MENDOCINO Co., 12/11/23 — After 100 years of water diversions from the Eel River to the Russian River and the sometimes successful provision of hydroelectric power, license holder PG&E published its Initial Draft Surrender Application and Conceptual Decommissioning Plan for the Potter Valley Project in November. According to the initial plan, Potter Valley Project operations will end and Scott Dam will be removed.
The first draft plan is a conceptual overview, which will get more specific over the next two years. The project includes two dams — a larger structure called Scott Dam where water is stored at Lake Pillsbury, and the smaller Cape Horn Dam that creates the Van Arsdale Reservoir. At Cape Horn Dam, a coalition of regional agencies, counties, and tribes has stepped forward to propose keeping a much lower impact water diversion in place. PG&E included this proposal in its initial draft in a non-binding capacity, and is considering whether to incorporate the new diversion facility into its final decommissioning plan, to be published in January, 2025. The coming months will be a critical inflection point for Mendocino County, as much of the local agriculture on which our economy relies today owes to the 1905 establishment of the Potter Valley Project, which made the easier to farm.
“Now it’s our turn to figure out, for the next 100 years, what are we going to do?” 1st District Supervisor Glenn McGourty, a longtime advisor regarding vineyards’ and farmlands’ impacts on watersheds for the University of California Cooperative Extension, said in an interview with The Mendocino Voice this week.
Anyone with an opinion on how the decommissioning plays out has until Dec. 22 to weigh in with a written comment for PG&E; details on how to comment are included at the end of the article. Comments will likely pour in from an array of people representing at least four counties, numerous Indigenous tribes, and interested individuals from career farmers to recreational fishers.
On Dec. 8, at the most recent Russian River Water Forum — a gathering first convened at the beginning of this year to identify water supply resiliency solutions in the Russian River basin — many of these stakeholders presented on top-of-mind issues for the region’s water future, and discussed the open comment period on PG&E’s initial draft document. Mike Shaver of the Potter Valley Tribe and Anna FarPorte of the Sherwood Valley Band of Pomo Indians shared about their water quality testing initiatives. Members of the Coyote Valley Band of Pomo, the Wiyot Tribe, the Bear River Band of the Rhonerville Rancheria, and the Cahto Tribe of the Laytonville Rancheria also attended, with several representatives vocalizing a desire to be thoroughly consulted both by PG&E and by regional authorities as decisions are made about the joint futures of the Russian and Eel basins.
In another presentation, Vivian Helliwell, representing the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, gave a look at the history of salmon and steelhead fishing that long underpinned local community lifeways. Now, Chinook salmon from the Eel are at less than five percent of their historic runs and steelhead numbers are “alarmingly low,” per a report from Charlie Schneider of California Trout.
The Eel River has been heavily affected by logging, canneries, road development, climate change and other human impacts hindering both the watershed’s health and that of its communities. In 2023, it was listed as one of America’s most endangered rivers. Removing the dams is just one component of the path to a healthier watershed — but as lawsuits under the Environmental Species Act laid out in recent years, reconnecting the Eel by removing dams is a necessary part of recovery for fish populations and as such, a boon to the human communities that rely on the rivers. Further, due to seismic activity risk, Scott Dam was recently found to be too dangerous to continue storing high water levels at the adjoining Lake Pillsbury, meaning its spillway gates will remain open until its removal.
At this point in the decommissioning process, public say comes down to a fairly limited range of choices. PG&E will remove Scott Dam, but is still weighing a rapid dam removal of around two years against a phased dam removal in around three years, which would entail lowering and notching in three phases. PG&E is considering the proposal for a New Eel-Russian Facility at the location of Cape Horn Dam to continue diverting water to the Russian, but has no obligation to include this facility. Complete removal of Cape Horn Dam without reconstruction of a diversion facility is still in play; proponents are also weighing the diversion options of a control section with a pump station or a roughened channel with gravity supply.
“PG&E will review feedback on the drafts to prepare a final plan,” spokesperson Paul Moreno wrote to The Voice this week, when questioned about what factors the utility would weigh in its decision to support a new diversion facility. “In general, we are encouraged when proposals show a broad base of support from various stakeholders and are fair to PG&E electric customers.”
He said the proponents’ demonstrated financial and technical ability to execute the diversion will be critical in informing what route PG&E decides to take. Sonoma County, Sonoma Water, and the Mendocino Inland Water and Power Commission have just signed onto a new joint powers agreement, or JPA, establishing the Eel-Russian Project Authority to take over and maintain a diversion from the Eel to the Russian River. The Round Valley Indian Tribes (RVIT) will hold a seat on the board. While other area tribes have a vested, vocal interest in the future of the basins as well, Nikcole Whipple — an intern with Save California Salmon and a student of Indigenous law — explained at the Russian River Water Forum meeting that RVIT holds a Tribal Water Right on the Eel River as a federally recognized tribe with lands adjacent to the waterway.
Other proponents of the New Eel-Russian Facility include California Department of Fish and Wildlife, Humboldt County, California Trout, and Trout Unlimited.
As for the diversion options included in the draft — the pump station or the roughened channel — Chair Janet Pauli of the Mendocino County Inland Water and Power Commission, who co-owns Pauli Ranch in Potter Valley, says it’s too early to make a call about which option would best serve both fish populations and the interests of water users. Studies of the Eel currently underway will be critical to a final proposal.
“If you know what fish need to negotiate in the river up until they get to the point where Cape Horn Dam is now, then you can make a determination when you do the modeling of the flows at this specific location [around] different timing of flows, different timing of life cycles, depth of water, velocity of water,” she said. “You can start to look at whether it is as easy for the fish to negotiate as, for example, the hardest place in the river downstream that they’ve already been able to negotiate.”
A pump station would function alongside the river, whereas a roughened channel would use part of the existing in-river structure to facilitate rapids for fish passage. Engineering is underway to weigh the factors Pauli mentioned. The groups plan to definitively choose one way forward by spring, ahead of PG&E sending its Final Draft Surrender Application to FERC in June, 2024.
Schneider of California Trout emphasized that many of the studies commissioned as part of the Two Basin Partnership (which had once proposed taking over the project) have been critical to reaching this point, despite the partnership’s ultimate failure.
“Whether it’s the studies to quantify the habitat above the dams and really understand the importance of it [or] the dam removal studies [or the] economic studies, all that work is proving valuable still,” he reflected. “I do think we have really been moving forward with our understanding of the project and the dams on the whole.”
As we approach the public comment period, Pauli hopes that water users who rely on diversions for their livelihoods will make their desire for a new facility known. Schneider also pointed out that, as PG&E has laid out this high level plan, they’re only looking to nail down approaches to the options listed within — so, for example, desires for Scott Dam to remain in place will be a moot point if expressed in public comment.
Should a new diversion facility not go forward, McGourty fears a dire situation for inland Mendocino County and the county’s economy as a whole.
“We’d probably have to start from scratch,” he said. “It’s not likely that we’d be able to get new water rights in our lifetime.”
But he also emphasized that a continued diversion needs to be supported by other programming to increase water resiliency — like raising the channel from the Russian River to flood the Ukiah Valley floodplain in winter, implementing more water storage, investing in more intensive studies of groundwater, and looking into expansions of recycled water initiatives such as Ukiah’s purple pipe program (on track to offset 50% of the city’s water use). The volatility of water supply in Mendocino County means more sustainable water infrastructure is critical.
With dam removal going forward, Schneider is optimistic about the next 100 years — especially when it comes to the Eel River basin. In concert with restoration efforts, he expects to see changes to the wide gravel beds that tend to emerge when rivers are controlled, more low-gradient river sections prompting beaver activity in the river, revegetation and reseeding along the river banks, and an eventual return of salmon and steelhead to the Eel’s headwaters.
“We’ve seen historic accounts that the Gravelly Valley area was thought to be one of the most important spawning grounds for Chinook in the upper Eel River,” he said. “I don’t think it would be a surprise to any of us to see Chinook spawning in the former lake bed, once the river’s had time to reset itself.”
As Pauli put it, much of the process will have a “hurry up and wait” feel — but a final surrender application with much more detail, following FERC’s feedback, is expected by January, 2025. Among all the interests in play, Supervisor McGourty also emphasized his hope that no one see the question of the basins’ future as a binary one — as if what’s good for the Humboldt County watershed isn’t also beneficial to Mendocino County residents who rely on water diversions.
“We’re in both basins,” he said. Then he added, “There’s been significant damage in the last hundred years to habitat, which is part of the reason why our fisheries are not doing well. … [The river] is a shared resource that’s very, very important to our heritage, our culture, and our future.”
To see more details on the plan and submit comment, you can review the Initial Draft Surrender Application using the password PV_Surrender and share any comments and thoughts with PG&E before Dec. 22. Comments can be submitted to Senior Licensing Project Manager Tony Gigliotti at 12840 Bill Clark Way, Auburn, CA 95602 or by email at [email protected].
Notice that no entity from Lake co. is included in the decision making. Scott dam & Lake pillsbury are in Lake co. Very suspicious!
Your Lake County Board of Supervisors did not act when they should have to sit at the table. They only now are acting by voting and writing a statement. Shame on them
Ironically, I just read an article of the century long study and undoing of dams in the state of Maine. It is definitely worth reading as the dam removals feed the life of all. Indigenous people, locals, eagles, ospreys, etc., and brought together communities, volunteers, tribes, and free flowing rivers. In this case it was “take it down and they will come”. The fish are once again spawning and coming in from the Atlantic. The article is from a GOOD News site. We could all use some. My apologies, I can’t remember the name of the river.
alternative energy replacing hydro everywhere,,but water absolutely necessary..so yes rivers run.but farming needs water…underground water storage only answer…New Mexico figured it out 75 years ago
Put it all back like it was. Water diversion for grapes? Houses that shouldn’t be there. Put it back like nature intended. PGE drained every drop they could. Taxpayers foot the bill..
Thanks for getting to the point ☝️ I and a lot of Vinyard / land Stewart’s
couldn’t agree more