Archive for the 'Salmonid/Wildlife Impacts' Category

PSA: 28th Annual Salmonid Restoration Mar. 10-13

Published on March 4, 2010 in Environmental Impacts, Salmonid/Wildlife Impacts and Streams and Wetlands. 0 Comments
Hello,
Please help publicize the upcoming Salmonid Restoration Federation and American Fisheries Society Cal-Neva Conference with the attached press release and conference announcement.

Please email SRF if you can help distribute conference agenda packets and posters. Please indicate how many we should send and to what address.
Thank you,
PSA:
28th Annual Salmonid Restoration & 44th Annual AFS Cal-Neva Conference Agenda and Registration Online at www.calsalmon.org
The joint conference will be held March 10-13 at the Redding Convention Center in Redding, CA. The conference theme is “Fisheries Science and Restoration in a Changing Climate” and will include watershed tours, workshops, outstanding scientific presentations on coastal stream habitat restoration and salmon recovery. The conference will features special events including a screening of The filmRiver of Renewal , an AFS Social at Turtle Bay, a Poster Session and Job Fair, a 5 K Spawning run, and a wild salmon banquet with cabaret and music by Absynth Quintet http://www.absynthquintet.com/
Conference Announcement:
28th Annual Salmonid Restoration & 44th Annual AFS Cal-Neva Conference Agenda and Registration Online at www.calsalmon.org
Salmonid Restoration Federation and the California-Nevada American Fisheries Society chapter will co-host the 28th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference and the 44th Annual Cal-Neva AFS Conference in Redding, California. We are truly excited about this new collaborative effort. The theme of the conference is Fisheries Restoration and Science in a Changing Climate. The first two days of the conference will be filled with symposia, full-day workshops continuing education classes, and field tours. A half-day plenary session will be followed by 1.5 days of technical, biological, and policy-related concurrent sessions. This conference will focus on a broad range of salmonid, fisheries, and watershed restoration topics of concern to restoration practitioners, and the scientific fisheries community.
This year the conference will feature workshops on topics including Water Quality and TMDLs, Floodplain Restoration, a Fisheries Engineering and Stream Restoration Symposium, Stormwater Pollution Workshop, and continuing education classes on presentation skills, acoustic tag training, and River 2 D technology. Concurrent sessions include: the State of California Salmonids, Anadromous Salmonid Monitoring, Stream Channel Restoration, Central Valley Salmonid Recovery Planning, Marine and Estuarine Fisheries Research: Conservation and Management, Status, Ecology and Management of Inland Fishes and Anadromous/Migratory Fishes, Water Diversions and Fish Impediments, FERC Relicensing and Restoration Opportunities, Planning, Documenting, and Evaluating Fish Restoration Activities, Instream Flow for Salmonids, and a Contributed Papers session.
Field Tours will visit restoration projects in Clear Creek, Battle Creek, the Upper Trinity River, the Shasta River, the Upper Sacramento River and Redding urban streams. The Plenary session will feature David Montgomery author of King of Fish: the Thousand Year Run of Salmon and Dirt: the Erosion of Civilization, Larry Brown from the US Geological Survey who will discuss climate change and native fishes in the San Francisco Estuary and watershed, and Dan Bottom from the National Marine Fisheries Service will discuss “Pacific Salmon at the Crossroads and how Resilient are Salmon Ecosystems.” Maria Rea from NOAA will discuss salmonid recovery planning efforts for salmon in California.
SRF and AFS have created a dynamic conference agenda that addresses pressing issues that affect salmonid recovery and fisheries throughout the Pacific Northwest. We are also combining some of the unique features of each of our conferences. AFS will host a social at Turtle Bay, a job fair as part of the joint poster session, and a Saturday morning 5K Spawning Run. SRF will feature our annual meeting, the film screening of River of Renewal, a poster session and reception, banquet, awards ceremony, cabaret, and dance band Absynth Quintet.
For more information about the conference, to see the agenda, or to register, please visit www. calsalmon.org

28th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference March 10-13

Published on March 2, 2010 in Salmonid/Wildlife Impacts and Streams and Wetlands. 0 Comments

Hello,

The Salmonid Restoration Federation is excited to announce the upcoming 28th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference. Please share the following information with your constituents. If you are unable to include all of the following information please review Public Service Announcement attached.

28th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference March 10-13, 2010 in Redding, CA

In 2010 the Salmonid Restoration Federation and the California-Nevada American Fisheries Society chapter will co-host the 28th Annual Salmonid Restoration Conference and the 44th Annual Cal-Neva AFS Conference in Redding, California. We are truly excited about this new collaborative effort. The theme of the conference is Fisheries Restoration and Science in a Changing Climate. The first two days of the conference will be filled with symposia, full-day workshops continuing education classes, and field tours. A half-day plenary session will be followed by 1.5 days of technical, biological, and policy-related concurrent sessions. This conference will focus on a broad range of salmonid, fisheries, and watershed restoration topics of concern to restoration practitioners, and the scientific fisheries community.

This year the conference will feature workshops on topics including Water Quality and TMDLs, Floodplain Restoration, a Fisheries Engineering and Stream Restoration Symposium and continuing education classes on presentation skills, acoustic tag training, and River 2 D technology. Concurrent sessions include: the State of California Salmonids, Anadromous Salmonid Monitoring, Stream Channel Restoration, Central Valley Salmonid Recovery Planning, Marine and Estuarine Fisheries Research: Conservation and Management, Status, Ecology and Management of Inland Fishes and Anadromous/Migratory Fishes, Water Diversions and Fish Impediments, FERC Relicensing and Restoration Opportunities, Planning, Documenting, and Evaluating Fish Restoration Activities, Instream Flow for Salmonids, and a contributed papers session.

Field Tours will visit restoration projects in Clear Creek, Battle Creek, the Upper Trinity River, the Shasta River, the Upper Sacramento River, and a Redding urban streams tour including Sulphur Creek, Salt Creek, and gravel augmentation projects.

The Plenary session will feature David Montgomery author of King of Fish: the Thousand Year Run of Salmon and Dirt: the Erosion of Civilization, Larry Brown from the US Geological Survey who will discuss climate change and native fishes in the San Francisco Estuary and watershed, and Dan Bottom from the National Marine Fisheries Service will discuss “Pacific Salmon at the Crossroads and how Resilient are Salmon Ecosystems.” Maria Rea from NOAA will discuss salmonid recovery planning efforts for salmon in California.

SRF and AFS are collaborating to create a dynamic conference agenda that addresses pressing issues that affect salmonid recovery and fisheries throughout the Pacific Northwest. We are also combining some of the unique features of each of our conferences. AFS will host a social at Turtle Bay, a job fair as part of the joint poster session, and a Saturday morning 5K Spawning Run. SRF will feature our annual meeting followed by the Redding premiere of Rivers of Renewal, a poster session and reception, and out annual banquet, awards ceremony, and cabaret and Latin dance band Sambada. For more information about the conference or to see the exciting agenda, please visit www. calsalmon.org.

Best,

Melissa Scott

Fresno Judge Halts Protection Plan For Winter Run Chinook

Published on February 15, 2010 in Salmonid/Wildlife Impacts. 0 Comments

Dan Bacher, Feb 5, 2010

(Fresno) Federal Judge Oliver Wanger on Friday afternoon put a temporary hold on a federal plan (biological opinion) protecting salmon from the fish-killing California Delta pumps that deliver water to corporate agribusiness and southern California.

Chinook Salmon

The ruling, in place for 14 days, allows for unlimited pumping, at least unless the projects hit “take” limits for salmon killed at the pumps or until Delta smelt protections are triggered in the Delta. The ruling can be extended by the judge for 14 more days.

Westlands Water District, the “Darth Vader” of California water politics, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) and other water districts requested the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) so that water exports from the Delta could be increased. The pumping restrictions are designed to protect migrating juvenile winter-run Chinook salmon from being killed in the massive federal and state project pumps.

Endangered winter run Chinook salmon are unique to the Sacramento River system. After migrating for thousands of years to spawn in the McCloud River every year, the run was blocked from migrating to its spawning grounds after the construction of Shasta Dam. Since then, the fish has been forced to spawn in the Sacramento below Keswick Dam and has declined dramatically due to increased Delta water exports, declining water quality, unscreened or poorly screened diversions and other factors.

The positive news is that Wanger ruled for the federal fishery agencies, Earthjustice and NRDC on the Endangered Species Act (ESA) claim. “He ruled that plaintiffs have NOT shown they are likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that the Biological Opinion violates the Endangered Species Act (ESA),” said Barry Nelson, senior water policy analyst from NRDC.

Unfortunately, the judge also ruled that Westlands and the other plaintiffs are likely to succeed on their claim that the NEPA (National Environmental Protection Act) applies to implementation of the federal biological opinon as he ruled in the delta smelt case, according to Nelson.

“The judge made an erroneous finding of fact that the agencies didn’t consider any alternatives or the impacts on the environment, ” said Nelson. “The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) actually went through the factors, including estimated water supply costs and phased in parts of the RPA (Reasonable and Prudent Alternative) .

“The judge also found that blocking ESA protections won’t cause jeopardy because there aren’t ‘too many’ fish being killed at the pumps – wholly ignoring critical habitat, indirect effects, and the fact that the BO requires all of the components of the RPA to be implemented to avoid jeopardy,” said Nelson.

Following the above “reasoning,” Wanger issued the TRO blocking the salmon biological opinion limitation on Old and Middle River reverse flows below -2,500 to -5,000 cfs. So there are currently no Old and Middle River flow restrictions in place, according to Nelson.

NMFS can come back in to show “more harm” to get the TRO dissolved. Meanwhile, NRDC and EarthJustice are considering their legal options.

“This ruling has enormous implications for the Delta and the fishing industry,” said Nelson. “It also has dramatic implications for the SWP, as my colleague Kate explains here: http://switchboard. nrdc.org/ blogs/kpoole/ is_the_departmen t_of_water_ res.html”

The state’s position is in conflict with other state laws, including regarding salmon protection, as Nelson explains here: http:// switchboard. nrdc.org/ blogs/bnelson/ state_legal_ strategy in_the_de. html.

The ruling also has major implications for The Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP), a plan that many fishing and environmental groups criticize as leading to the construction of a peripheral canal and more dams. “By the way, the judge specificially was comforted by the state’s ‘non-opposition’ to the TRO request,” Nelson observed.

Fishing groups are outraged about the court’s ruling in favor of Westlands at a time that Central Valley salmon populations are in an unprecedented state of collapse. “Fishing families along one thousand miles of U.S. coastline rely on healthy runs of Sacramento River salmon to make a living; they depend on keeping the current salmon protection plan in place,” said Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations. “Too much water is being taken from the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento- San Joaquin Delta estuary – salmon, fishing families, coastal communities and seafood consumers have paid a heavy price as a result.”

“The shutdown of the California recreational and commercial salmon fishing industry for the last two years has already erased $2.8 billion dollars and 23,000 jobs from our state’s economy,” said Dick Pool, program manager of Water4Fish. “The 2009 adult salmon returns to the Sacramento are almost assured to reach another all- time record low. The past water export practices have been the root cause of this decline. This federal fish restoration plan is the absolute minimum we need to begin a turn around of this decline.”

The Pacific Legal Foundation, a law firm that advocates on behalf of agribusiness and other corporate interests, praised the ruling. “Water is desperately needed in these parts of California, but even though the Golden State has received a substantial amount of precipitation over the past month, the salmon biological opinion has prevented water from getting to where it’s needed most,” the group said on its “Liberty” blog.

“Under today’s decision, however, federal agencies will not be able to implement a significant component of the biological opinion for at least the next 14 days, meaning that much more water will be able to be pumped to California water projects,” the group stated. “Although the harm from the federal government’s ‘fish before people’ policy has been clear to many, some have contended that environmental restrictions aren’t that big of a deal. Today’s decision, however, should put to rest the notion that the man-made, regulatory drought is anything but real.”

The TRO was issued as Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg and corporate agribusiness are pushing for the construction of the peripheral canal and a $11.1 billion water bond.

Delta and fish advocates believe that the water bond, combined with the water policy package passed by the California Legislature in November, creates a clear path to the construction of the peripheral canal and Temperance Flats and Sites reservoirs. The canal will cost $23 billion to $53.8 billion to build at a time when California is in its worst economic crisis since the Great Depression – and the budgets for teachers, game wardens, health care for children and state parks have been slashed.

Science Magazine website

In Central California, Coho Salmon Are On The Brink

Published on February 15, 2010 in Salmonid/Wildlife Impacts. 0 Comments

Greg Miller, Science Magazine, January 2010

The Central California coho salmon was federally listed as endangered in 2006 and the population numbers are still dropping. The historical range of Central California coho salmon once stretched from Punta Gorda in Northern California, south to San Lorenzo River in Central California. Now many Central California coho salmon populations are extirpated or nearly extirpated in several major river basins and across most of their southern range. Northern range populations may face the same fate.

In Lagunitas Creek and its tributaries, just north of San Francisco in Marin County, once home to a thriving coho run, last year’s population surveys revealed a catastrophic decline with only 64 returning adults counted while the estimate for the entire northern range is alarmingly low, at 500 returning adults. Because this is the third year in the coho three-year life cycle, the numbers of spawning adults may be too low to produce enough offspring for species survival. “We truly are at the brink of extinction,” says Charlotte Ambrose, a Recovery Coordinator with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) in Santa Rosa, California.

The precipitous population decline is due to multiple and compounding factors: dams have blocked access to habitat, thereby reducing spawning sites and offspring, the reduced numbers of offspring then face degraded habitat conditions that further reduce their survival rate. Additionally, ocean conditions off the California coast have reduced the availability of food for the hungry smolts that do make it out of the freshwater habitat, and California’s three-year drought has impeded up-stream and down-stream migrations. There are only two ways we can help the coho: habitat restoration and capture/release programs.

Conserving and improving what’s left of the coho’s habitat is the best hope for the fish’s survival, says Ambrose. A federal species recovery plan to be released next month has identified 28 watersheds, including Lagunitas Creek, where NMFS thinks habitat restoration efforts can have an immediate impact on the coho’s survival. Unfortunately, captivity and release efforts to help coho have at best mixed success rates. “Historically our best guess is that hatcheries have overall had a detrimental effect on salmon populations…due to inbreeding,” says John Carlos Garza, a NMFS geneticist in Santa Cruz. Dwindled populations of fish have a higher rate of inbreeding which leads to lower survival rates in the wild. Habitat restoration thus remains the only real hope of survival for the beleaguered Central Coast coho salmon.

Click here for the Jan. 29 article from Science Magazine.

For additional information on the Central California Coast Coho Salmon click here for the NOAA website

Healdsburg Wild Steelhead Festival: Feb.5-7

Published on February 1, 2010 in Lakes and Resevoirs, Salmonid/Wildlife Impacts, Streams and Wetlands and Water Conservation. 0 Comments

Healdsburg Wild Steelhead Festival Gala Dinner Hotel Healdsburg, Friday February 5, 6:00 PM
Dinner Speaker:
Jim Lichatowich, the author of Salmon Without Rivers will be this year’s special guest speaker at the Gala Dinner the Friday night of the Healdsburg Wild Steelhead Festival. Jim’s other works include the landmark article in Trout magazine, “Pacific Salmon at the Crossroads” which predicted the issues we are faced with today with our Pacific salmon and steelhead fisheries.
Jim also contributed to the Trout Unlimited special report, “A Blueprint for Hatchery Reform” and has been one of the West Coast’s leading advocates for watershed and habitat restoration to bring back our wild populations of salmon and steelhead. on a sustainable basis.
Jim’s presentation is mesmerizing in its evolutionary sweep of Pacific Salmon history and the landscapes that have supported this magnificent species through the centuries.
The dinner will be at the elegant Hotel Healdsburg on the square.  Dinner will be provided by the renown Dry Creek Kitchen which has received world wide attention for it’s cuisine.
Join us before the dinner in the Healdsburg Hotel lobby to meet the author and enjoy some of the Russian River’s finest wines from our local fish-friendly wineries and vineyards.
Gala Dinner Ticket Info Please contact:
Liz Keeley, Festival Coordinator (707) 484-6438 liz@healdsburgsteelheadfest.org Healdsburg Wild Steelhead Festival

Healdsburg Wild Steelhead Festival Gala Dinner Hotel Healdsburg, Friday February 5, 6:00 PM
Dinner Speaker:Jim Lichatowich, author of Salmon Without Rivers

Public Meeting at Jenner Community Club, Jan. 30

Published on January 26, 2010 in Coastal Impacts, Salmonid/Wildlife Impacts, Streams and Wetlands and Watershed Related. 0 Comments

Hello Folks,

Please join us on January 30th to learn more about the Sonoma Land
Trust, a few of our partners, and our plans to develop a comprehensive
resource management plan for the Jenner Headlands that balances public
use with the protection of the property’s incredible biological and
cultural resources.  We are holding a public meeting at the Jenner
Community Club from 4-5:30, where we will present an overview of our
planning process and our initial public access plans.  After the
presentation we will have time for Q&A.  The JCC is located in the town
of Jenner at 10432 Hwy 1.

To learn more about the Sonoma Land Trust and the Jenner Headlands
before the meeting, please visit our Web site at www.sonomalandtrust.org
<http://www.sonomalandtrust.org/> .

We look forward to seeing you on the 30th and beginning the next phase
of the Jenner Headlands project.

Brook R. Edwards

Jenner Headlands Project Manager

Sonoma Land Trust

Federal Endangered Species Act Notice Letters

Published on January 20, 2010 in Salmonid/Wildlife Impacts. 0 Comments

Northern California River Watch, along with Biological Diversity and Coast Action Group, have filed three 60 Day Notice Letters pursuant to the Federal Endangered Species Act. The Notices allege that the parties named contributed to the take and harm of endangered Coho salmon and threatened Steelhead trout of the central coast region of California. These Notice Letters can be viewed in the Current Cases section of the website.

State Water Board Begins Process of Regulating Water Diversions That Kill Salmon and Steelhead in Russian River

Published on January 20, 2010 in Agriculture Impacts, Environmental Impacts, Salmonid/Wildlife Impacts and Streams and Wetlands. 0 Comments

SAN FRANCISCO— The California State Water Resources Control Board indicated yesterday that it will move forward over the next year to draft regulations on water diversions for frost protection of vineyards in the Russian River watershed, to protect imperiled coho salmon and steelhead trout. Water Board staff recommended that any diversion of water from the Russian River and its tributaries for frost protection between March 15 and June 1, including pumping of connected groundwater, must be under the auspices of a Board-approved water-demand management program that will ensure cumulative diversions do not de-water salmon streams, and will require monitoring and public reporting of diversions in the Russian River and tributaries. The Board declined to take emergency action to implement regulations for frost pumping this spring.

“In the face of extinction of coho salmon, the state Water Board has finally taken some long-overdue baby steps to address excessive water diversions and pumping from salmon streams in the Russian River watershed, although it will be at least another year before any regulations on pumping are put in place; they may not be in time even for next year’s frost season,” said Jeff Miller, a conservation advocate with the Center for Biological Diversity. “Coho salmon need immediate protection to prevent de-watering streams. Another season of fish kills is unacceptable since coho are near extinction in the Russian River, and chinook and steelhead are not far behind.”

Water diversions and pumping from streams for grape growing de-water rivers and creeks where listed fish species spawn, harming imperiled coho salmon, chinook salmon, and steelhead trout. De-watering of streams occurs not only during spring and summer vineyard irrigation, but also due to winter “frost protection” pumping to protect budding grapes from frost. When freezing temperatures hit the North Coast, vineyards pumping water for frost protection can dry up portions of the Russian River and its tributaries, stranding and killing young salmon.

“The Water Board needs to take action to avoid harming the last coho salmon and steelhead trout – that is the bottom line,” said Larry Hanson of Northern California River Watch.

“Effective regulations on Russian River water diversions are long overdue. It’s been 13 years since the Water Board determined frost protection pumping is harming salmon,” said Miller. “The rules being contemplated contain some positive steps, such as regulating connected groundwater, protecting from cumulative pumping effects, and requiring adequate monitoring to determine when pumping is impacting fish. However, these rules are weaker and less protective of fish than the approach the Water Board has already adopted on the Napa River, and unauthorized ponds and diversions are not addressed. Also, success depends heavily on the criteria used by the Board to approve water-demand management programs.”

In spring 2008 and again in 2009 there were widely publicized salmon kills due to excessive water diversions in the main stem of the Russian River at Hopland and in Felta Creek, a tributary. At yesterday’s hearing, Water Board staff estimated that there were likely 20 to 30 separate frost pumping events in 2008 that could have killed salmon in the Russian River watershed, but that state and federal agencies did not have the resources to survey or document stream conditions.

“The Water Board clearly does not have the staff, the funding, or the spine for strong enforcement actions, so any regulations need to be adequately protective of the fish,” said Miller. “The benefit of the doubt should go to species about to go extinct, since Russian River water is already over-appropriated and minimum flows for fish are not being met.”

In November 2009, the Center for Biological Diversity, Northern California River Watch, and Coast Action Group notified the Water Board of their intent to sue the agency for authorizing water diversions for vineyards in Mendocino and Sonoma counties that harm federally protected salmon and steelhead.

Background

There are at least 60,000 acres of vineyards in the Russian River watershed, 70 percent of which are within 300 feet of salmon streams. The Water Board currently permits and authorizes harmful water pumping, diversions, and water storage and continues to issue water-appropriation permits in the over-allocated Russian River watershed, in conflict with public trust values and beneficial uses. In 1997, the Water Board released a report identifying vineyard practices, particularly frost protection activities, that hurt federally listed species of fish struggling to survive in the Russian River basin and its tributaries. The National Marine Fisheries Service requested in the spring of 2009 that the Water Board adopt regulations to protect listed fish species.

The region’s significant fisheries are near extinction. Coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) on the central California coast are listed as endangered by both the state and federal governments; chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) along the California coast are federally listed as threatened; and steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) on the central California coast and Northern California are federally listed as threatened. Central California coast coho salmon are now at only 1 to 2 percent of their historical abundance. Coho have been eliminated from more than half of their historical streams in California, and in recent years, only 500 to 1,000 wild coho have returned to the entire central coast region to spawn. California coast chinook salmon have declined 97 to 99 percent from historical runs. Northern California coast steelhead have declined by 90 percent, and central California coast steelhead have declined by 80 to 90 percent in the past 50 years.

Salmon and steelhead spawn in freshwater streams and young fish require habitat with sufficient flows; deep pools; adequate food and shelter; and clean, cold water in order to survive long enough to migrate to the sea. The huge amounts of water withdrawn for grape growing dries up spawning beds and kills fish or leaves young salmon and steelhead stranded in hot and crowded shallow pools, where they are exposed to overcrowding and predators.

Grape growers have the option of pursuing permits for off-stream storage of water during high stream flows in winter, so that water is available for frost protection and the need for pumping from streams or groundwater during critical periods for salmon is eliminated. Some vineyards and grape growers have begun organizing to monitor water diversions and stream flow, and to address water pumping. These growers should be commended for trying to solve the problem. Many growers are calling for voluntary measures and self-regulation to deal with frost pumping. However, a Water Board rulemaking is necessary to ensure that the efforts of the leading growers are not thwarted by non-participants and that landowner-led solutions are effective. It is clear that even one or two diversions on a small tributary can have a significant impact on fish habitat. No voluntary plan can ensure full participation, and a strictly voluntary plan would ultimately fail to protect salmon and steelhead. An opt-in plan would also have the unintended effect of forcing the proactive growers to compete against growers that lag behind or refuse to do their fair share.

The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 255,000 members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.

Growers Face New Rules on Russian River Water in 2011

Published on January 20, 2010 in Salmonid/Wildlife Impacts and Streams and Wetlands. 0 Comments

Robert Digitale, Press Democrat, January 19, 2010

It won’t happen until next year, but state water officials said Tuesday they want to adopt new rules that would limit the use of Russian River water for frost protection.s. grapes in battle over water

The state Water Resources Control Board took no formal action, but its five members voiced support for further work on proposed regulations that seek to protect the river’s endangered salmon and steelhead.

Board member Tam M. Doduc expressed support for a set of draft rules written by staff.

“We’ve heard today from the growers that it’s too stringent and we’ve heard from the enviros that it’s not stringent enough,” Doduc said at the end of a board workshop. “So to me it seems kind of balanced.”

It will take about a year for the water board to complete a formal hearing and get state attorneys to give their blessing to any new rules. The earliest the regulations could take effect would be 2011.

In the meantime, the board directed its staff to gather a “working group” of leaders from farm and environmental groups to further refine the regulations and, where possible, forge a consensus.

After the meeting at least some growers and environmentalists expressed cautious optimism the coming discussions would produce acceptable rules.

Growers “have a steep hill to climb,” but at least the board members voiced support for some flexibility in the regulatory process, said Pete Opatz, a leader for Sonoma County grape growers.

Kimberly Burr, who spoke at the meeting on behalf of two environmental groups, the Center for Biological Diversity and Northern California River Watch, said she was encouraged the board was moving forward to adopt new rules. She earlier had urged the board to strengthen the staff proposal in order to better protect fish.

The two environmental groups have formally notified the water board of their intent to sue the state for failing to protect the river’s salmon and steelhead. A third group, Coast Action Group, has also notified the water board of a similar lawsuit under the federal Endangered Species Act.

Both federal officials and environmental groups have urged the board to approve new rules to ensure adequate water for salmon and steelhead during frosty spring nights.

On such nights many growers spray water over their vines to freeze the greed buds in ice, which keeps the plant tissue safe at a constant 32-degree temperature.

But officials with the National Marine Fisheries Service said frost protection by growers in 2008 and 2009 stranded and killed both coho salmon and steelhead. The strandings, prohibited under the Endangered Species Act, occurred on the Russian River and a tributary.

Tuesday was the water board’s third meeting on the issue since last spring. About 50 people attended the workshop, including a number of grape growers from both Sonoma and Mendocino counties.

A key ingredient to the board’s approach is to have growers join organizations that would manage water diversions for frost protection on both the river and its tributaries.

Such groups “would have to have the authority to kick bad actors out of the program, which could mean for that grower that they could not frost protect at all,” staff member Victoria Whitney told the board.

Both farmers and environmentalists said more storage ponds must be built in order to provide a source of water on cold nights when streams lack enough flow for diversions.

In a related matter, growers and the Mendocino County Russian River Flood Control & Water Conservation District are seeking board support for placing stream flow gauges at the base of various tributaries and conducting field studies as to the minimum flows needed for fish. Below that minimum flow no water could be diverted.

On Tuesday some grower representatives referred to the staff’s draft rules as burdensome while others called for a chance to find workable alternatives.

“We will cooperate to save fish, but we want to save our industry,” said David Fanucchi, an Alexander Valley grape grower.

But Alan Levine, executive director of Coast Action Group, said growers can afford to build more storage ponds as part of the state’s efforts to better manage a finite amount of water.

“Things aren’t looking good for fish,” Levine said.

Russian River Gravel Mining Stopped

Published on January 15, 2010 in Environmental Impacts, Gravel Mining Impacts, Salmonid/Wildlife Impacts, Streams and Wetlands, Waste Discharge and Watershed Related. 0 Comments
To All,
In case you haven’t seen it, here are some press releases on the very big win in the gravel mining decision.
Marc

doc4b046ebe08ee6525298528.jpg

Judge’s decision could halt river gravel mining
A decision last week in Sonoma County Superior Court overturned a 2008 Board of Supervisors decision to extend the deadline for terrace gravel mining in the Russian River. Pictured above are Syar’s gravel pits along the Russian River between Healdsburg and Windsor.
Board of Supervisor’s 2008 extension reversed By Kerrie Russell Tribune Editor Published: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 3:02 PM PST A decision last week by the Sonoma County Superior Court could mean the end of gravel pit mining along the Russian River.
A ruling by Judge Robert Boyd overturned a 2008 Board of Supervisor’s vote that would have allowed an extension of terrace gravel mining in the Russian River.
The judge’s decision came a year after a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) lawsuit was filed by the Westside Association to Save Agriculture, the Russian River Keeper and the North Coast Rivers Alliance.
The group filed the suit last fall after the Board of Supervisors in October of 2008 voted 3-2 to in favor of Syar Industries request to extend a terrace gravel mining deadline past April of 2006. The 1994 ARM plan (certified in 1996) required a 10-year limit and called for the end of mining on the west side of the Russian River.
“The ARM plan was clear that there were no extensions,” said Riverkeeper Don McEnhill.
However, last year’s decision from the Board of Supervisors would have allowed Syar Industries to “finish the job” on phase VI of the project, west of the Russian River just south of Healdsburg, and required that no more than a year should pass after mining is completed for environmental restoration there.
Following a motion from Fourth District Supervisor Paul Kelley, supervisors Tim Smith and Mike Kerns voted in favor of the three-year extension in 2008.
But in Judge Boyd’s 12-page ruling last week, he found that Sonoma County violated CEQA by failing to (1) prepare a separate Environmental Impact Report addressing the significant adverse impacts of Syar’s proposed terrace gravel mining, (2) adequately explain why the alternative of terminating mining and reclaiming the disturbed land for other uses was not feasible, and (3) provide an adequate discussion of alternative gravel sources including importation of gravel from outside the County and development of existing and proposed quarries within the County.
Boyd called Syar’s requested extension a contradiction of “the very essence of the project history,” and called their argument “circular.”
In response to the Board of Supervisor’s finding that the ARM should be extended because alternatives are infeasible, Boyd stated, “An agency cannot find an alternative infeasible simply because the developer does not want to do it.”
David Spielberg, attorney for Syar, was unsure what the company’s next steps will be.
“At this point, we’re still looking at it and evaluating what our response ought to be and what our options are,” he said. “Right now, we’re still trying to digest the decision.”
Terrace gravel mining stopped in 2006 while Syar waited for a decision on the extension.
“This decision is a great victory for the people of Sonoma County who rely on the Russian River and adjacent water aquifer for their drinking water,” said Marc Bommersbach, President of Westside Association to Save Agriculture (WASA). “Years of strip mining in the aquifer of the Russian River have severely impacted this precious resource that supplies the drinking water to 700,000 people in Sonoma and Marin Counties.”
Opponents of Syar’s gravel mining also argue that there are less costly and more environmentally sound ways to supply gravel for construction and road projects.
“It has been clearly demonstrated that the county has supplies of gravel to support projects like roads and buildings without relying on mining gravel in the county’s drinking water aquifer. They haven’t mined there since 2006 and the freeway project has not come to a halt,” Bommersbach said.
McEnhill said the ruling is a big win for the river.
“We feel like this ruling will make it very difficult, if not impossible, to try and go back and dig up the aquifers,” he said. “We think the biggest win is for our future water supply and for ag along the river.
“This is a victory that’s been a long time coming. It’s a historical win,” McEnhill said.

Judge’s decision could halt river gravel mining
A decision last week in Sonoma County Superior Court overturned a 2008 Board of Supervisors decision to extend the deadline for terrace gravel mining in the Russian River. Pictured above are Syar’s gravel pits along the Russian River between Healdsburg and Windsor.
Board of Supervisor’s 2008 extension reversed By Kerrie Russell Tribune Editor Published: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 3:02 PM PST A decision last week by the Sonoma County Superior Court could mean the end of gravel pit mining along the Russian River.
A ruling by Judge Robert Boyd overturned a 2008 Board of Supervisor’s vote that would have allowed an extension of terrace gravel mining in the Russian River.
The judge’s decision came a year after a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) lawsuit was filed by the Westside Association to Save Agriculture, the Russian River Keeper and the North Coast Rivers Alliance.
The group filed the suit last fall after the Board of Supervisors in October of 2008 voted 3-2 to in favor of Syar Industries request to extend a terrace gravel mining deadline past April of 2006. The 1994 ARM plan (certified in 1996) required a 10-year limit and called for the end of mining on the west side of the Russian River.
“The ARM plan was clear that there were no extensions,” said Riverkeeper Don McEnhill.
However, last year’s decision from the Board of Supervisors would have allowed Syar Industries to “finish the job” on phase VI of the project, west of the Russian River just south of Healdsburg, and required that no more than a year should pass after mining is completed for environmental restoration there.
Following a motion from Fourth District Supervisor Paul Kelley, supervisors Tim Smith and Mike Kerns voted in favor of the three-year extension in 2008.
But in Judge Boyd’s 12-page ruling last week, he found that Sonoma County violated CEQA by failing to (1) prepare a separate Environmental Impact Report addressing the significant adverse impacts of Syar’s proposed terrace gravel mining, (2) adequately explain why the alternative of terminating mining and reclaiming the disturbed land for other uses was not feasible, and (3) provide an adequate discussion of alternative gravel sources including importation of gravel from outside the County and development of existing and proposed quarries within the County.
Boyd called Syar’s requested extension a contradiction of “the very essence of the project history,” and called their argument “circular.”
In response to the Board of Supervisor’s finding that the ARM should be extended because alternatives are infeasible, Boyd stated, “An agency cannot find an alternative infeasible simply because the developer does not want to do it.”
David Spielberg, attorney for Syar, was unsure what the company’s next steps will be.
“At this point, we’re still looking at it and evaluating what our response ought to be and what our options are,” he said. “Right now, we’re still trying to digest the decision.”
Terrace gravel mining stopped in 2006 while Syar waited for a decision on the extension.
“This decision is a great victory for the people of Sonoma County who rely on the Russian River and adjacent water aquifer for their drinking water,” said Marc Bommersbach, President of Westside Association to Save Agriculture (WASA). “Years of strip mining in the aquifer of the Russian River have severely impacted this precious resource that supplies the drinking water to 700,000 people in Sonoma and Marin Counties.”
Opponents of Syar’s gravel mining also argue that there are less costly and more environmentally sound ways to supply gravel for construction and road projects.
“It has been clearly demonstrated that the county has supplies of gravel to support projects like roads and buildings without relying on mining gravel in the county’s drinking water aquifer. They haven’t mined there since 2006 and the freeway project has not come to a halt,” Bommersbach said.
McEnhill said the ruling is a big win for the river.
“We feel like this ruling will make it very difficult, if not impossible, to try and go back and dig up the aquifers,” he said. “We think the biggest win is for our future water supply and for ag along the river.
“This is a victory that’s been a long time coming. It’s a historical win,” McEnhill said.