|
Filed under: Uncategorized
Public meeting about proposed hydropower project on October 22
Posted on October 11, 2012 by jeffpelline
Food & Wine, Arts & Culture
Click on icon for fall issue of Sierra FoodWineArt magazine, offering culture and entertainment news.
Facebook site is here
Smartphone app is here.
Sierra Geotourism map & guide
Click on icon to see map.
sacramento connect- Hwy. 99 ramp closures set in Nicolaus for bridge work
- Photos: Seminar encourages teen girls to pursue math, science
- Briefs: Riverfront Park entrance closed for utility work
- 5.7 quake in Plumas County felt throughout Sacramento area
- Magnitude 5.7 earthquake felt throughout Sacramento area
- Ranadive plans to move "quickly" to resolve front office, coaching situations
- Updated: M 5.7 Earthquake near Greenville
- NPR.org
- China's Air Pollution: Is The Government Willing To Act? May 24, 2013
- Can This Man Bring Silicon Valley To Yangon? May 24, 2013
- Military Moms: A Bond Borne From Shared Loss May 24, 2013
SYRCL thanks you Jeff for helping us to spread the word to all who are concerned about this project that could endanger the few remaining wild salmon on the Yuba River!
For those of you who would like to see the Preliminary Application Documents they are found here:
http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/file_list.asp?accession_num=20120709-5160
Knowing a little bit about the Archimedes hydro technology that Archon is hoping to deploy, and understanding that retrofitting existing dams to take these relatively low production capacity (3MW) facilities is a critical strategy in meeting California’s 33% renewable portfolio standard (RPS), I am wondering if SYRCL could elaborate a little more here about what their specific concerns are.
So far I am hearing 1) this project should not undergo an expedited process in order to allow the community time for full evaluation, and 2) installation of this technology may inhibit migration and spawning of salmon, steelhead and sturgeon especially considering the fluctuation in flows present on the Yuba (all federally listed endangered species).
According to a recent YUBANET article:
“Archon has committed to engaging the public and regional stakeholders, and we are going to hold them to that promise. But there are specific issues that Archon must address. For instance, Archon has said it will consider new fish ladders to mitigate impacts, but we have serious concerns about their effectiveness—they don’t work for green sturgeon, one of the three listed species of fish in the Yuba, ladders negatively impact salmonid migration and behavior, and they aren’t effective over the range of flows in the Yuba River, as little as 300 to as great as 100,000 cubic feet per second,” said Melinda Booth, SYRCL’s acting Executive Director.
“Although there are many ongoing studies on the Yuba River, none directly investigate the problems of fish passage and artificial predation at Daguerre Point Dam. By granting the traditional process to Archon, FERC has underestimated the need to fully understand the role of this dam, and any new facilities, in impacting populations of salmon, steelhead and sturgeon,” said Gary Reedy, SYRCL’s River Science Director.
SYRCL believes that the proposed project would conflict with a range of complex resource issues on the Yuba. In February 2012, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) issued a Biological Opinion which found that Daguerre Point Dam likely jeopardizes the survival of three species of endangered fish. NMFS ordered the Army Corps of Engineers, which operates Daguerre, to improve fish passage for migrating salmon, steelhead trout, and sturgeon.”
http://yubanet.com/regional/Fast-Track-Process-Approved-for-Daguerre-Point-Dam-Hydro-Project.php#.UHbherRQlFs
I am wondering if there are other issues related to the dam and reservoir that need a much fuller discussion in the community; such as dam operations and the potential for dam removal, as described in February 2012 biological opinion issued by the National Marine Fisheries Service.
http://swr.nmfs.noaa.gov/pdf/YubaRiverBiolgicalOpinion2012.pdf
Since the NMFS and USACOE lack the statutory authority to order the removal of the dam, and the Congressional authorization to do so is highly unlikely in the near future, and the installation of new infrastructure may represent an important opportunity to leverage funding for implementing many of the other recommendations included in the biological opinion, such as changes to operations in conjunction with fish ladders and other improvements; shouldn’t the discussion really center around implementing the findings of the biological opinion, rather than the efficacy of the Archon project itself?
Please SYRCL, set me straight if I am n the wrong track? Am I missing something here?