PDA

View Full Version : Protect the Tuolumne - Time to Take Action



Dug
09-14-2007, 03:11 PM
San Francisco has released a Draft Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the “Water System Improvement Program” proposed by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC). Embedded in the SFPUC’s $4.3-billion plan to upgrade and expand the water system is a proposal to increase diversions from the Tuolumne River in Yosemite National Park. The plan proposes to increase diversions by 25 million gallons a day, potentially harming an already fragile Tuolumne drainage, rather then focusing on conservation measures.

The Draft EIR is available at:
www.sfgov.org/site/planning_index.asp?id=37672
(Scroll down to “Public Utility Commission (PUC) Projects: SF PUC Water System Improvement Program DPEIR.”)

A report has been released by the Tuolumne River Trust which reviews the plan, discusses flaws in the plan, and provides alternative proposals to meeting future water demand in the bay area.
The Tuolumne River Trust report can be found at:
www.tuolumne.org/content/article.php/sfreport
(One page summary: www.tuolumne.org/content/fmd/files/One%20page%20summary.pdf)

As part of the environmental review process, the public is provided an opportunity to review the impacts of and alternatives to the SFPUC’s proposal. The public comment period is open until October 1. As stewards of our local rivers and streams, now is the time to speak up encourage conservation over additional exploitation of our water resources. Please voice your opposition to additional diversions by attending a public meeting, sending a letter, or writing an email.

Public meetings next week:
September 18 (Tuesday), 6:30pm – Fremont Main Library, Fukaya Room, 2400 Stevenson Blvd., Fremont.

September 19 (Wednesday), 6:30pm – Avenidas Senior Center, 450 Bryant St., Palo Alto.

September 20 (Thursday), 1:30pm or later – San Francisco Planning Commission, City Hall, Room 400, 1 Dr. Carlton B Goodlett Place, San Francisco. (Call 415-558-6422 the week of the hearing for a recorded message giving a more specific time).

Send letters to:
Paul Maltzer, Environmental Review Officer
San Francisco Planning Department
1650 Mission Street, Suite 400
San Francisco, CA 94103

Send emails to:
wsip.peir.comments@gmail.com

Thanks for the support!!

marteen
09-14-2007, 06:32 PM
Dug:

Thank you very much for advertising this important document. Between CCSF's water diversions and the TID-MID diversions....Salmon and steelhead in the T are having a hard time making a living.

marteen
09-26-2007, 02:35 PM
Dug:

Here is my drift of the SF EIR:

Michael Martin, Ph.D.
P.O. Box 2216
Mariposa, CA 95338

September 26, 2007



Paul Maltzer, Environmental Review Officer
Water System Improvement Program PEIR
San Francisco Planning Department

Dear Mr. Maltzer:

I am a home owner in Tuolumne County, specifically in the Hetch Hetchy Subdivision, Block 5, Lot 2, Groveland. My home is on the Middle Fork of the Tuolumne River. I am a flyfisherman, as well as a professional fisheries biologist.

Your environmental review of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission's plan to consume (divert) more water from the Tuolumne River fails to adequately identify and address all of the potential environmental impacts to the River, specifically how 14% more diversions in the upper Tuolumne River basin with affect critical habitat in the lower Tuolumne River, specifically spring-run Chinook salmon, fall-run Chinook salmon, and Steelhead trout, along with potential impacts to the upper Tuolumne River watershed. These federally recognized “threatened” or “species of concern” - designated populations (ESU) will arguably require more water than less in future years. I urge you to undertake additional studies of the lower Tuolumne River to provide protection and enhancement of these depleted fisheries, before finalizing this document. There should be no more diversions of the Tuolumne River at the expense of the San Joaquin River Delta receiving water environment, period.

Your report shows that the majority of the potential future demand resides outside of San Francisco. I recommend that you let those entities solve their water demand problems by other means. Over ½ of the demand is outdoor water use and is a major cause for the increased demand. Water conservation and efficiency measures, along with recycling, should eliminate the need for additional future water supplies. There is uncertainty regarding future increases in demand, as several demand factors in the analysis such as projected growth, may have major challenges or be reduced because of economic difficulties. As an owner in the upper river watershed, and I am concerned that increased water diversions will reduce my property values, as well as my own, as well as tourists, recreational opportunities. I am also concerned with the potential effects of atmospheric shifts, such as global warming, and how that will affect (reduce) water supply. In California, history has demonstrated how during critical water short years, full wet weather deliveries continue for municipal and agricultural users, while natural resources take the short end of the deal and brunt of the injuries and damages. Your feasibility studies must include an analysis of the effects of drought and water shortage, and how San Francisco proposes substitute water demand (=supply) (i.e., reduced diversion from the Tuolumne River) during those critical times. It is very clear that reduced water flows in the San Joaquin River basin has resulted in seriously depressed recruitment of anadromous Salmonid populations in the basin rivers.

I support all of the alternatives identified in your draft document that protects the Tuolumne River from new diversions in future years. Requiring more water conservation, efficiency, and recycling at the demand source is the best way to lessen impacts to the Tuolumne River while promoting a sustainable water solution for the San Francisco Bay Area. This will also afford more protection to the upper Tuolumne River watershed fisheries and recreational usage. The San Francisco water scheme and power generation operations have degraded the integrity of the downstream Tuolumne River watershed. Further diversions will certainly maintain that degradation, and greatly limit opportunities for restoration of those resources that depend upon the river. Your EIR lacks sufficient description of the potential impacts upon the lower Tuolumne River, especially with respect to anadromous fish populations, Chinook salmon and Steelhead trout. It also fails to address consistency with on-going State and Federal resource agency activities, studies, and actions that may be compromised by additional water diversions in the upper Tuolumne River. I recommend that additional feasibility studies and mitigation evaluation (and implementation where necessary) be included in your EIR analyses, prior to adoption of the proposed water plan.

Only by reducing diversion and off-stream uses of water can we protect the anadromous fishes of the lower Tuolumne River and other San Joaquin River reaches, along with protecting the existing recreational fisheries of the upper Tuolumne River Watershed.

Sincerely,

Michael Martin, Ph.D.


Cheers,

Marteen
Hope some others will respond :?:

"When its gone, its gone"

Dug
09-26-2007, 10:38 PM
Marteen,
On behalf of all us opposed to additional Tuolumne diversions, thanks for such a thoughtful and well-presented letter! Hopefully these types of letters, along with the emails and comments made at the SFPUC hearings on the draft EIR, will encourage significant changes to the plan. Incidentally, the word is that more then 90% of those who spoke at these hearings favored the $4.3 billion seismic upgrades to the Hetch Hetchy water system, but expressed serious concerns about the proposal to divert an additional 25 million gallons of water per day from the Tuolumne.

For those who plan to heed Marteen's call to respond, the deadline to submit comments is October 1st. As an additional resource for crafting your responses, besides the points presented by Marteen and the previously mentioned links, go to: http://lomaprieta.sierraclub.org/TRT_Talking_Points_9.5.07.pdf

Thanks Again!!

Dug
10-09-2007, 04:41 PM
In response to concerns voiced by the SF Planning Commission that the SF public hearing on the draft Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) was inadequate, the comment deadline has been extended until October 15. There will also be a second hearing, including a presentation about the Water System Improvement Program (WSIP), at the Planning Commission meeting this Thursday sometime after 1:30pm in Room 400 at City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B Goodlett Place, San Francisco.

Thus far, many individuals, organizations, and agencies have submitted comments challenging the merits of of the PEIR and the need for additional Tuolumne diversions. To review some of these comments, go to: www.tuolumne.org/content/article.php/20071002155305738. Documents sited are those from:
- Tuolumne River Trust, Sierra Club and Clean Water Action
- CA Department of Fish and Game
- Modesto Irrigation District and the Turlock Irrigation District
- San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority and the Kern County Water Agency
In addition, KRON TV just produced a brief segment about the issue and can be seen at www.kron.com/Global/category.asp?C=95980&nav=menu130_2_7

After the comment period ends on October 15, the SF Planning Department has until May, 2008 to address comments and questions from the public before finalizing the PEIR. From there, the SF Planning Commission will determine whether it should be certified, and the SF Planning Public Utilities Commission will review the PEIR and consider adoption of the WSIP. Appeals will be heard by the SF Board of Supervisors.

So if you haven't submitted comments yet, there's still time!

Thanks for the support and stewardship.