[env-trinity] Letter to Editor Trinity Journal-Reclamation the largest hurdle to fisheries restoration

[Tom Stokely]

Reclamation the largest hurdle to fisheries restoration

http://www.trinityjournal.com/news/2011-04-27/Opinion/Reclamation_the_largest_hurdle_to_fisheries_restor.html 

FROM TOM STOKELY CALIFORNIA WATER IMPACT NETWORK MT. SHASTA, CALIF.
I write in response to Tom Rodgers’ letter “Junk science on Trinity flows” which appeared in the April 13 Trinity Journal.

I understand the frustration that bass fishermen and Trinity Lake users feel toward higher Trinity River fishery flows due to reservoir drawdown. However, the real culprit is the Bureau of Reclamation, which has never made a promise it has kept in Trinity County.

The impacts from Trinity Lake drawdown such as impacts to non-native bass were recognized when the Environmental Impact Statement and Report was prepared for Bruce Babbitt’s 2000 Trinity River Record of Decision that increased river flows to roughly 47 percent of the reservoir inflow. A number of mitigation measures were identified to reduce significant impacts, which included a barebones minimum pool for the reservoir, a Trinity Lake fish stocking program as well as extending boat ramps to allow improved low-water access. Predictably, BOR is now saying that they aren’t required to provide any mitigation for boat ramps or fish stocking, and they have said in writing that the inadequate minimum pool requirement for Trinity Lake is not “hard and fast.” BOR has even gone so far as to say that California’s temperature standards for the Trinity River are not something that they have to comply with. See http://www.c-win.org/webfm_send/141 for the letter on temperatures and a minimum pool.

Regarding Rodgers’ allegations of ‘junk science,’ I would like to point out that this year is considered a wet water year, not a normal water year that he alleges.

The river gauging station at Lewiston was first established in 1912 before the dams were built, so historical flows can be determined since that time. According to those historic river gauges, river flows of 11,000 cfs at Lewiston were common before the dams were built, but very rare since then.

I think if there is any criticism of the science behind the Trinity River Restoration Program, it is that the Bureau of Reclamation has largely ignored restoration of fish populations in tributaries such as the South Fork Trinity River and has instead focused millions on reshaping the river channel upstream of the North Fork, along with studying the river to death. It will be impossible to restore anything close to historic fish runs while the tributaries are ignored, especially for steelhead and coho.

In summary, I’d have to quote a friend of mine who once said “The Bureau of Reclamation is really good at turning the victims against each other.” As long as various Trinity interests keep taking cheap shots at each other, the Bureau of Reclamation will drain Trinity Lake to a mud puddle during the next drought, and the salmon will ultimately die because there will be no cold water left in Trinity Lake to sustain them. The key to keeping Trinity Lake high and survival of the salmon and steelhead fisheries is establishment of an enforceable minimum cold-water pool at Trinity Lake. The California Water Impact Network continues to work toward that goal.



Tom Stokely
Water Policy Analyst/Media Contact
California Water Impact Network
V/FAX 530-926-9727
Cell 530-524-0315
tstokely at att.net
http://www.c-win.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20110427/d1b35e6a/attachment.html>