RAFTING would gain special consideration vis-ˆ-vis power generation under proposed legislation. See story, "Bill gives rafting preference over hydropower."Democrat file photo by Joanne McCubrey
Posted on 04/19/2002 4:59:36 PM PDT by Phil V.
RAFTING would gain special consideration vis-ˆ-vis power generation under proposed legislation. See story, "Bill gives rafting preference over hydropower."Democrat file photo by Joanne McCubrey |
By EDMOND JACOBY Staff writer
State Sen. Tom Torlakson, D-Antioch, has introduced legislation that would block state agencies from furthering any uses of the South Fork of the American River that is not consistent with whitewater rafting or other recreational activities.
The legislation, SB 2078, quickly moved from its introduction Feb. 22 through committee assignment and amendments, and is scheduled for what may be its final hurdle, a hearing Tuesday before the Committee on Natural Resources and Wildlife, before being acted upon.
Asserting that it is reasonable to operate "hydropower projects upstream of and including Chili Bar Dam" in a manner "to enhance instream beneficial uses, including whitewater boating, swimming, and fishing on the South Fork American River below Chili Bar Dam," the legislation proclaims that the state Legislature "hereby finds and declares" that "maintaining sufficient, reliable, and predictable instream flows is necessary for safe and efficient whitewater recreational use and for reasonable domestic water use."
The legislation specifically prohibits state agencies, which would include the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and other state agencies with regulatory authority over the river system in El Dorado County, from assisting or cooperating, "whether by loan, grant, license or otherwise, with any department or agency of the federal or local government in the planning or construction of any dam, diversion, or water impoundment facility ... unless the secretary determines that the structure will not adversely affect water flow conditions for whitewater recreational use or other instream beneficial uses ... of the South Fork American River below Chili Bar Dam to Salmon Falls Bridge."
The legislation also specifically deletes language from the California Water Code that grants certain water use rights to the Georgetown Divide Public Utility District.
According to Torlakson's press spokesman, Robert Oaks, the 7th District senator is a whitewater rafter. An information backgrounder supplied by his Sacramento office described the bill as a cure for difficulties encountered last summer by recreational river users.
"For many years, there was a casual arrangement whereby recreation interests met with (Chili Bar) dam operators to release adequate flows of water for recreation," the backgrounder said.
"During Summer 2001, water was not released regularly and consistently from Chile [sic] Bar reservoir, creating significant problems for downstream recreation," it said.
Torlakson is not alone in his interest in whitewater rafting on the South Fork of the American below Chili Bar Dam. The number varies, but approximately 40 outfitters hold commercial licenses from El Dorado County for rafting on the South Fork. Some of those outfitters are local companies, most are not, but all pay $300 per year for the right to operate their rafts on the river below Chili Bar Dam, plus daily use fees for each passenger they carry down river. County officials say the business is beneficial to local businesses, although detractors complain the foreign companies are benefiting from the arrangement more than the local economy.
El Dorado has not always favored commercial rafting, and in the 1970s it attempted to ban rafting on the South Fork altogether, according to county Parks and Recreation staffer Jeff Novak. The matter went to court, he said, and the county was directed to manage the river for the benefit of rafting and other recreational uses, based on the model provided by federal practices. The key ruling for rafting was when the South Fork was declared a navigable river, thus allowing rafting by right.
Attempting to reach a balance between the court order and local opponents, the county adopted as controlling the historical rafting patterns and limited the number of licenses it issues based on historical usage levels. A new river management plan was adopted by the Board of Supervisors last fall. Individual, non-commercial rafting is not governed by the rules.
A key issue in the whitewater use quarrel is the generation of electric power by powerhouses on the South Fork above Chili Bar Dam. El Dorado Irrigation District operates one, the El Dorado Powerhouse, which is due to begin generating power in June after a major overhaul necessitated by the floods of 1999. Sacramento Municipal Utility District operates 10, and Pacific Gas & Electric operates one power generator that is integral with Chili Bar Dam.
Electricity generated by the powerhouses does not bring the same price around the clock. At peak usage times -- in the summer, that typically is between late morning and early evening on weekdays, when air conditioners are in use -- electricity brings a higher price than at other hours, and a significantly higher price than in the hours between midnight and sunrise.
According to hydraulic engineers, early-morning releases at Chili Bar Dam sufficient to assure river flows on the order of 1,200 to 1,700 cubic feet per second, the amount rafters say is needed to make the rafting experience safe and enjoyable, require water to begin surging down the upper reaches of the South Fork, coursing through the powerhouses one-by-one, during those post-midnight hours.
The water, they say, can be stored and used to drive the generators when power is needed, but once generated, the electricity is gone; it cannot be stored for sale when the price rises. In effect, the stored water is stored electricity waiting to be generated and sold.
While recreationalists may see the issue in terms of lost river access, for the utility companies it is more one of lost revenues, which translates, in turn, to higher rates they may have to charge their customers. The tension inherent in that dichotomy is little more than a difference of opinion when water is abundant, but it becomes something worth fighting about when drought enters the picture.
That's what happened last summer. Low water levels and low flow rates restricted the ability of the utilities to cooperate with releases timed and gauged to benefit rafting below Chili Bar Dam.
"If the water is up there, they'll release it," said EID Director Richard Akin.
"Last summer it wasn't there. You can't get blood out of a turnip, and you can't get water out of a dry stream bed," he said.
Whitewater enthusiasts, according to the arguments they put forth, see dams like the one at Chili Bar as the key to the problem.
The dam was built, however, as part of the power generation system. If it were not there, the South Fork would become a trickle in the summer as it did historically before the dam was built.
" Rafting is a great thing," said Richard Akin.
"But, you know, in 1977 my son rode his bicycle down to Coloma, and he rode it across the American River. It gets that low in the summer," he said.
"Every summer, the American River slows to a trickle. If it wasn't for the dams storing water to produce power, there wouldn't be any water from late spring until well into fall," he said.
"These people forget where that water comes from," he said.
EID Board President George Osborne agrees, and said he has photographs of people picnicking beside the South Fork of the American at Chili Bar before the dam was built there.
"They rolled up their pants legs and waded across the river there," he said.
"In the past, the 'area of origin' concept was a much higher priority than it is today," Akin said.
"And this just sounds to me like another effort to grab from us our local resource heritage."
E-mail Edmond Jacoby at ejacoby@mtdemocrat.net
Right now, the market IS FREE to sort it out. When demands for power generation and consideration of available water to release are the inputs the power company maximizes the timing and the production to the greatest good for the greatest number.
At the heart of the rafting gambit is a water theft/release/reallocation to the California Delta Pumping plants for transfer to points south.
The rafting industry is the "useful idiot" of Southern California.
I think the closest thing is the Klamath list. It has been used as such and no one has compained yet.
Speaking of complaining, let me know if you wish to be added or removed from this list.
There are more then a hundard miles of river and two dams (Folsom is the big one) between the discussed parts of the american river and the sacramento river delta.
Setting a minimum river flow release requirement also checks erosion. Frequent rapid changes in river flow do bad things to the river bed/bank, what about the property rights of those who live near the river.
Dinsdale, for 28 years I lived within two hours drive of more hydro power dams than I think exist in the entire state of California. Not one of those rivers has ever had any problems with erosion below the dams because of variable release rates.
As for property rights, they are only enhanced. The flood control aspects of any hydro dam makes downstream river bank property far more useable and immensly more valuable.
Are you saying this only happens when water is released from the lake behind the dam ? ...better tell mother nature to be nice in the winter when the river escapes it's banks.
Instead we see things like this. We see the ANWR rescue people crying out against putting a whole in the ground in an area the size of a couple of football fields. Meanwhile American soldiers waste away their lives and other valuable resources protecting oil in Saudi Arabia.
I wonder if there has ever been a Constitutional test of this interpretation?
Many of these dams are capable of sending a five foot wall of water down the river bed once or twice a day (or more often, but there would be no reason to). Nature does it once a year, maybe twice.
Notice the picture at the top of this article. The changes in river elevation due to hydro generation never pushes(raises) past the rather considerable zone of stable, natural rock rip-rap. . . .effectively zero augment to erosion. (the picture is typical of the stretch from Chili Bar Dam to Salmon Falls bridge and the upper reaches of Folsom Lake. This bill is a wedge to release water.
There is also rafting below Folsom/Nimbus.
The delta interests need all the tools available. The rafting industry is just one. Without other water use agendas backing this bill it would get nowhere.
BTW I agree with you about SCal not getting any more water. LA should have no lawns (I'm serious about that).
Here is a picture of the South fork American River above Chili Bar Dam . . .
The condition of the canyon is COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT of dam operation. The large area of rocky river bed is natural. In 1997 (New Years day) a warm Pacific storm dumped inches and inches or tropical rain on a deep and early Sierra snow pack. Near record flows resulted.
Even unregulated dam operation could not begin to match the fury of Mother Nature's extremes. . . She has left us a stable river bed.
Your "erosion" arguments don't float a boat.
Look a little closer, it is not. (grass growing in the bed, fisherys depend on this) Nice uneven riverbed. Lots of people fish the South fork. The Yuba river below Bullards Bar damn on the other hand looks a lot like the LA river, flat bottom, no plants, few fish, banks undermined. (sorry no pictures on hand, but I've been there)
Sure nature scoures the river, damns do it with less fury but much higher frequency.
My point all along is that power is only one of the purposes of a dam, others are recreation, flood control and irrigation. Each of these other activitys has economic value. Dam operators have to balance each of these while remembering that they are all subject to diminishing returns.
You are correct. It is not "lifeless" . . . nor is it any more or less "verdant" than the areas in question.
Prior the hydro development of the American river canyon the "fisheries" of the lower stretches of the river(that part in question) consisted of carp, small mouth bass, frogs and crayfish. The summer water temperature was too warm for trout.
Today the water temperature is too cold for bass and most carp. TROUT LOVE IT! The ecology of the river has already adapted.
There is no substantial ecological/environmental argument to float this bill.
Uh . . . excuse me . . . there IS an argument - one that is contorted and bogus.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.