Fresno Judge Halts Protection Plan For Winter Run Chinook

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

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

Santa Rosa Groundwater “Recharge”

To All,

One thing you will hear over and over about ground water in the Santa Rosa area is that it is in a “recharge area” . However this paradigm needs to shift. It implies that we can draw from the water resources without consequence because it will always “recharge and come back”. This is not true. What a water recharge area actually is can be greatly varied and un-explained. Some aquifers just dry up. With such little science and information about the county’s primary resource, it is actually quite irresponsible to assume that anyone is actually “managing groundwater”, especially officials tasked to do so.

Lloyd

More Wells Sinking the Central Valley

To All

The consolidation caused by the repeated pumping action of ASR’s (AKA “ground water banking”) causes permanent compression of the formation also. This is the biggest crime of all because the ground water storage capacity is reduced forever. It never comes back.

Lloyd

Hi Don–

The attached jpg file shows the situation in the Central Valley as of 1977–the subsidence at this site was about 36 feet over the time span indicated. It’s worse now.

The man in the photo is Joe Poland, who studied Central Valley groundwater for USGS.

Jane

Hi,
in case this didn’t get posted here yet.

Great quote I hope to hear around this watershed someday…..Don

“We don’t need any more straws going down there ’cause we’re already doing a pretty good job of sucking it dry,” says farmer Dan Errotabere, who has dug three wells as deep as 1,200 feet to irrigate his tomatoes, almonds, and garlic in recent years. “We’re using this water as a last resort, but pretty soon we’re going to need a policy to protect ourselves from ourselves.”

<http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2010/0111/Will-drilling-more-wells-in-California-help-or-hurt>http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/2010/0111/Will-drilling-more-wells-in-California-help-or-hurt
Don McEnhill
Russian Riverkeeper
PO Box 1335
Healdsburg, CA 95448
707-433-1958
fx: 707-433-1989
<http://www.russianriverkeeper.org/

Russian Riverkeeper works with the community to advocate, educate, and uphold our environmental laws to ensure the protection and restoration of the Russian River for the health and benefit of all who use and enjoy it.

Take Action on Wastes

To All,

The problem of “waste” in the U.S. is both a local and a federal issue, with the Environmental Protection Agency providing the scientific veneer, among others, for the nation’s profit-at-any-cost, multibillion dollar sewage sludge, garbage, and chemical fertilizer industries. Several decades ago, after public pressure forced corporations and municipalities to stop dumping toxic sewage sludge into the oceans and waterways (it was killing all the fish and marine life and polluting beaches), the EPA decided it was time to rename this hazardous waste “organic fertilizer” (or “biosolids”) and to begin to spread municipal sewage sludge on millions of acres of non-organic farmland and rangeland. Emboldened by their success, EPA and the sludge industry then tried to tell us in 1998 that it would be OK to spread sewage sludge on organic farms as well. Fortunately OCA and the organic community beat them back as part of a massive nationwide grassroots campaign called Save Organic Standards (SOS).

A steady stream of greenwashing and false solutions that encourage waste production instead of waste reduction are coming at us from corporate marketing departments and the federal government. OCA believes that positive action to encourage waste reduction, reuse, recycling and composting (real organic composting, not renaming sewage sludge or industrial waste as compost) is most likely to arise at the local level. Several cities have taken positive actions in the direction of zero waste, but the devil is in the details.

Take household and industrial sewage sludge for example. For decades sewage sludge (the end product of the nation’s thousands of Wastewater Treatment Plants) was dumped in the oceans and rivers, now it is spread on non-organic farms and rangelands, while current industry plans include burning it and turning it into an energy source; but the fundamental problem isn’t what to do with billions of pounds of toxic sewage sludge produced every year (obviously we must isolate and contain it as hazardous waste), but rather how can we stop producing it in the first place. Household sewage, contaminated as it is with chemical cosmetics, toxic household cleaners and any number of pharmaceutical drugs poured into toilets and kitchen sinks, isn’t pristine; but, to paraphrase Bob Hope, it’s not the shit, it’s what we’ve done to it. After the toilet is flushed or the drain is emptied, household waste is funneled into a vast underground sewage system, where it joins a toxic stew of industrial and hospital wastes and rainwater runoff from our streets and highways. Allowing corporations to flood the environment and the waste stream with 100,000 synthetic, mostly toxic chemicals, (most of which end up in sewage sludge), less than 1% of which have ever been proved to be safe for the environment and public health, is a form of insanity. Besides contaminating the water and soil, this irrational so-called “sewage treatment” process wastes enormous amounts of potable water.

At a certain point, cities and towns must come to the realization that using clean water to flush away household waste; engineering rooftops, roadways and streets to funnel rainwater into our sewage systems (instead of capturing it or percolating it back into the soil); and allowing industry and hospitals to discharge toxic chemicals into our wastewater stream just doesn’t make sense. Composting (non-water) toilets, rooftop water catchments and cisterns, and zero discharge of synthetic chemicals potentially or actually proven to hazardous to human health and the environment (the “precautionary principle”) are not fringe ideas, but rather the wave of the future. That is if there is a future.

Human and animal manure, (separated from and free from chemical and pharmaceutical residues), throughout the centuries, and in the present time can and should be safely composted and utilized as a fertilizer on fields, farms, and forests. Although current organic standards prohibit the use of compost derived from human manure (properly composted animal manure is allowed) on food crops, feeding the soil with properly composted “humanure” (or producing methane gas for energy use through bio-digesters) will no doubt become the norm in the future as fossil fuel and water supplies dwindle and chemical fertilizer costs become prohibitive.

Tune in to future issues of Organic Bytes for OCA’s ideas on how we can and must reform our garbage, sludge, and chemical fertilizer industries and put an end to the rampant consumerism that is literally poisoning the planet with garbage and toxic chemical

–Larry

California Water Boondoggle

If you have been wondering why government can’t seem to get anything right, consider this:
Not only is the government manipulated by special interest influence, it also caters outright to special interests.  Pandering politicians continuously and repeatedly create government boondoggles — a series of reinvented mini-ENRONs — plagueing us and our wallets, over and over again.
Case in Point – California’s Water “Solutions.” We all understand there is a problem with water in California.  How do the politicians go about solving this problem?
Water Transfer Facilitation Act ( Westlands Water Project) SB – 1759 sponsored by Dianne Fienstein and Barbara Boxer.
What would this bill do?  For years Central Valley farmers (mostly large agribusiness) has been getting cheap publicly subsidized water. Aside from the money issue, there have been severe negative consequences from this water use including damage to the Bay Delta system ecosystem and fishery loss, polluted ground and surface water in areas of the Central Valley, and soil loss from pollution. SB 1759 proposes more taxpayer money to help build a peripheral canal and subsidize the shipment of up to an additional 300,000 acre feet (98,100,000,000 gallons) of water for use by industrial agriculture and possibly to some southern California Cities.
Aside from the cost of this project to subsidize agribusiness on marginal soils, this bill would support continued and additional damage to the Bay Delta system by eliminating protections put in place by legislation (the Central Valley Improvement Act) and poisons ground water, surface water, and soils in the region. Some of this water may be resold (without reimbursing this publicly financed project).
Proposed State Water Bond
Closely linked to The Westlands Water Project (SB-1759) is the Water Bond solution proposed by our Governor and some California Legislators.
The Water Bond proposes taking on huge debt to build a peripheral canal and some dams (linked to SB 1759) that would supply publicly subsidized water to wealthy agribusiness – with some water going to Southern California cities.
Aside from the astronomical debt (financed at very high interest rates due to poor California Bond ratings),  the Water Bond would continue to enrich a few while devastating the Bay Delta system and other Central Valley ground and surface water resources.
And, in fact, provisions in the Water Bond may allow for future privatization of our water – where we get to buy back the water resource that we paid to develop.
What are you going to do?
Write your Senators and tell them what you think about SB 1759
Vote “NO” on the Water Bond
Alan Levine,
Coast Action Group

California’s Groundwater Shrinking because of Agricultural Use

Garance Burke,
Christian Science Monitor,
January 4, 2010

New data from satellites show the vast underground pools feeding faucets and irrigation hoses across California are running low, a worrisome trend federal scientists largely attribute to aggressive agricultural pumping.

California water pumping agricultural use

The photograph above illustrates subsidence in the San Joaquin Valley, California. In the photo, USGS scientist, Joe Poland shows subsidence between 1925 and 1977 due to fluid withdrawal and soil consolidation.

The measurements show the amount of water lost in the two main Central Valley river basins within the past six years could almost fill the nation’s largest reservoir, Lake Mead in Nevada.

“All that water has been sucked from these river basins. It’s gone. It’s left the building,” says Jay Famiglietti, an earth science professor at the University of California, Irvine, who led the research collaboration. “The data is telling us that this rate of pumping is not sustainable.”

Hundreds of farmers have been drilling wells to irrigate their crops, as three years of drought and environmental restrictions on water supplies have withered crops, jobs and profits throughout the San Joaquin Valley, where roughly half of the nation’s fruits, nuts, and vegetables are grown.

Developers and cities dependent on the tight supplies also have joined the well-drilling frenzy as the crisis has deepened.

NASA scientists and researchers from UC Irvine presented their findings at a recent conference, showcasing data from twin satellites that pick up changes in the aquifers coursing underneath the state.

The NASA mission represents the first attempt to use space-based technology to measure how much groundwater has been lost in recent years in California and elsewhere in the world.

From October 2003 through March of this year, Mr. Famiglietti and his team tracked how Earth’s gravitational pull on the satellites changed as the amount of water stored in the Sacramento and San Joaquin river basins dried up.

As river water, snowmelt, soil moisture and aquifer levels declined, the satellites sensed less of a pull to the planet, which allowed scientists to extrapolate over time how much water had disappeared.

More than three-quarters of the loss was due to groundwater pumping in the southern Central Valley, primarily to irrigate crops, researchers found.

If drilling keeps on at the same clip, scientists warned, more wells could start running dry.

“We’ve known about the conditions in California for a while since it’s one of the most pumped aquifers in the United States,” says Michael Watkins, NASA’s Pasadena-based project scientist for the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment mission.

“Hydrologists were just surprised to see that the deep water conditions had dropped so much, since it was more than we had expected,” he says.

Click here for original article

Will Drilling More Wells in California Help or Hurt?

Garance Burke, Christian Science Monitor
January 11, 2010

The government is spending $40 million in federal stimulus funds to pull water from underground aquifers in drought-stricken California, even as evidence is growing that the well-drilling boom could degrade the quality of water delivered to millions of residents.

Farmers, conservationists and engineers are criticizing the Interior Department’s plan to spend taxpayer money on digging more wells, saying the approach risks marring the environment. Canals buckle, aquifers collapse and drinking water turns saltier due to so much pumping, and studies show that the state’s water supplies are dwindling.

“We don’t need any more straws going down there ’cause we’re already doing a pretty good job of sucking it dry,” says farmer Dan Errotabere, who has dug three wells as deep as 1,200 feet to irrigate his tomatoes, almonds, and garlic in recent years. “We’re using this water as a last resort, but pretty soon we’re going to need a policy to protect ourselves from ourselves.”

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar says the government is targeting its well-drilling effort to serve remote communities and prop up California’s agricultural economy, a $36 billion industry that grows nearly half the country’s fruits, nuts and vegetables.

“The role of the federal government is to provide a helping hand. But the federal government can’t solve the water problems,” Mr. Salazar says as he sampled sliced cantaloupe with local farmers several weeks ago. “California water issues are a big mess and have been a big mess for a long time.”

Since the drought began in 2006, hundreds of new wells have been drilled and are pumping around the clock in the state, tapping aquifers that date to the days of the dinosaurs.

In the last six years alone, the amount of water that has been lost from the aquifers coursing beneath the parched Central Valley would be nearly enough to fill the nation’s largest reservoir, Nevada’s Lake Mead, NASA researchers says Monday.

Salazar announced in July the department would send emergency drought aid from President Barack Obama’s stimulus package to drill and renovate up to 135 wells. The total number has dropped since then, and authorities are still drawing up plans about how and where to drill.

The money will go to dig up to 50 new wells, retrofit up to 40 old ones and install temporary pipes and pumps to move water to crops and orchards, federal officials says. More than $2 million of the funds will be used for monitoring the real-time ecological impacts of wells in sensitive areas, and proposed new wells will undergo environmental review.

While everyone agrees the state’s aquifers are quickly being drawn down, no California or federal rules govern how much water can be pumped out. Driven by a similar set of concerns, other Western states have set up laws to limit pumping.

Dennis Freeman, who oversees a main canal that irrigates the valley’s farm fields, says even without government-financed wells, it is already costing millions to fix the damage wrought by decades of pumping.

“There’s no doubt about it, the canal is sinking,” he says, gesturing at cracked and buckled concrete panels lining the structure’s edge. “There’s more wells going in, because our growers gotta get water to their crops. But we’re always concerned about the effect that will have.”

Continue reading ‘Will Drilling More Wells in California Help or Hurt?’

The Toilet That Can Help Solve Our Water and Energy Problems

The Toilet That Can Help Solve Our Water and Energy Problems
By Gar Smith, Earth Island Journal. Posted December 28, 2009.
Upwards of 3 million people die annually from diarrhea, dysentery, and parasitic diseases — all for the want of clean water. Meanwhile, each year in the water-rich United States, 2.1 billion gallons of the world’s most precious liquid are used, not to water thirsty crops or slake parched throats, but to flush human waste from home toilets to municipal sewers. While harvesting rainwater and recycling graywater are fine strategies, it’s time to get to the seat of the problem. We need a Toilet Revolution. As frequently happens, the solution to this modern problem can be found in the recent past — and the Third World present. Jeff Conant, author of The Community Guide to Environmental Health, has traveled the world in search of the perfect “waterless toilet.” He found it in the Mexican town of Tepotzlan, which boasts hundreds of “non-traditional waterless” eco-loos. In the 1980s, Tepotzlan’s innovators got a boost when former UNICEF worker Ron Sawyer settled in to help the locals design a new generation of “eco-san” toilets.
While the practice of using human waste as fertilizer is as old as humanity itself, Tepotzlan’s eco-sanistas marked an engineering watershed when they found a way to separate feces from urine. A locally designed toilet seat harvests the fluids while allowing the solid wastes to fall into a dry compost toilet. (Not such a strange idea: The human body is designed to send solid and liquid wastes in opposite directions.) One immediate result of separating pee from poo is the elimination of the unpleasant aromas associated with the traditional outhouse.
While installing waterless toilets in high-rise apartments might raise certain engineering challenges, “urine-separating dry toilets” are being adopted around the world — from South Africa, Peru, Cuba, and India to the United States, where composting waterless toilets can be purchased online. There are several to choose from, including Biolet, Envirolet, Sun-Mar, the venerable-sounding Clivus Multrum, and the EcoJohn (an “incinerating toilet” that’s being used in US homes and military camps). Most sell for around $1,500. Home Depot lists a Biolet for $1,400 (about the price of a new fridge). The Nature’s Head urine-separating dry toilet (designed by sailors for onboard use) is a bargain, priced at $850.
Dry-compost toilets not only conserve water, they also protect rivers and oceans. By circumventing modern sewers, dry-compost toilets avoid diverting nitrogen, potassium, and phosphate-rich wastes from the land (where they would enrich the soil) to rivers and oceans, where they cause algal blooms, oxygen-robbing eutrophication, and oceanic “dead zones.”
The first flush of the Toilet Revolution was heard in Orange County, of all places. In 1997, San Diego announced plans to have a “Toilet-to-Tap” system up and running by 2001. In 1998, California’s governor signed a law directing the state to evaluate the potential of recycling the post-toilet flow to “ensure that any water produced by these systems meets the identical standards that our drinking water does now.” While San Diego’s filtration system successfully reduced contaminants to the same level as “untreated fresh water,” many people had trouble swallowing the idea of sipping treated waste water, even though toilet-to-tap is a proven, Space-Age technology. For decades, America’s orbiting astronauts have thrived by drinking their own urine, recycled endlessly through space shuttle filtration systems.
There’s another powerful reason to separate and recycle urine. It turns out that urine — the world’s most abundant waste — could become the “fuel of the future.” Ohio University researcher Geradine Botte has developed a catalyst that can extract hydrogen fuel from urine. While it takes 1.23 volts to split two hydrogen atoms from H2O, it only takes 0.37 volts to strip four hydrogen atoms from a urea molecule. That’s twice as much hydrogen for one-third the effort. The Royal Society of Chemistry’s journal, Chemical Communications, confirms Botte’s discovery: “While water is an increasingly limited essential resource,” the journal notes, “there will never be a lack of urine.”
Existing nickel electrode technology can be easily scaled up to produce hydrogen from the effluent of today’s sewage treatment plants. As Botte notes: “We do not need to reinvent the wheel.” But tomorrow’s water-smart homeowners will need to adapt. There will be one more container to add to the line-up for weekly curbside pick-up — the urine bin.
Solving two problems for the price of one is a rare deal, especially when tankless toilets will start paying back the investment immediately as household water use falls by one-third. Sometimes, relief can come from surprising places. If this all pans out, we may need to replace the phrase “piss-poor” with “urine-rich.”

Healdsburg Wild Steelhead Festival: Feb.5-7

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