(Note particularly the “emergency regulations” highlighted in bold.)
Notice Of Proposed Emergency Regulation For Enhanced Conservation Measures And Information In Key Russian River Tributaries (Dutch Bill, Green Valley, Mark West, And Mill Creeks)
by the California State Water Resources Control Board
The Problem
With dry conditions continuing across much of California, many of the State’s key fisheries are now at record low numbers and several species are in danger of extinction. Central California Coast (CCC) coho salmon (coho salmon) and Central California Coast steelhead (steelhead) in the Russian River tributaries are listed as endangered or threatened by federal or state agencies and face a particularly perilous situation, affecting their ability to survive a fourth year of drought. The coho salmon has been highlighted by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) as the eighth most endangered species under its jurisdiction considered at risk of extinction. The Russian River tributaries are prime spawning ground for the anadromous species, and low flows, already a problem before the drought, have been made worse by the extremely dry conditions of the past three years. Increased pumping of surface and groundwater results in disconnected stream systems with low flows, isolated pools with low oxygen levels, and elevated temperatures that kill fish and threaten coho salmon with extinction.
Populations of Russian River coho salmon and steelhead have declined significantly since the 1950s. While they once supported a commercial harvest of more than 13,000 coho salmon annually, by the 1990s coho salmon returning to the Russian River watershed averaged less than 600 fish. After crashing to as few as 2 to 7 fish between 2000 and 2008, the coho salmon population has been increasing due to a captive breeding program. The benefits of that program are now in danger of being lost. While there are no abundance estimates for steelhead in the Russian River watershed, their numbers have declined substantially and Central California Coast steelhead are likely to become in danger of extinction in the foreseeable future.
When it became clear that voluntary water conservation efforts to provide minimal flows for fish would fall short this year, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), working with NMFS, requested that the State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) take action to provide the small amount of water necessary to maintain pools that can support summer rearing and migration of coho salmon and steelhead. Coho salmon and steelhead depend on pools in these tributaries to grow during the summer months and then migrate to the ocean from the late fall through spring. The four Russian River tributary watersheds that are affected are: Dutch Bill Creek, Green Valley Creek, Mill Creek, and parts of Mark West Creek.
Outreach
In 2014, CDFW and NMFS established the California Voluntary Drought Initiative (Drought Initiative). The Drought Initiative targets priority Russian River tributary watersheds, among other watersheds in California, for the development of voluntary agreements between CDFW, landowners, and other parties to provide instream flows for fish, associated monitoring, and access for potential fish rescue efforts. Earlier this year, recognizing the dire conditions facing these important fish species this year, the State Water Board, CDFW and NMFS broadly publicized their plea for voluntary efforts and met with area landowners to secure participation in the Drought Initiative.
Unfortunately, the outreach efforts have had limited success, with only 20 residential landowner agreements providing additional instream flows in place under CDFW’s Drought Initiative as of June 5, 2015. The additional flow represented by these 20 agreements is not enough to make a difference towards the species’ survival.
Proposed Emergency Regulation
The proposed emergency regulation will protect coho salmon and steelhead in four Russian River tributary watersheds: Dutch Bill Creek, Green Valley Creek, Mill Creek and parts of Mark West Creek. The four watersheds have been identified by CDFW and NMFS as a high priority for Central Coast California coho salmon preservation and encompass 130 square miles and about 13,000 landowners.
The regulation would require enhanced conservation measures for all users of water (e.g. residences and businesses, including wineries) diverting from the four watersheds, including groundwater, resulting in more water remaining instream. The regulation also includes reporting for surface and groundwater use. Groundwater is included in the proposed regulation because the close hydraulic connection between groundwater and surface water in the region make groundwater pumping a significant factor in stream flows. Water used for commercial agriculture purposes only would be excluded from the conservation restrictions.
Unless gray water is available for use, the conservation measures eliminate all watering of ornamental lawns; limit watering of all other landscaping to twice a week and only between the hours of 8 p.m. to 8 a.m.; limit car washing to commercial car washes that recirculate water; and prohibit the filling or refilling of decorative ponds and fountains. Water used for community recreation facilities would be permitted, though with limitations. The regulation includes other restrictions as well and applies to non-potable as well as potable water.
The proposed regulation would require diverters, if directed by the State Water Board, to provide information on the sources and uses of both surface and groundwater diverted from the watersheds and applies to all landowners in and suppliers of water from the watersheds. Information obtained through these informational orders will provide the State Water Board with critical information to accurately estimate total water demand, and the burden that this demand places on stream flows, in the four priority tributary watersheds.
The regulation would not impose the enhanced conservation restrictions on water users who are complying with a voluntary agreement, but participation in the voluntary program would not affect any other independent conservation or water use restriction obligations such as an information order or curtailments, if imposed in the future.
* * *
In a separate but related “letter to landowners” with property on the four Russian River Tributaries, the Water Board adds: “The proposed emergency regulation would also prohibit new groundwater wells or surface water diversions (except for winter diversions to offstream storage that first receive an approval from the Deputy Director for the Division of Water Rights) for the duration of the emergency regulation, which is 270 days, unless extended by the State Water Board. Enhanced conservation in combination with no increase in water extractions in these four watersheds should help to provide the minimal amount of water needed to maintain pools essential for rearing coho salmon and steelhead.”
* * *
SO: No private car washing, no lawn watering, reduced landscape watering, and no filling of “decorative” ponds. Plus required reporting of information already required.
The only “new” “emergency” regulation that might have noticeable benefit for fish is in the separate letter to landowners which “prohibits” non-winter surface water diversions. But of course such “prohibitions” are toothless without oversight, monitoring and enforcement.
* * *
COMMENT #1:
To the State Water Resources Control Board
Considering what an important matter this is, it’s both shocking and disquieting how poorly it’s been handled from the start. First of all, with the plethora of communication options available nowadays it’s extremely disturbing that some of the hardworking taxpayers who the water regulations will affect only received the letter three days prior to the meeting in Sacramento while others, who live not 20ft away and are on the same exact watershed, received no notice at all, at least not until after the meeting had already taken place, giving us nowhere near adequate time to respond. That in of itself gives cause for concern as it violates our fundamental rights.
But as if that wasn't enough, the proposed water regulations themselves are severely unbalanced — asking homeowners to sacrifice greatly while vineyards, that use at least three times the water we do, are exempt. Last I heard, the salmon are the endangered species, not a grapevine that can be replaced at any time so why are the hardworking average joe’s who pay thousands a year in taxes being asked to relinquish control of their water usage when the big vineyards can water seven days a week without restriction? I’m certain that the salmon, the supposed reason for these regulations, would greatly appreciate some help from the grape owners who use more water than we ever will.
The entire affair lacks any sort of common sense, especially when you factor in that new vineyards, which will draw from the same depleted watersheds we're being told to conserve, are currently in development. It truly baffles the mind. After all, a person never has more rights than they do in comfort of their own home. To forcibly remove some of those rights and transfer them instead to the government is egregious. I don't dispute that the Coho salmon are important nor that we're in a drought, but if we are in such a serious drought emergency as to sanction regulating what hardworking taxpayers do with the water on their own property then, by rights, development on all new vineyards should be immediately halted. It’s extremely difficult to take the proposed regulations seriously when the grape growers are not only given a free pass to water as they please, but are also able to start new wineries as though there’s no drought at all which will only serve to further deplete the limited water resources. It’s an outrageous abuse of power and a poorly thought out course of action that doesn’t respect let alone consider the needs and feelings of those whose daily lives it will affect. In fact, it seems as though only the vineyards are being taken into consideration, not the drought, not the fish, and certainly not us.
Stop the madness and start using your brains. Then ask yourself: Are the consequences of these actions, which make no logical sense, worth the fallout? Are they worth allowing government intrusion on private properties in a country which is known for being the land of the free and the home of the brave?
The Kraus Family
Sebastopol
* * *
COMMENT #2:
To the State Water Resources Control Board
On the afternoon of June 16th, I received a letter from the State Resources Control Board about emergency regulations for four Russian River Watersheds. I am in the Green Valley Watershed and my property also borders the Dutch Bill Creek Watershed.
Some of my neighbors received this letter stating that a meeting would be held on June 17th in Sacramento at 9 a.m. which gave none of us time to prepare to attend the meeting. Some people received the letter a day or two after the meeting. One of the sentences in the letter states, "the enhanced conservation measure applies to non-economic uses of water..."
You aren't regulating vineyard use of water obviously because the wine industry brings in vast amounts of money to Sonoma County. I have lived in West Sonoma County for 35 years and the proliferation of water use by vineyards and entertainment centers is a disgrace. They are not held accountable. My family and I care deeply about the plight of the Coho and all animals affected by this severe drought. To blame this tragedy on the domestic use of water is absurd. The threat to the Coho is not new information. People have testified for years that the toxic run-off from vineyards pollutes tributaries of the Russian River. Also the drilling of new wells has affected homeowners wells. The vineyard owner who lives across the street from me has 40 acres and is watering his young vines this summer. I have a 30 foot well and most of my neighbors have shallow wells because we live in a water scarce area.
We reject this regulation and the fact that you're insulting our rights as homeowners to participate in discussion AFTER the law is passed. Will vineyard owners be in attendance at the meetings you hold the second week of July? I think not.
Pamela Stone Singer
Occidental
* * *
COMMENT #3
To Daniel Schultz, California State Water Resources Control Board, staff@OAL.ca.gov
Regarding: Emergency Regulations To Address Insufficient Flow For Coho Salmon In Tributaries of the Russian River
We hereby submit these comments in connection with the proposed emergency actions due to insufficient flow for specific fisheries and tributaries to the Russian River and the recent submission to OAL (office of administrative law).
We recommend that the State Water Board withdraw, reconsider and revisit this regulation and that the Office Of Administrative Law not approve it. As discussed below it is the State Water Board that is in defiance of Governor Brown’s Drought Proclamation and Order.
I live in the watershed of Green Valley Creek in the upper reach, the headwaters. It is historically water scarce with lots of serpentine and franciscan formations, notoriously low water bearing.
I am a past member of Salmon United, Trout Unlimited and a longtime advocate of maintaining the historic bounty of salmon in our rivers and streams and a strong fishing industry on the north coast.
I have testified repeatedly that the main cause of decline of salmonids is the dewatering of the tributaries. This is widely acknowledged today but little is being done about it.
Now comes the State Water Resources Control Board proposing to focus its attention and increased regulation on the noncommercial sector of the population, making demands regarding information and monitoring of residential water use. Why? We all know that it is the rapid expansion of acreage of irrigated vineyards in the hills which is draining the creeks and aquifers due to an overindulgence in water well drilling, extraction and diversion.
Many appellations in France (if not all) prohibit irrigation! Grapes are perfectly suited to our summer dry climate and can thrive without irrigation. The only reason there is little acreage of grapes dry-farmed now is that growers/investors get increased tonnage per acre equaling increase revenue equalling increased profits for shareholders.
How long did we expect the generous permitting of irrigated vineyards in the dry hills of West Sonoma County to continue before causing the collapse of the fishery? And in the relentless pursuit of higher returns per acre, varietals have been allowed on land where frost is a problem and precious groundwater is allowed to be sprayed on grapes for frost protection. This floods the soil and drenches leaves with water to prevent freezing. Why couldn't we foresee the inevitable outcome of this?
The State Water Resources Control Board is regulating lawns? What lawns? I challenge you to find ornamental lawns in the Dutch Bill, Green Valley and Atascadero Creek watersheds. It is not grass that is causing the problem, it is irrigated vineyard. A five acre vineyard uses as much water as a five acre ranchette. Would Sonoma County planners allow a density of 40 homes on 200 acres? Never! And water would be one of the main issues. But they readily, willingly allow 200 acres of irrigated grapes with an equivalent water use.
Furthermore, vineyard wells are permitted without full review under the California Environmental Quality Act with compliance essentially imposed only on minimal erosion control measures without insisting on any review of irrigation alternatives and dry farming or any other water conserving alternatives. We believe this is a clear violation of state environmental law.
The solution is obviously not to ignore this travesty and restrain rural residents, it is to take on the hard task of limiting irrigated vineyard acreage in this sensitive part of the county.
We suggest the State Water Resources Control Board table this new regulation and instead:
Hold workshops in the upper reaches of the Russian River to allow residents and growers to engage in our own problem-solving with regulators and planners involved including Water Board staff.
Ban groundwater used for frost protection.
Offer incentives for dry farming and seminars by members of the industry who are enthusiastic about the age-old dry-farming technique.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely, Ann Maurice,
Ad Hoc Committee For Clean Water, Occidental
* * *
COMMENT #4
I hereby submit to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) and to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) the following comments for consideration in connection with emergency actions.
”I am shocked, shocked, to learn that there is gambling going on at Rick's!"
I am shocked that you did not realize that drilling many and massive wells to facilitate more vineyards and entertainment centers would have a deleterious effect upon the coho salmon. What rock were you hiding under when the pesticide and herbicide runoff caused the deaths of insect and juvenile fish populations alike? Where were you when the frost protection measures of draining creeks caused the death of thousands of juvenile fish, flopping on the dry creek beds in agony.
I am outraged that you think that you have the right to curtail my domestic water use, while going whole hog forward on more destruction of wildlife habitat for the benefit of vineyard owners and their ilk.
Stop the madness. Put an immediate halt to all new vineyard development, use of water for irrigating vineyards, and any new entertainment centers. We are not amused.
Michael T Yezbick
Sebastopol
Be First to Comment