This is just one post in the Water & Wildlife Category

Coverage from around the state: Wanger rules federal permit to protect salmon from water deliveries illegal; ruling could mean further Delta export restrictions

Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on April 17, 2008 at 8:04 am

More on yesterday’s big news story regarding the latest ruling from the Wanger court, this time in favor of the salmon & steelhead:

From Mike Taugher at the Contra Costa County Times:

The federal permit meant to protect the most imperiled salmon runs in California rivers where other salmon populations are collapsing is illegal, a federal judge ruled Wednesday. It was the second time in a year that U.S. District Judge Oliver Wanger struck down a permit meant to shield fish from the effects of California’s water delivery systems.

The rulings, which come at a time when several Delta fish populations are in a state of collapse, conclude that federal agencies responsible for regulating water operations under the Endangered Species Act have been too soft.

Environmentalists and anglers say regulators’ leniency allowed water pumping to significantly contribute to the fish collapse. Wednesday’s court ruling “basically reinforces what we’ve been saying,” said Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations. “What was going on here is the Bush administration told their higher-ups to shut their scientists up and let us take more water,” he said.

The permit struck down was issued in 2004 under questionable circumstances: Although scientists in the National Marine Fisheries Service concluded that the conditions it laid out would allow water operations to threaten two salmon runs and steelhead with extinction, that conclusion was overturned by James Lecky, now the Bush administration’s top official overseeing marine endangered species. “The (permit) is … inexplicably inconsistent as to the species’ survival and recovery,” Wanger ruled.

The Sacramento Bee gives more information on the biological opinion:

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and National Marine Fisheries Service violated the Endangered Species Act in approving rules to guide these new operations, called a biological opinion, Wanger ruled.

The biological opinion was controversial from the beginning. A draft prepared by Fisheries Service biologists in Sacramento concluded fish would be harmed by the new water operations. But The Bee reported in October 2004 that this finding was summarily reversed by political appointees.

The agencies behaved in an “arbitrary and capricious” manner, the judge found, by failing to include measures to recover the species, which include Central Valley steelhead and winter- and spring-run chinook salmon. They also failed to consider the effect of climate change on water operations. The evidence included findings by the agencies themselves that the new operations could kill 20 percent of each species.

“In practical terms this forecasts elimination of spring-run salmon from the Sacramento River, a total loss of habitat, despite the … conclusion there will be no adverse impact or jeopardy to the species,” Wanger wrote.

Stockton’s Record adds this:

Wanger pointed out contradictions in the previous report in his 151-page ruling. For example, the Fisheries Service reported anywhere from 51 percent to 66 percent of juvenile steelhead would be killed if water exports increased. Steelhead could be eliminated from some rivers. Yet the service decided the species would not be jeopardized, a contradictory conclusion, the judge wrote.

The rules also didn’t consider climate change, which could reduce the Sierra Nevada snowpack and diminish the amount of cold water that salmon need to survive and spawn, Wanger ruled.

A hearing next week will address actions to help salmon and steelhead until the new rules are finished. That could mean less pumping, officials said.

Wanger’s smelt ruling has so far decreased water supplies by about 30 percent, or 600,000 to 700,000 acre-feet, according to the state Department of Water Resources. That’s enough water annually for at least 2.4 million people.

“We’ve got to change how we attack these issues,” said Jerry Johns, deputy director of the Department of Water Resources.

So how will this affect Southern California? From the Los Angeles Times:

Though the judge’s decision might further curb delta exports, a more likely result is operational changes 250 miles to the north at Shasta Dam, experts on both sides said. Cradling the state’s biggest reservoir, the dam traditionally releases most of its water down the Sacramento River and onward to the delta in late summer and fall. But environmentalists have pushed for more cold-water releases to help the struggling runs of salmon and steelhead.

Sherwood of Earthjustice said the ruling could mark “a turning point” in operations by the state and federal water projects, which redid the California landscape in the 20th century to move water from the wet north to farms and communities in the south.

Jeff McCracken, a spokesman for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which operates Shasta Dam as part of the federal water project, said it was too soon to decipher the decision’s fallout. There will be no impacts until the judge tells us we have to do something differently,” he said. “At this point we haven’t gotten there.”

Laura King Moon, assistant general manager of the nonprofit State Water Contractors, said the ruling underscored the importance of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan, an effort underway in Sacramento to spotlight ways to heal the delta while fixing the water delivery system. We can’t continue to have the water system of our state remain at the mercy of every individual endangered species,” she said. “We need a comprehensive plan.”

Lester Snow, state Department of Water Resources chief, agreed that the ruling was “further evidence that the delta is teetering on the brink of collapse,” noting that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger had proposed a slate of solutions.

Among the fixes being eyed is construction of the long-debated Peripheral Canal, which would divert water around the delta and onward to Southern California. The proposal has been condemned by environmentalists and others who say it would rob the delta of the water it needs for fish to survive.

The ACWA issued this press release in the wake of the ruling:

Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) Executive Director Timothy Quinn released the following statement regarding today’s court ruling on operation of the state and federal water projects and impacts on salmon and steelhead.

“Though it’s too early to say how the ruling will affect water project operations this year, it’s safe to say this is one more factor that will add to the management challenge of operating our water system to adequately protect fish and meet our water supply needs.

“When you factor in existing constraints on water supply operations in the Delta and now the possible addition of new constraints on storage above the Delta, it underscores the need for a comprehensive solution that can meet the co-equal needs of the environment and the economy. Both are losing now.

“We have to invest in a system that can accomplish both objectives.”

Environmental groups and government agencies will meet in Fresno on April 25th to begin the process of figuring out how to modify operations while a new permit is drafted.

Click here to read more coverage from around the state in yesterday’s breaking news post on Aquafornia. For coverage from the San Francisco Chronicle, click here. For coverage from the Voice of San Diego, click here.

April 17, 2008 · Filed Under Judge Wanger salmon ruling, Salmon, Water & Wildlife