<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16640" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><BR><BR><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>FOR
IMMEDIATE RELEASE April 16, 2008<BR><BR>CONTACT:<BR>Mike Sherwood, Earthjustice
at 510-550-6700<BR>Craig Noble, NRDC at 415-875-6100 or 415-601-8235
(mobile)<BR>Zeke Grader, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations
at<BR>415-561-5080 ex 224<BR>Christina Swanson, The Bay Institute at
530-756-9021<BR>Gary Mulcahy, Winnemem Wintu Tribe at 916-991-8493<BR>Sejal
Choksi, Baykeeper at 925-330-7757<BR><BR>Judge Tosses Biological Opinion for
Salmon and Steelhead in California<BR>Groups say delta water project operations
must protect water supply for<BR>fish and people<BR><BR>FRESNO, Calif. – A
federal judge has invalidated a water plan that would<BR>have allowed more
pumping from the San Francisco Bay Delta at the expense<BR>of five species of
protected salmon and steelhead trout. Fishing and<BR>conservation groups and a
California tribe called the ruling a victory for<BR>the millions of Californians
who depend on the delta for drinking water,<BR>fishing jobs and agriculture. The
ruling comes in the wake of federal<BR>fisheries managers’ unprecedented April
10 decision to cancel this year’s<BR>salmon fishing season because of a record
decline in spawning fish.<BR><BR>The decision is the second time the court has
ruled that water export plans<BR>would harm the threatened estuary. The court
scheduled a conference on<BR>April 25 for the parties to address developing
interim remedies to protect<BR>the fish.<BR><BR>In his opinion Judge Oliver W.
Wanger relied on the National Marine<BR>Fisheries Services’ (NMFS) own finding
that diverting water from the<BR>bay-delta was killing huge numbers of salmon.
He said, “This morbid<BR>projection is inconsistent, if not irreconcilable” with
the agency’s<BR>opinion that the project operations did not jeopardize the
survival of the<BR>fish. He also faulted the agency for failing to analyze the
effects of<BR>global warming on the fish, calling that failure “arbitrary
and<BR>capricious.”<BR><BR>The court also cited NMFS’ findings that “current
operations result in the<BR>loss of 42 percent of the juvenile winter-run
Chinook population, and<BR>proposed project effects are expected to result in an
additional 3 to 20<BR>percent loss of the juvenile population.”<BR><BR>NMFS also
found that proposed water project operations would kill as many<BR>as 66 percent
of Central Valley steelhead and 57 percent of juvenile spring<BR>run Chinook
salmon – likely leading to the extirpation of the spring run in<BR>the
Sacramento River and steelhead in the Central Valley. These findings,<BR>the
court ruled, are the “diametric opposite” of the finding that the<BR>projects
would not jeopardized listed salmon species.<BR><BR>“When most of our native
fish species are struggling to survive, the water<BR>project’s plans to
eliminate habitat, reduce cold water flow requirements<BR>and increase delta
exports made no sense,” said Dr. Christina Swanson, a<BR>biologist with The Bay
Institute, a plaintiff in the case. “Ecological<BR>collapse in our rivers and in
the delta is not just bad for fish, it’s bad<BR>for the millions of people who
depend on delta water for farming and<BR>drinking.”<BR><BR>The plaintiffs
challenged a 2004 long-term water plan known as OCAP<BR>(Operating Criteria and
Plan) that would have allowed increased exports<BR>south of the delta by
reversing many of the decade-old protections credited<BR>with saving endangered
winter-run Chinook salmon from extinction, including<BR>relaxing cold water flow
requirements and eliminating nearly half of the<BR>available spawning habitat in
the Sacramento River. These operational<BR>changes have corresponded with
significant declines in protected Chinook<BR>salmon populations since 2004. This
year’s salmon run has largely failed to<BR>show up.<BR><BR>“Salmon need cool,
clean water,” said Kate Poole, a senior attorney with<BR>the Natural Resources
Defense Council (NRDC), a plaintiff in the case.<BR>“Meeting their needs can
keep clean water flowing from our taps as well,<BR>without losing our salmon
fishing industry.”<BR><BR>“We’ve never seen the Sacramento salmon return as bad
as this year,” said<BR>Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast
Federation of<BR>Fisherman's Associations, a plaintiff in the case.
“California’s water<BR>projects must be operated in a way that helps protect
these commercially<BR>important species, rather than driving them to
extinction.”<BR><BR>The court’s ruling follows an August 31, 2007 decision to
protect the delta<BR>smelt. In that ruling the court ordered state and federal
water managers to<BR>reoperate the giant pumps that draw water from the delta to
supply farms<BR>and cities in the San Joaquin Valley and Southern California.
The fishing<BR>and conservation groups say keeping enough fresh water in the
delta is<BR>vital to protecting the fragile ecosystem.<BR><BR>Biologists have
grown alarmed in recent years about a cascading series of<BR>crashing delta fish
populations; salmon, steelhead, delta smelt, striped<BR>bass, longfin smelt,
sturgeon and Sacramento splittail are all in trouble.<BR><BR>“With his decision
today, Judge Wanger has placed salmon survival back at<BR>the center of
California’s struggle to protect our natural heritage,” said<BR>Mike Sherwood,
an attorney from Earthjustice who represented the coalition<BR>of fishing and
conservationists. “There are several man-made factors that<BR>have contributed
to the collapse of salmon runs. One factor is pumping too<BR>much of our water
from the delta and exporting it south. This ruling makes<BR>it clear that there
are biological limits to the amount of water we can<BR>export south.”<BR><BR>The
Delta’s fragile ecosystem and drinking water supplies already face<BR>severe
pollution threats from agricultural pesticides and dairy waste,”<BR>said Sejal
Choksi, program director for San Francisco Baykeeper. “Today’s<BR>ruling is a
huge step forward in restoring our Delta to a healthy state.”<BR><BR>The court
will now schedule hearings to establish an interim salmon<BR>protection plan for
project operations. Agencies predict that a new<BR>Biological Opinion for salmon
will be complete by December 2008.<BR><BR>Conservationists say water managers
could restore the delta by following<BR>the advice of the state’s own master
water plan, which identifies<BR>conservation, water recycling and better
groundwater management as the<BR>biggest, cheapest sources of untapped water
supply.<BR><BR>BACKGROUND<BR><BR>Prior to construction of the state and federal
delta water pumping systems,<BR>chinook (or “king”) salmon and steelhead were
abundant in the Sacramento<BR>and San Joaquin River systems. Sacramento River
salmon were of great<BR>cultural and spiritual importance to the Winnemem Wintu
Tribe and remain a<BR>major economic contributor to northern
California.<BR><BR>As a part of the pumping projects, a necklace of dams was
constructed up<BR>and down the western slope of the Sierra Nevada on every major
river<BR>flowing into the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers blocking the
upstream<BR>migration of chinook salmon and steelhead to and from their
historic<BR>spawning grounds. Of the 6,000 miles of historic steelhead
spawning<BR>grounds, today only 300 miles remain. Friant Dam on the San Joaquin
River<BR>resulted in the extinction of the spring-run chinook salmon in that
river.<BR>Shasta and Keswick Dams on the Sacramento River blocked the
winter-run<BR>chinook salmon from their historic spawning grounds, forcing them
to spawn<BR>in a 40-mile stretch of less favorable river habitat below those
dams.<BR><BR>Every year the pumping of huge volumes of fresh water out of
the<BR>Sacramento-San Joaquin River delta sucks in and grinds up juvenile
salmon<BR>and steelhead as they attempt migrate down the rivers and though the
delta<BR>on their way to the ocean. As a result, Sacramento River winter-run
Chinook<BR>salmon, Central Valley spring-run Chinook salmon and Central
Valley<BR>steelhead populations have plummeted from historic abundance and all
three<BR>species are protected under the federal Endangered Species
Act.<BR><BR>In August 2004, federal scientists charged with reviewing the plan
to<BR>increase pumping to 8 million acre feet concluded that doing so
would<BR>illegally jeopardize protected salmon. However, after
political<BR>interference, the agency flip flopped and released a final opinion
in<BR>October 2004 that concluded that the project operations plan would not
harm<BR>listed salmon and steelhead species. But after several negative
independent<BR>science reviews and widespread concern over inappropriate
political<BR>influences on the opinion, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the
State<BR>Department of Water Resources asked NOAA Fisheries to reconsider the
plan<BR>in April/May 2006. Yet the agencies continued to implement the new
plan<BR>without any lawful analysis of its impacts to listed fish species while
a<BR>new opinion is written.<BR><BR>The plaintiff coalition that launched the
legal challenge includes: Pacific<BR>Coast Federation of Fishermen's
Associations and the Institute for<BR>Fisheries Resources, The Bay Institute,
Baykeeper, California Trout,<BR>Friends of the River, Natural Resources Defense
Council, Northern<BR>California Council of the Federation of Fly Fishers, and
the Winnemem Wintu<BR>Tribe.<BR><BR>Read the decision online here:<BR></FONT><A
href=""><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=3>http://www.earthjustice.org/library/legal_docs/salmon-decision-41608.pdf</FONT></A></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>