| Reflections on the tragic 100th anniversary
of PG&E’s Potter Valley Project (PVP) tunnel, Cape Horn
Dam, Van Arsdale Lake, and later construction of Scott Dam and Lake
Pillsbury.
David Keller, Bay Area Director, Friends of the Eel River
The Eel River has been severely damaged during the last century
by diverting water through the PVP to the Russian River. It’s
time to restore the health and wealth taken from the Eel River.
Here are 7 reasons to take down the dams and save the Eel River.
1. They don’t make rivers like they used to: fish, wildlife
and human friendly, abundant and self-cleansing, resilient and self-sustaining.
Restoration of the Eel River and other coastal rivers is essential
for all species’ survival and prosperity in the future. Life
depends on water, and we must stop abusing this incredible treasure,
and our soil, timber and fishery resources, until they are damaged
beyond repair. If we continue to practice “cut and run”
water exploitation, where will we go next when these resources are
gone?
2. We are not willing to allow the extinction of California’s
native coastal Salmon (Coho, Chinook) and Steelhead. Their survival
and recovery includes restoration on all our coastal rivers and
streams, including the Eel River, which was once one of California’s
most abundant salmon bearing rivers. Its 3684 square mile watershed
is the third largest in California, and cannot be lost as productive
home to these federally and state protected species.
Damming and diverting Eel River flows prevents fish from migrating
to spawning gravels in over 750 stream miles of prime, snow-melt
fed cold water headwaters habitat, bringing ocean nutrients upstream,
and prevents juveniles from journeying to the Pacific. Water temperatures
are too hot and flows too low to support healthy salmonid populations.
Dam elevations too high for fish ladders and poorly designed fish
screens at the tunnel intakes also take an extreme toll on fish.
West coast salmon populations have collapsed. The 2008 commercial
and sport ocean salmon seasons have been closed for the first time
ever in all of California and most of Oregon, costing millions of
dollars to the local economies.
3. We can no longer build our civilization as if there are no limits
to water, wildlife and energy. Generations of engineers dammed and
diverted rivers, based on the perception that there were abundant
natural resources and scarce people. But, now there are abundant
people, scarce natural resources, and global climate change. Water
viewed as a commodity for sale to the highest bidders, will not
get us through the next century. To ensure a sustainable future,
engineers must be given new goals and tasks by our policy makers:
how to get the same – or better – results for us while
using far less water and energy. Higher efficiencies and reuse of
highly treated wastewater to offset current and future potable water
use are critical components of our new path of demand reductions.
We need effective economic and legal incentives to leave more water
in our rivers.
We must fundamentally change the directions given to our engineers,
bureaucrats and utility rate setters by public policy makers. This
includes Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Bureau
of Reclamation (USBR), California State Water Resources Control
Board (SWRCB), California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), Sonoma
County Water Agency (SCWA), and a host of other legislative and
regulatory agencies. These agencies have failed to protect and restore
the public trust resources, including our National Wild and Scenic
designated Eel River.
4. The Eel River Watershed belongs to the people of California.
Under California’s constitution, citizens own all the water
in the state. Water law allows you to get a ‘right’
to use water in a reasonable and beneficial way, but not ownership
of the water. The Constitution importantly prohibits “the
waste or unreasonable use or unreasonable method of use or unreasonable
method of diversion of water.”
Back to top |
The California Supreme Court has concluded
that “the public trust is an affirmation of the duty of the
State to protect the people’s common heritage of streams,
lakes, marshlands, and tidelands… The State has an affirmative
duty to take the public trust into account in the planning and allocation
of water resources, and to protect public trust uses whenever feasible.”
(National Audubon Society v. Superior Court of Alpine County).
We have a legal, ethical and moral obligation to be good stewards,
to preserve the value and health of our watersheds and their complex
environment, and to protect our common resources forever. The current
damages to the Eel River violate these principles of law and stewardship.
5. The Russian River doesn’t need the water diverted from
the Eel River. 120,000 to 180,000 acre feet of water are diverted
year round from the Eel River through the PVP, then released into
the Russian River. Many stakeholders have become dependent on this
century-old transfer, and fear relinquishing the water wealth. From
Potter Valley agriculture to filling Lake Mendocino, the Eel’s
water is sent down the Russian River to serve municipal, agricultural,
residential and industrial growth and users in Mendocino, Sonoma
and Marin Counties. Yet, not one dime has been paid to communities
in the Eel River watershed for this theft.
According to the SWRCB, major segments of the Russian River are
‘over appropriated’: more water is taken in dry seasons
from the river and its tributaries than is naturally coming into
the system from rainfall, snowmelt, aquifer and groundwater discharges.
This illegal abuse of the Russian River is masked by the transfers
of Eel River water.
This practice damages both rivers. Russian River residents, water
suppliers and businesses must learn how to live within their own
water budget. This transfer of water has cost the Eel River’s
recreational fishing and boating industry over $6M per year in lost
income, jobs and productivity. If Russian River customers’
water bills actually included the costs of restoring the Eel River,
watershed management practices would change rapidly.
6. The PVP is obsolete and is bad for river health: neither Scott
nor Cape Horn dams were designed for flood control. Instead, they
provide flows to PG&E’s now antiquated, inefficient hydropower
generator, producing a maximum of 9.2mW when everything is working.
This is not “green energy”. More efficient electrical
usage in the service area alone could easily save more than PVP
generates.
The dams hinder fish migration and prevent new gravels and sediments
from flowing downstream to replenish spawning grounds, and cause
increased erosion of the river bed. Dams fill with these sediments,
reducing their capacity, and have lifespans further shortened by
seismic and geotechnical faults. The costs of correcting these and
other problems are staggering, and PG&E has no budget to fix
them. The true cost of this electricity is huge.
7. Salmon and Steelhead are not cute, furry and cuddly, but they
have been part of the complex life of the Eel River for millions
of years. The Eel River is a remarkably inspiring and beautiful
river. Let’s not lose this all during our watch.
|
Friends
of the Eel River