Here's some info taken from Wikipedia (so take it for what it's worth) about Sites Reservoir"
"Potential environmental impacts:
Unlike other proposed reservoir projects in California, Sites would not directly affect fish migration because it is not located on a major river. In addition, if water for irrigation and Delta salinity control were provided from Sites, additional cold water could be retained in Shasta Lake for fall-run chinook and coho salmon.[14]
However, diversions could take more than 60 percent of the Sacramento River's flow at certain times, potentially harming salmon and other fish species. The reservoir itself would affect habitat for 23 sensitive, threatened or endangered wildlife species.[13] Due to the low elevation and relatively dry climate of the reservoir area, about 30,000 acre feet (37,000,000 m3) of water would be lost to evaporation each year.[13]
The project would be operated in the interest of protecting fisheries, with such installations proposed as advanced fish screens at the pumping stations along the Sacramento River; potential modifications to upstream Shasta Dam to increase the supply of cold water available there; and modifications to the existing Tehama-Colusa and Glenn-Colusa Canal intakes that would be used by the project.[1]"
I didn't include copies of the referenced footnotes.... Now, if you want to compare to another new proposed reservoir project Google Temperance Flat Dam. That proposal is truly destructive but is scheduled to begin construction in 2021.
"America is a country which produces citizens who will cross the ocean to fight for democracy but won't cross the street to vote."
Author unknown
Sites Reservoir is exactly the type of reservoir California needs for extra water storage. It is offstream so no fish passage issues, the creeks that are being dammed are barely perennial meaning no real runoff, it is fairly far downstream on the Sacramento meaning it can capture flood events during the winter and spring, and the valley it is being built in is fairly narrow meaning less evaporation. The Tehama-Colusa and Glenn-Colusa Canals already divert a good portion of the Sacramento River most of the irrigation season. Diverting this water in the winter will possibly leave more water in the mainstem Sacramento for fish and delta issues. If we are going to build a dam, this is the type that makes the most sense. I'd much rather have this dam than raise Shasta or build Temperance Flat.
I think you make some valid points; though I don’t know nearly enough of the nitty gritty details about what real world impacts this dam would create, I’m certainly more concerned at the moment with the other two options mentioned. I’m still not exactly sold on this one either, though I’m open to the idea we will likely build more dams whether I like it or not, so it makes sense to choose wisely.
I think we really need to take a hard look at the long range outlook though:
If the states population continues to grow (a given), and we make no substantial changes to our water usage and conservation, eventually we will run out of rivers to dam. Dams have numerous negative issues with them, including the basic issue that by design they are extremely inefficient in terms of actual usable storage potential. Groundwater offers a lot more potential, at substantially lower costs, has positive environmental impacts, etc etc. In my opinion we really should be moving much more in that direction.
Even better still would be to seriously rethink our own usage, from domestic water usage to agricultural. There’s a lot of water we could supply by cutting some of the wasteful use. If we only consider addressing our water concerns from the supply side, rather than the demand side as well, then we are dealing with substantially bigger problems. I mention all this because it seems to me that most discussion about the water needs for our state eventually boil down to building more and more dams, which is a mentality that worked ...for a while, when we had a lot more miles of river and a LOT LESS people! I think we outgrew that model decades ago, but we’ve been very slow to adapt to the new realities we face going forward. I think we need to address our water needs from every possible angle, from conservation, recycled uses, storage, and delivery.
JB
"Lord help me to be the person my dog thinks I am"
- unknown
Very noble and sensible. Requires integrity. As you know already, this is the "wild wild west" and the "elite" (will not name names....) of the world can buy favorable legislation in the name of the free enterprise, capitalism, and the "american way".
Read John H.'s post as well.
I hate to be so cynical and un-hopeful for overcoming obstacles with good honest sensible planning, but it's all about money and ego.
Last edited by OceanSunfish; 07-26-2019 at 08:56 AM.
Bookmarks