facebook twitter you tube



The Dam Problem!

There are always the expected lawsuits over endangered fish and scenic rivers not to mention climate change.

Oct 18, 2011


Families Protecting The Valley Newsletter Tell Your Friends about Families Protecting The Valley

OCTOBER 18 2011

» Smeltageddon
» Water Bond
Donate to Families Protected the Valley
Visit Our Web Site

Visit Our Web Site

Board of Directors

Denis Prosperi
Chester Andrew
Bob Smittcamp
Russ Waymire
John "Dusty" Giacone
Joe Marchini
Mark Watte
Kole Upton
Piedad Ayala
Tom Barcellos
Jim Walls

The Dam Problem!

We hate to be pessimists about the possibility of building or increasing the height of dams in the State of California, but it's damn difficult. Last week we told you of Congressman Jeff Denham's attempt to raise Exchequer Dam on Lake McClure to gain an additional 70,000 acre feet of storage and the problems he's having because of the Wild and Scenic River designation on the Merced River. The article below from the Redding Record Searchlight is about the attempt to increase the height of Shasta Dam. It may be a glimpse of what's in store for Congressman Denham.

As the article points out, raising Shasta Dam 18.5 feet has been "considered one of the best ways to store more water in California for more than a decade." The Bureau of Reclamation began the required environmental impact studies in 2005 with approval anticipated by 2009 and construction to begin by this year or next. If it were only so simple.

There are always the expected lawsuits over endangered fish and scenic rivers not to mention climate change. So now, a draft environmental study could be released at the end of the year, three years behind schedule. So, when could actual dam construction begin? As the headline says: We'd Die Waiting.

This is another example of how the state could actually do something that would help not only the jobs the dam construction would create, but the jobs the extra water would create for agriculture. California has lost its manufacturing base. Just about the only thing we still produce is food, and if we don't get our water situation straightened out it may not be much longer before we destroy the best food producers in the world. However, we will keep environmental lawyers and biologists busy on overtime with taxpayer dollars we no longer have.


Editorial: Will bigger dam bring new jobs? We'd die waiting

Staff Reports/Redding Record Searchlight

Jim Reed has a jobs program for the north state, but paycheck-hungry locals would starve to death waiting for it.
Reed, the Democrat who ran against Republican Rep. Wally Herger in 2010 and is seeking a rematch next year, has grabbed onto the idea of increasing the height of Shasta Dam by 18.5 feet as both an important project for California's water supply and, critically, just the kind of major infrastructure project that the north state needs to put residents to work.

Only one problem: While he says the environmental and feasibility studies for dam enlargement will be completed soon, opening the door for construction, in the realm of dam-building, time moves at an almost geological pace. Waiting for the dam is like watching the Sierra Nevada's granite massif rise.

It's not for lack of trying. Building a modestly taller dam and impounding a larger reservoir in Lake Shasta has been considered one of the best ways to store more water in California for more than a decade. The Bureau of Reclamation formally launched its required environmental impact studies in 2005, and at that time a spokesman told the Record Searchlight to expect a decision by 2009 and construction by 2011 or 2012.

A seemingly endless series of lawsuits related to endangered Sacramento River fish and the Central Valley Project's operations, as well as the need to consider climate change in the environmental reviews, have delayed the studies. Reclamation spokesman Pete Lucero says the agency now expects to release a preliminary draft environmental impact study — a draft of a draft — at the end of this year, three years behind schedule and counting. It's anyone's guess how much longer it would take to actually approve construction — and overcome the political and legal resistance from Indian tribes, fisheries advocates and environmentalists who would fight the larger dam's inevitable encroachment on the upstream section of the McCloud River that is protected as "wild and scenic" under state law.

Give Reed credit for bucking his political base and thinking big, but California might not be ready for such big thinking these days.

Studying and fighting over the expansion of Shasta Dam promises to keep an army of consultants, biologists, engineers and lawyers busy for years to come.

But actual construction workers? Today's unemployed tradesmen will be collecting Social Security before anyone starts pouring concrete to enlarge the dam.

If you enjoy our newsletter please send it to friends. If someone sent this to you and you'd like your own free subscription, sign up
here. If you'd like to respond just click 'reply' or send to john@familiesprotectingthevalley.com


Valid RSS FeedGet the 10 most recent items from our RSS feed.