 |
 |
Historical Timeline
1988: Litigation begins. A lawsuit challenging the Friant water users' long-term contract renewals and later amended to compel flow releases from Friant to restore fish, including salmon, in good condition was filed by the Natural Resources Defense Council on behalf of The Bay Institute and the other members of an environmental coalition.
1998: Settlement process starts. After numerous court victories, the environmental coalition, led by The Bay Institute and the Natural Resources Defense Council, entered into settlement negotiations with the Friant Water Users’ Authority (FWUA) with the goal of restoring the river and re-establishing native fishes while not adversely impacting FWUA’s water supply.
Water Supply Plan: In order to minimize water supply impacts of river restoration, a Water Supply Plan was developed that evaluated a wide range of water supply and efficiency measures to increase the total water supply available for the river without impairing the region’s agricultural productivity. The Bay Institute policy director Bobker was the co-chair of the water supply oversight team. Hydrologist Vorster worked closely with the consultants to develop the analytical tools that are still used to today to quantify the impacts of water management alternatives.
Negotiations: Starting in 1999, the environmental coalition and FWUA agreed to “stay” the litigation. In the years that followed, the “stay” was extended six times, and in 2002 a small team of negotiators, including The Bay Institute policy director Gary Bobker and supported by the technical analysis of hydrologist Vorster, worked on developing a compromise settlement proposal. The negotiations collapsed in 2003 when FWUA refused to accept a Mediator compromise proposal that the environmental plaintiffs accepted.
March 30, 2009 President Obama signed legislation authorizing and funding the San Joaquin River Restoration settlement.
1988: Litigation begins. A lawsuit challenging the Friant water users' long-term contract renewals and later amended to compel flow releases from Friant to restore fish, including salmon, in good condition was filed by the Natural Resources Defense Council on behalf of The Bay Institute and the other members of an environmental coalition.1998: Settlement process starts. After numerous court victories, the environmental coalition, led by The Bay Institute and the Natural Resources Defense Council, entered into settlement negotiations with the Friant Water Users’ Authority (FWUA) with the goal of restoring the river and re-establishing native fishes while not adversely impacting FWUA’s water supply.
1999-2001: Pilot Projects. Working with FWUA and the Bureau of Reclamation, the environmental coalition conceived and implemented a riparian Pilot Project on the river. This resulted in releases of water from Friant Dam into the San Joaquin River for environmental purposes for the first time in 50 years. This action of rewatering the San Joaquin River was a momentous initial step in restoring one of the most degraded rivers in the United States. The release was repeated again in July 2000 and September 2001. The Bay Institute hydrologist Peter Vorster was the technical lead for the environmental coalition on these pilot projects including designing and implementing the release schedule, developing the water supply mitigation, and helping to prepare the evaluation reports.
1999-2003: Technical Studies and Negotiations: The size and scope of the restoration of the San Joaquin River is immense. The Bay Institute devoted many years, starting in 1999, to negotiations and restoration and water supply planning, which formed the backbone of the eventual settlement of the litigation. The Bay Institute’s technical and policy staff played vital roles in the negotiations and the restoration and water supply studies. The Bay Institute hydrologist Vorster was the only member of the environmental coalition to serve on both the restoration and water supply study oversight teams.
River Restoration Plan: The Bay Institute hydrologist Vorster and biologist Tina Swanson provided extensive technical input and managerial oversight in the development of a San Joaquin River Restoration Plan.Water Supply Plan: In order to minimize water supply impacts of river restoration, a Water Supply Plan was developed that evaluated a wide range of water supply and efficiency measures to increase the total water supply available for the river without impairing the region’s agricultural productivity. The Bay Institute policy director Bobker was the co-chair of the water supply oversight team. Hydrologist Vorster worked closely with the consultants to develop the analytical tools that are still used to today to quantify the impacts of water management alternatives.
Negotiations: Starting in 1999, the environmental coalition and FWUA agreed to “stay” the litigation. In the years that followed, the “stay” was extended six times, and in 2002 a small team of negotiators, including The Bay Institute policy director Gary Bobker and supported by the technical analysis of hydrologist Vorster, worked on developing a compromise settlement proposal. The negotiations collapsed in 2003 when FWUA refused to accept a Mediator compromise proposal that the environmental plaintiffs accepted.
2003-2006 Litigation and Final Settlement: Beginning late in 2003, lawyers for the plaintiffs and their experts including The Bay Institute hydrologist Vorster and biologist Swanson began preparing for litigation. In August 2004 the judge rules that it is no longer a question if flows and fish will be restored but how much flow will be required. Trial date is set for early 2006 and throughout 2005 The Bay Institute’s technical staff play vital roles in the discovery and expert witness testimony prior to trial. After the exchange of expert reports in the Summer of 2005, and prodding from Senator Feinstein, the parties re-enter settlement negotiations, which leads to the September 2006 settlement. The Bay Institute technical and policy staff provide support and review for the year-long settlement negotiations.
September 2006 A settlement of the litigation was reached. The settlement specifies the water supply and physical actions necessary to restore the ecological integrity of the river so that the native fish—including Chinook salmon, which existed in the river before Friant Dam was built—can survive in good condition.
2007-2009 Implementing the Settlement and passing the Legislation. From 2007 to 2009 The Bay Institute’s work focused on: 1) the timely and cost-efficient implementation of the settlement, including advancing the legislation to appropriate funding for the settlement and technical work associated with such a large scale restoration. NRDC requested that The Bay Institute take the lead for the environmental coalition on implementing the water management goal of the settlement, 2) reconnecting the residents of the San Joaquin Valley to a living river to help them become proactive advocates for the river and sustainable water management in the Valley; 3) informing the Delta Vision and Bay-Delta Conservation Planning processes that a healthy San Joaquin River will be an essential part of any long-term Delta solution.
March 30, 2009 President Obama signed legislation authorizing and funding the San Joaquin River Restoration settlement.October 1, 2009 First flows are released from the Friant Dam from October 1 to November 20, 2009, and will commence again on February 1 and will be ongoing through December 1, 2010. The releases consist of a constant base flow of 350 cubic feet per second (CFS) and a series of pulses with a modest pulse in the fall of 2009 and a longer duration, higher springtime pulse in 2010 that depends on the magnitude of winter rains and snowpack accumulation. Most of the fall flow releases infiltrated into the ground in Reach 1 and 2, recharging the depleted groundwater aquifers.
Looking ahead in 2010
The spring 2010 release will provide cleansing, beneficial flows to the Delta. The Bay Institute hydrologist Peter Vorster will be an integral part of the design, management, and monitoring of the interim flows. He will assess and predict runoff and water supply conditions, analyze seepage losses, evaluate and refine the operational protocols, and insure that the recapture and reuse of the restoration flows does not have an adverse impact on the Restoration Goal, downstream water quality, or fisheries.
The spring 2010 release will provide cleansing, beneficial flows to the Delta. The Bay Institute hydrologist Peter Vorster will be an integral part of the design, management, and monitoring of the interim flows. He will assess and predict runoff and water supply conditions, analyze seepage losses, evaluate and refine the operational protocols, and insure that the recapture and reuse of the restoration flows does not have an adverse impact on the Restoration Goal, downstream water quality, or fisheries.
The Bay Institute will continue working with NRDC in 2010 to ensure all aspects of the settlement and legislation are implemented. We expect the Draft Programmatic Environmental Document for the Restoration Program to be released in the spring, which will require The Bay Institute's review of thousands of pages of program description and analysis, including modeling results. This document is a complete, system-wide analysis of alternatives designed to meet both the Restoration Goal and the Water Management Goal, and is required prior to implementing the site-specific actions to achieve the goals. The Bay Institute will provide input to the design and planning of these site-specific actions in 2010, and continue their ongoing technical work on restoration water management and water supply actions to mitigate the impact of the restoration releases.
Temperance Flat: The biggest ongoing threat to the river and Delta is the proposal by the State and Federal governments to build the large and expensive ($3.5 billion) Temperance Flat dam upstream of Friant Dam, which would bury another 15 miles of the river, bury existing hydroelectric generation facilities and thus be a net drain on our energy supply, and provide very little new San Joaquin River water supply, particularly if the other less expensive and less damaging groundwater storage projects are constructed, for which funding has been already authorized by the settlement legislation. The recently released plan formulation report for Temperance Flat (aka as the Upper San Joaquin River Storage Investigation) showed that a significant portion of the water supply yield from Temperance Flat is actually derived from the ability to integrate its operation into the State Water Project and allow more Delta water to be diverted. In the next year the Temperance Flat proposal will undergo a more detailed feasibility study and environmental impact assessment, which will require The Bay Institute’s review and comment. Proponents of the dam want to secure a portion of the statewide bond proposed for the November 2010 ballot. The Bay Institute will continue to engage in this area in the coming year, as it is a core issue in the ongoing debate on how to provide for California’s future water supplies in an environmentally and economically sound manner.
