storytemplate

Latest Potter Valley Shenanigans
by Michael Guerriero
Subtle but critical management problems keep accumulating and coming to light around the operation of PG&E’s Potter Valley Hydroelectric Project on the upper Eel. Friends of the Eel River (FOER) has again stepped up to address these problems, challenging the governmental agency responsible for the hydro license, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Public complaints are based on the Endangered Species Act and the declining salmon and steelhead numbers, as well as demanding reparations for PG&E’s most recent violations.
        In 2005 FERC approved a new flow schedule for diversions of Eel water to the Russian watershed, and releases of Eel water into its own river. This set of guidelines is called the “Reasonable and Prudent Alternative” (RPA) for the Potter Valley Project’s (PVP) operation. Now PG&E’s own records show that in the past 18 months between 2005 and summer of 2006 flows have been mismanaged in the amount of 20,000 acre-feet, and the fish screens are badly damaged that are supposed to prevent salmon and steelhead fry from being sucked into the water tunnel and becoming fertilizer for the vineyards of Potter Valley.
      In addition to these insults to the endangered runs of Eel River salmon, the Potter Valley Irrigation District (PVID) copped extra Eel water when it was granted its request for “emergency” frost protection in March and April—a problem never encountered in the past. Both NOAA (umbrella agency for the National Marine Fisheries Service) and CDF&G countered that the Eel River flow during this period is critical for out-migrating salmonid fry. These agencies were also concerned about water levels in Lake Pillsbury causing cutbacks in summer flows. While the regional NOAA officials recommended denial of the request, the recommendation was reversed by Jim Lecky in the D.C. office and Rod McGinnes, head of NOAA in California. The move appears to be due, in part, to political pressure from our federal representatives (and the Governor), enabling FERC to grant a temporary variance from the license requirements and allow additional water for anticipated “frost protection” with provisions to repay the volume lost to the Eel River. The quantity asked for by PVID is up to 50 cubic feet per second (which is 99 acre-feet in 24 hours) to protect a special variety of wine grapes. This flow is in addition to what PG&E currently diverts for its own use plus 30 to 35 cubic feet per second for planted sport trout between Potter Valley and Lake Mendocino. It was observed that the PVID requested 50 cfs for the first and second days and then only 20 cfs. When queried about its use of the extra water, they said they needed to fill one pond to the south of the valley and to make sure the ditches were full of water. Is this a reasonable use of water?
Friends of the Eel River, in a motion to intervene, has challenged FERC to review its decision allowing this variance in light of potential environmental impacts on habitat of endangered or threatened species. Additionally, we joined CDF&G, the Round Valley Tribal Council, Friends of the Russian River, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife in stating that there is no emergency involved in frost protection, and that PG&E should be penalized for violations of the RPA. Additional concerns include FERC issuing an Environmental Assessment without any public question or input, and not doing the required full Environmental Review that this situation called for. The call to declare an emergency before the fact of a frost is unprecedented, and is a political favor that was unreasonable to fulfill.
    A casual observer may consider these events trivial; however, seen from the perspective of those involved in the restoration of the Eel River salmon runs, the sport and commercial fishing industry, and downstream residents in the watershed, any deviation from the RPA deserves skeptical scrutiny. NOAA stated that the RPA was so finely tuned it could not be compromised without jeopardizing the salmon in the Eel River.
Why are we investing $2 million annually for salmon restoration projects in this wonderful river if politics end up ruling the day? Is it to see the work compromised by mismanagement of the best, coldest volume of headwater in the system for the sake of wealthy, intransigent wine growers and their developer friends in the Russian River watershed? Will our investment in restoration ever be free of mitigation for current injuries to the watershed?
Join our effort by becoming informed and letting your voice be heard. We work hard to keep our website informative and up to date, so check us out at www.eelriver.org. Join our effort—the Eel River needs your help too!