by Felice Pace
Drought Emergency Water Regulations, enacted in the midst of an historic drought and intended to give those Coho Salmon which spawn and rear in the Scott River Basin a chance to survive, are not needed by the Coho and will needlessly devastate Scott Valley farmers and ranchers if implemented. That is the message of the Scott Valley Agriculture Water Alliance, a new organization which, according to its website, formed to "be
a unified voice communicating on behalf of local farmers and ranchers,
spreading accurate information about Scott Valley’s agricultural
producers, the Scott River, and its fish." Their vision is to "debunk
the myths that are driving the state’s severe water regulations."
So far the organization has published what it calls a "white paper" titled "WHY THE STATE WATER BOARD’S 2021-2022 FLOW REGULATION IS NOT NEEDED FOR COHO SALMON IN THE SCOTT RIVER." The organization's "mission' and "vision" are driven by the white paper's assertion
that providing emergency flows to help Scott River Coho is an
"existential threat" to farmers and ranchers in Scott Valley.
The Scott River is a Klamath River watershed and, according to the consensus of fisheries biologists and restorations, the valley and canyon sections of the Scott are key to the survival and recovery of Klamath River Coho Salmon. Not so according to the Scott Valley Agriculture Water Alliance and its white paper.
Klamath River Sub-basins with the Scott in pink
I lived in the Scott River Valley from 1976 until 2002. I still spend time there and I've been involved in water and fish issues there since the 1980s. When I decode the words of the new water alliance and read its white paper I see a determination to use selective information to support a preordained conclusion: that irrigated agriculture in the Scott River Valley has no impact on Coho or Chinook Salmon and is, in fact, the highest and best use of Scott River water.
The Scott Valley Agriculture Water Alliance is the creation of three accomplished Scott Valley ladies: Theodora Johnson, Lauren Sweezy and Sari Sommarstrom. All three have lived in the Scott Valley
most or all of their lives and all are part of families involved in irrigated agriculture as a major source of income. Below I look more closely at the new organization and its claims.
Carefully Selected Facts
"WHY THE STATE WATER BOARD’S 2021-2022 FLOW REGULATION IS NOT NEEDED FOR COHO SALMON IN THE SCOTT RIVER" (the caps are theirs) sets out to debunk the "myth" that Drought Emergency Water Regulations, enacted in the midst of an historic drought are needed to give Coho Salmon a chance to survive in the Scott River Basin. You can read the white paper at this link.
You can also read the Department of Fish & Wildlife's rationale for
requesting that the Water Board order the emergency flows at this link.
There are curious things about the white paper. For one, its authors did not put their names on it. I can easily understand why Sommarstrom, a recognized professional scientist, might not want to be associated with this particular white paper. It blatantly selects facts and omits those which do not support its forgone conclusions. Not exactly the scientific method on display.
But scientists too can be advocates and no one can use all the data and cite all relevant studies. Nevertheless, even advocate scientists feel obliged to let readers know that theirs is not the only scientific view. The new alliance's white paper does not conform to that standard. Instead it discounts scientific and technical information on the needs of Coho and Chinook Salmon and omits key studies and reports, including studies and reports commissioned by the Karuk Tribe.
As I see it, the white paper demonstrates once again that Scott River irrigators remain recalcitrant. They refuse to do their part to maintain Scott River aquatic ecosystems in order to prevent Scott River Coho and Chinook Salmon from continuing their long-term slide toward extinction. Scott Valley Ag folks think their water needs
and uses are superior to all other needs and uses.
Flood irrigation in Scott Valley on March 2, 2022. By law, irrigation is supposed to only take place "from about April 1 to about October 15 of each year."
The Restoration Dodge
Thirty five years of "restoration" in the Scott Valley has failed to result in the recovery of Scott River
Salmon and most of the aquatic habitats on which they depend. Too
many times "restoration" funding that was supposed to help salmon has instead been diverted to mainly benefit irrigators. Most importantly, "restoration" has failed to include restoration of the flows aquatic ecosystems and the salmon which depend on those ecosystems need to survive, much less to thrive.
Rather
than addressing the key need for adequate flows, voluntary
"restoration" has been used to avoid providing the real, wet water that
salmon and all fish need. That must change.
There's No Substitute for Recovery Flows
According to the best available scientific information, flows needed to recover salmon and restore salmon and related beneficial uses of Scott River are larger by month compared to the emergency drought flows requested by the Department of Fish and Wildlife and adopted by the Water Board. Once the drought is over, those who want Scott Valley Salmon restored should ask the State Water Board to adopt flow objectives for Scott River that are adequate for recovery.
State Water Board adoption of recovery flow objectives by month and water year type would provide certainty and resolve conflicts. Those who depend on water for irrigation and those who depend on water for salmon would know what they could expect and they could plan accordingly. Flow objectives adopted by the Water Board would be scientifically informed and socially balanced as required by law.
Robust
Scott River Flow Objectives are urgently needed to restore not just
Coho and Chinook but all the beneficial uses that are guaranteed in the
California Constitution and Water Codes. Those "beneficial uses" include irrigation. The
State Waters Board's adoption of flow objectives by water year type
would help Scott Valley Agriculture make the transition to truly sustainable
production. Real sustainable production is production which does not threaten other
beneficial uses.
The science exists to inform flow objectives by water year type. Water Board staff reservations not withstanding, that is what the Water Board should do.
Valley of Denial
The White Paper's authors refuse to recognize that the Scott River Basin could be producing
many more Coho than it has been producing if only those consuming large
amounts of surface and groundwater were giving back a little. But
in the Scott Valley selfishness rules and has been redefined as virtue.
In light of these social realities, only
consistent and rigorous enforcement of California's Water and Wildlife
laws can end the ongoing epidemic of selfishness and adequately protect the Scott River's water and fish. But rather than truly regulate, the State Water Board continues to accept "cooperative solutions" that may keep Coho from going extinct but will not restore Coho or Chinook Salmon as the vibrant and vital Public Trust Resources they once were and can again be. Cooperative solutions can play a role, but rigorous enforcement on bad actors is critical to successful recovery.
A key provision of the Water Board's orders for the Scott and Shasta Basins is a limitation on highly inefficient stockwatering methods. Abuse of stockwatering rights, including excessive diversions from streams and using stockwatering rights to irrigate pastures outside the irrigation season, has been one of the most blatant abuses of water law in Scott Valley. To put matters bluntly, many with stockwatering rights have been committing water theft. The new limitation still allows diversion of ten times the amount of water needed by a rancher's livestock. It is high time for the Water Board to eliminate hugely inefficient livestock watering, not just during the drought but once and for all.
Those who care
about Klamath River Salmon should actively support the State Water Board's emergency regulations and stockwatering limitations for the Shasta and Scott Basins. We must also continue to be vigilant. Political pressure on the Water Board to "compromise" what salmon needed is intense. Those who care about salmon and our rivers must continue to insist that Water Board staff not compromise California's Water and Wildlife Codes.
If you think enforcement rather than "cooperative solutions" is what is most needed now, let the State Water Board know at this address: ScottShastaDrought@waterboards.ca.gov and let Cal DFW know at this address: R2Info@wildlife.ca.gov. If you see Scott Valley irrigation outside of the April 1 to October 31 irrigation season, or any other abuse of the environment, please file a confidential online complaint with Cal EPA.
<<<<<<<>>>>>>>
Digging Deeper
I
see the white paper as an accurate expression of dominant beliefs and
positions shared by most members of the Scott Valley's agricultural
community. For those interested in learning more about Scott Valley society and politics and how they impact salmon and all beneficial uses of water, below I dig a deeper into what I believe are errors and intentional omissions contained in the Ag white paper.
The white paper uses public information on the size of the Scott River's adult
Coho run and information on Coho out-migration from the Scott to argue
that the Coho are not really in danger
of extirpation from the Scott River Basin and that, even if they were in
danger, the emergency flows called for by DFW and being ordered by the
State Water Board are not needed in summer because there are no Coho in
Scott River at that time.
In making those assertions the white paper's authors ignore the following relevant factors:
#1 Coho Population Size
500 spawning adults is considered the absolute minimum population of a
salmon stock needed to maintain sufficient genetic diversity within that
stock or population group.
Because not all migrating adults get to spawn, a run size significantly
in excess of 500 individuals is needed to assure that at least 500
adults get to reproduce. Reduced genetic diversity means reduced
resilience and increased risk of extirpation/extinction.
As
noted in the white paper, in the Scott River Basin "average coho run
size since 2007 is now 732 adults." Since not all migrating adults
are able to spawn, 732 migrating adults
is dangerously close to the 500 minimum spawning adults scientists believe are needed to maintain genetic
diversity. Significant loss of genetic diversity vastly increases the chances that a fish or wildlife species or population will go extinct. But even before a critical threshold is reached, fewer spawners means reduced genetic diversity and increased vulnerability to changing environmental conditions.
A low genetic population combined with significant year to year variability in the number of spawners and now three rather than just two "weak" Coho "cohorts" is not the robust Coho population that the white paper's authors claim.
The threat of extirpation from the Scott, which would be the extinction
of the Scott River Coho, is not
some risk manufactured in order to punish Scott Valley irrigators; it
is, rather, a clear and present danger well documented by scientific
experts. What is it about those experts that the three authors question?
It can only be either their competence or their
integrity.
#2 Where Coho Are Found
The authors claim that the emergency flows are not needed during the
irrigation season because "CDFW’s annual salmon reports clearly show
that coho do not occupy the mainstem
of the river during July through early October." The authors fail to mention that the reason there are no Coho in the River during summer and early fall is that conditions there are rendered lethal to salmon and most other fish.
Removal of stream shade in order to maximize agricultural production in Scott Valley is one reason Scott River becomes too hot for salmon during the summer and early fall. Coho, and Chinook and Steelhead as well, flee into those cold tributaries which flow from wilderness and are not dewatered by irrigation diversions before they reach Scott River.
Scott River below Scott Valley on October 6th, 2019.
The Chinook Salmon run is flow-delayed nearly every year.
A stream's water temperature is also flow related: more flow
means lower stream temperature and less flow means higher stream
temperature. The dewatering of the Scott
via irrigation and stockwatering are another reason the Scott River below
Scott Valley is too hot for Coho and almost every other fish species to
survive. If you doubt this just swim the Scott River below Scott Valley in August. I've done it and seen an eerie underwater wasteland devoid of all salmon and most other fishes.
According to the Clean Water Act as expressed in the North Coast Regional Basin Plan, Scott Valley Ag folks are supposed to
maintain natural shade along streams
that pass through the land they control so that stream water
temperatures remain cool. Most Scott Valley Ag operators ignore this
legal requirement. They plow and plant right down to the streambanks
or allow their livestock to trample the banks, thereby
removing shade vegetation which allows the water to grow hot while adding sediment that fills pools and renders spawning gravel unusable.
The photo
below shows plowing this spring right up to the streambank break along Moffett Creek in Scott Valley
and the photo below that is of a feed lot located along lower Kidder Creek where a group of bulls is allowed to continually trample several hundred feet of streambank.
I've been filing complaints for years about these and other sites in the Scott Valley where streambanks are trampled, sediment is delivered to streams and stream shade is removed or prevented. Unfortunately, and in spite of the fact that the Scott is officially recognized as sediment and temperature impaired, the North Coast Water Board refuses to enforce the Clean Water Act when it comes to agricultural operations and operators.
The reason there are no Coho in Scott River below Scott
Valley in summer is because the irresponsible Ag operators whose actions
the white paper defends decrease flows
and increase the river's temperature to the point where Coho can't
survive in the River in and below Scott Valley and must flee to the
free-flowing tributaries.
#3 The Ag Safety Net is Ironclad
The white paper's authors claim that maintaining the emergency flows for Coho
threatens to put farmers and ranchers out of business. It is a false
claim for several reasons, below are two:
1. Since 1977 almost all agricultural operations and operators in the Scott Valley have
developed the ability to irrigate with groundwater. Many of those
irrigation wells and center pivot irrigation
systems were paid for by federal taxpayers via the Klamath EQIP
Program. When surface water is not available, the irrigators just use
groundwater. This cuts into their profit margins but it is still
profitable to farm using groundwater for irrigation.The Water Board's emergency regulations allows for some use of groundwater for irrigation.
2. Some Scott Valley Ag producers receive taxpayer subsidies every year. In addition, whenever as a result of drought or other disasters Ag producers can't make a
profit, the federal government steps in with Disaster and Farm Bill Payments
to make those farmers and
ranchers whole. For example, from 1995 to 2019 Ag producers in the 96027 (Etna) zip
code (just one part of Scott Valley) received $6,010,299 in payments from the federal government (source: EWG Database).
Those payments are financed by taxpayers. Payments made every year are augmented regularly when a disaster is declared.
Ag producers have an excellent government
safety net that guarantees their incomes. The safety net has many aspects, not just the two described above. For example, taxpayers pay part of the premium whenever an Ag operator decides to purchase crop insurance. I'm not against these income supports. It is just too bad that the poor and
disadvantaged don't enjoy similar income support.
The levels of taxpayer support enjoyed by Scott Valley Ag producers individually and collectively are readily available from a public database at this link. The authors of the White Paper surely know about the ongoing crop, disaster and conservation payments because their family Ag businesses receive them. Why do you suppose they failed to mention them?
#4 Key Information Excluded and Ignored
The authors' use and misuse of selective information is evident to those familiar with the relevant scientific information. The omissions are reflected in the white paper's bibliography. The only document from the Karuk Tribe included is the Emergency Petition itself. The Karuk Tribe commissioned and paid for several scientific studies and assessments that are relevant to the status and recovery of Coho and Chinook Salmon in the Scott River Basin. Those studies are well known and readily available in several locations, including the Karuk Tribe's website. Why were the Karuk Tribe's Scott scientific studies and assessments omitted?
Denial of Reality Present and Past
Were
these errors and omissions intentional or unintentional? Who knows and
does it really matter? The fact is that the authors deny that Scott
River Coho are at risk of extinction
and totally ignore what experts have identified as the main risks to
their continued existence. They also ignore what is called for in the
Coho Recovery Plan.
The authors apparently believe that the need of
Scott Valley ranchers and alfalfa growers to maximize profits trumps the
needs of other species to survive.
Why else would they publish such a mean spirited white paper which
cherry picks the scientific information, failing to mention key facts that
do not comport with their objective?
The white paper is one more confirmation that in the Scott River Valley we
have a landed aristocracy which insists that their use of the land is the
highest and best use; Coho and
all else that depends on healthy stream ecosystems be damned.
This
should not surprise us. The Scott River Basin's landed aristocracy got
the land by expropriation, while eliminating its previous owners, the indigenous Shasta of Scott Valley.
They continue to believe that they are entitled, not only to the land
but also to the water.
While the degradation of the Scott River by agricultural operations has been a long term process, the details have changed over time. In the 1970s, Scott Valley native Jim Denny wrote an article chronicling the destruction he had seen up until that point. You can read Jim Denny's Death of a Lady at this link.
The
Ag white paper demonstrates why we need to get rid of the Scott
Valley Aristocracy. Aristocracies take care of themselves at the expense
of all others, including less advantaged
members of their own and other species. Aristocracies are antithetical
to real democracy and, in the case of Scott Valley, to acknowledgement
and redress for the historic genocide by which the Scott Valley
aristocracy got "ownership" of the land and (until
recently) control of the water.
We
should not be surprised that the aristocracy is upset about losing
control of the water. They refuse to take responsibility for the fact that it is their own greed,
resulting in the dewatering of Scott River
and the endangerment of Scott River Salmon, that created the current
situation.
This
is the way all aristocracies act and it is the main reason freedom
loving folks came to the USA, that is, to escape aristocracy and its
excesses. And that is why the Scott River
Aristocracy should fall: it is not only unjust to the Scott River, its aquatic ecosystems and those who depend on them, it is not in keeping with American ideals.
What
we need now is law and order in the form of rigorous enforcement of our water and
wildlife laws which Scott Valley irrigation interests have so often and so callously violated.
We need real and significant consequences for those who violate lawful Water Board orders. We need respect for all the beneficial uses of water, not just irrigated agriculture.
These
matters need to be brought out in the open and discussed because that
is the path to justice and social harmony. So I encourage all those
reading this who have related
thoughts and opinions to share them with neighbors and friends, including by leaving a comment on this post at this blog.
The Scott Valley is a beautiful place but the lack of water justice is an ugly stain on its society. We can build a society whose beauty corresponds to the natural beauty of the Scott River Basin. All that is required is honesty and equity. It remains unclear whether we are up to the task.
<<<<<<<>>>>>>>
Postscript: You Too Can Weigh-In
The Scott Valley Agriculture Water Alliance is using the "existential threat" it falsely claims is facing Scott Valley farmers and ranchers to build pressure on the State Water Board to rescind Drought Emergency Regulations enactment on behalf of Scott River Coho. You can weigh in on this issue too. The State Water Board is accepting comments at any time. Please email comments to
ScottShastaDrought@waterboards.ca.gov. Wherever you stand, let your voice be heard! That's democracy in action.
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
