's support for this critically-needed water infrastructure plan to address California's growing water needs that include storage, conveyance and conservation," said Governor Schwarzenegger. "Today's announcement proves that California's water needs are not a partisan issue."

The Governor outlined his $6 billion plan, Senate Bill 59 authored by Senator Dave Cogdill, to build more surface and groundwater storage, protect the Delta and promote conservation measures statewide. The proposal includes $4.5 billion for increased water storage, $1 billion for Delta sustainability, and $450 million for conservation and restoration projects.

The Governor also applauded Senator Feinstein's introduction of the Clean Fuels and Vehicles Act last month that would establish a comprehensive national program to increase the availability of low carbon fuels and to require a reduction in emissions from vehicles, based on California's own vehicle tailpipe emissions law. If passed, this bill will reduce carbon dioxide emissions from the transportation sector by 22% below projected levels by 2030 (or 662 million metric tons of carbon dioxide), equivalent to taking over 108 million cars off the road for a year.

"I applaud Senator Feinstein for proposing this policy at the national level. A healthy environment, a growing economy and strong national security are all reasons why we need a Low Carbon Fuel Standard for America," said the Governor.

"In California, the Low Carbon Fuel Standard will more than triple the size of our renewable fuels market and put more than 7 million alternative fuel or hybrid vehicles on our roads by 2020 without any new government spending. It's also great for our national security because we will be less dependent on foreign oil and less vulnerable to price shocks and instability beyond our borders."

California's Low Carbon Fuel Standard was introduced by Governor Schwarzenegger earlier this year to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and lower California's reliance on foreign oil. By 2020 the standard will reduce the carbon intensity of California's passenger vehicle fuels by at least 10 percent. In February, the Governor called for a national Low Carbon Fuel Standard.

"I would also like to thank Senator Feinstein for her leadership on levee repair funding and for pushing $94.1 million through the Senate Appropriations Committee to help fix California's eroding levees. Once approved by Congress and the President, this money will be used by the Army Corps of Engineers to repair 213 sites on the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers that were damaged by storms in 2006," said Governor Schwarzenegger.

The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta supplies water to 25 million people in California and is the lifeblood of California's $32 billion agriculture industry, irrigating millions of acres of highly productive farmland. However, the Delta is vulnerable to salt water contamination from rising sea levels and natural disasters. Many of the 1,100 miles of deteriorating levees throughout the Delta are at risk for failure due to earthquakes and major flood events.

Previously, the federal government shared repair costs with the state. But the current federal budget has significantly cut Corps funding, forcing California to contribute an additional $175 million for levee repairs. The State has completed repairs for 33 critical erosion sites and is working to complete, by September 2007, another 71 critical sites that resulted from the 2006 flood damage. #

Editorial: Strike up the band for salmon season
Eureka Times Standard – 4/12/07

If anybody is in need of some good news for a change, it's the North Coast's fishermen. Last year, dismal returns of salmon to the Klamath River resulted in the West Coast's most restrictive management measures ever. Salmon fishing was virtually shut down along 700 miles of the North Coast. On top of that, this year's Dungeness crab season has been a fizzle after early high hopes.

But this year, the brass band is playing “Happy Days are Here Again” as every kind of salmon fisherman -- commercial and recreational, ocean and stream, and tribal, too -- are anticipating the most liberal season in years.

And the optimism not only affects locals -- it will be a needed boost to the tourism economy, as the salmon frenzy will surely attract thousands of anglers from outside the area.

A lot of people deserve credit for making it happen, but first on the list has to be the Klamath Management Zone Coalition, a group from Northern California and southern Oregon that not only worked to interpret the mass of scientific data used to determine regulations, but then lobbied for the best fishing opportunities.

The plan was approved last week by the Pacific Fisheries Management Council, and the final OK is expected from National Marine Fisheries Service by May 1, just days before the sports season begins -- one of the earliest in 20 years. And although the commercial season in these parts is limited in order to protect coastal fall-run chinooks, the season is open for three months south of Point Arena.

And the fishing fiesta may keep going, because salmon look abundant for next season, too. #

Associated Press – 4/10/07
By Samantha Young, staff writer

SACRAMENTO - Democratic lawmakers Monday proposed legislation that would balance the habitat and water supply in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, a fragile ecosystem that provides drinking water to two-thirds of state residents.

The bill highlights five possible strategies, with a mandate that the Legislature end decades of debate and select a fix-it plan for the delta by 2008.

"Let's get to work and pick one," said Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento.

The lawmakers seized upon a set of recycled ideas promoted earlier this year in a report by the Public Policy Institute of California.

Among the potential solutions is piping water around the delta by building a canal. That would guarantee water deliveries to farmers, cities in Southern California and the San Francisco Bay Area if a levee were to break and seawater rushed in. A 1982 initiative to build such a canal was rejected by voters.

The Democrats' bill is the latest attempt to address problems in a vital estuary that drains more than 40 percent of the state's land mass but is beset by trouble, from disappearing native fish to sinking islands and decade-old levees in need of repair.

Previous attempts to address delta problems have been stymied by the myriad special interests that include cities, farmers, local irrigation districts and environmentalists.

The highest profile attempt of recent years is the California and Federal Bay-Delta Program, a state and federal joint effort started in 1994. Its goal was to end long-running disputes about delta water and restore the region's ecology. But critics of the CalFed program say it has failed to live up to its mission, despite more than a decade of work and $3 billion.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger weighed in with his own plan earlier this year, appointing a task force to study potential solutions.

"All of us have to give a little in order to make the system better," said Sen. Mike Machado, D-Stockton.

The other ideas include a proposal to fortify several levees, creating a channel to send water through the delta, and reducing the amount of exported water.

In a separate action related to delta water, the state Department of Water Resources on Monday sought authorization to operate pumps it uses to send water out of the delta to cities and farms.

The move comes two weeks after an Alameda County Superior Court judge ordered the pumps at the Harvey O. Banks plant to be shut down within 60 days unless the state complies with environmental laws designed to protect endangered fish.

The pumps are crucial for water deliveries throughout California, but also suck in and kill fish species that are threatened or endangered, including the chinook salmon and delta smelt.

State water officials want to avoid the time-consuming process of applying for permits. Instead, they are asking the state Department of Fish and Game to show that the pumping operations comply with the California Endangered Species Act. #

A national directive by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers could devastate scenery and wildlife habitat in California by forcing Central Valley flood control officials to chop down virtually all trees and shrubs on their levees.

A compromise is being negotiated, but unless the policy changes, tree-lined banks on 1,600 miles of levees in the Valley could be transformed into barren culverts within a year.

"It's hard to say how draconian these measures will be," said Gary Hobgood, an environmental scientist with the California Department of Fish and Game. "As it stands now, California has lost 97 percent of its riparian habitat since the arrival of Europeans. So we're down to this last thread of habitat."

The conflict highlights a difficult dance by federal and state officials who must weigh the need for no-frills flood control and California's tradition of also using levees for environmental protection and visual esthetics.

"Let's not forget we are a very proud city of trees. Now they're trying to take this away from us," said Sacramento artist Gregory Kondos, whose paintings of tree-dappled levees have earned him a worldwide following. "We're going to lose a landmark. It's not going to be anything that we can be proud of."

At issue is a national Corps of Engineers policy now being applied in California. It requires levees to be cleared of all vegetation to preserve channel capacity and allow access for inspection and repair. The policy is largely based on conditions on the Mississippi and Missouri rivers, where ample wildlife habitat exists between levees and the water's edge.

But in California, levees were built close together after the Gold Rush to create high water velocities to flush mining debris out of rivers. In most areas, there is little space between levees and the water, and vegetation on levees provides the only riverside habitat.

The issue first came to light in February 2007 when the corps released a national list of levees that failed maintenance standards. That review was ordered by Congress after deadly levee failures in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina.

A revised list released Monday shows that 32 levee districts in California failed maintenance standards.

The list is likely to grow. Many Valley levee districts have yet to be evaluated against the national policy, including those in Sacramento, where tree-shaded levees help define the urban experience.

Hobgood said riverside habitat is essential to a variety of wildlife, from providing nesting sites for birds to giving shelter and shade for fish in the rivers. The corps' maintenance manual for the Sacramento River flood control system actually encourages planting vegetation on levees.

"We have coordinated with environmental agencies for a number of years now to incorporate vegetation in our flood control systems to provide shade and habitat for endangered species here in California," said Jim Sandner, operations and readiness chief at the Sacramento Corps of Engineers district.

Dana Cruikshank, a spokesman at the agency's headquarters in Washington, said an exemption is not in the works for California. But the corps is drafting a new national standard to allow some vegetation on levees. That standard should be finished by year-end.

"Mostly very small brush, very small trees in some circumstances, could remain," Cruikshank said, "but not anything beyond a very small tree. And of course there will be some spots where there would be no vegetation at all."

The corps' regional commander, Brig. Gen. John McMahon, said Friday that removing trees won't necessarily make levees safer, because rotting roots left behind could provide a path for seepage that could compromise the levee.

McMahon hopes to tailor the forthcoming standard to California's needs. The goal, for instance, would be to remove trees where levee-strengthening is needed, but also to allow some vegetation where strength is not a concern.

"There's no doubt in my mind our headquarters would like one standard applied broadly across the full spectrum of levees," said McMahon. "I personally don't think that's the right tack to take in this situation. Not all vegetation on levees is bad."

Until the new standard is released, local corps officials are telling levee districts not to cut trees.

But time is running out: Local levee districts have three months to develop a plan to satisfy the corps, then nine months to carry it out.

If they fail to comply, districts will be ineligible for federal assistance to repair levees after a flood. Because most districts can't afford repairs on their own, the burden could fall on state and local taxpayers.

To make matters worse, local districts are squeezed by other rules that protect vegetation, said Mike Hardesty, president of the Central Valley Flood Control Association. If they remove all trees and shrubs, as the corps headquarters wants, they could face penalties from other state and federal agencies for destroying habitat.

The state Department of Water Resources next week will launch a routine spring inspection of Central Valley levees. It has increased its inspection staff from six to nine people to measure the habitat that would be lost if the current national policy is ultimately enforced.

Jeremy Arrich, chief of Water Resources' flood project integrity and inspection branch, said the goal is to persuade the Corps of Engineers to consider natural resources in its maintenance policies. Without that consideration, he said, many of Sacramento's urban levees are likely to fail the national policy when next evaluated by the corps.

The result could be an end to the gently shaded levees that have characterized the region for generations.

"Those beautiful trees, to me, are Sacramento," said Kondos. "If we can't protect that, there's something wrong with our world." #

California's sport salmon-fishing season opened this weekend, but many amateur anglers hopeful of landing a wild chinook came back disappointed.

"I've never seen it this slow," said Moe Morrison, 72, who went on his first fishing trip in 1964. The retiree from Mountain View gathered with hundreds sport fishers gathered at the Moss Landing Harbor in as early as 3 a.m. Saturday to buy tackle and pick up permits, but like many compatriots he never even had to get his net wet.

The slow start was an ominous omen to superstitious anglers still reeling after a dismal 2006. Last year, commercial fishermen