SCWA Releases: “There They Go Again”

“I want more, sir”

There they go again.
SCWA wants D1610 releases in the Russian River to reflect Dry Year calculationss, not normal year ones.

Yet, SCWA is petitioning for reduced flows,
-With no mandatory conservation from SCWA or from any of the contractors.
-With the rain this weekend, Santa Rosa vicinity is now at 69% of normal (last nite’s news).
-What is the storage at Lake Mendocino?

Today’s PD reports (sourced to SCWA Operations Dept, Sunday 7am) that Lake Mendocino’s storage= 67,229af (vs 117,232af capacity), Water supply pool = 77.90% at an elevation of 736.79 Its release is 172cfs.

Lake Sonoma’s storage = 242,229af (vs 381,000af capacity) Water supply pool = 98.87% at an elevation of 449.99. Its release is 85cfs
Lake Pillsbury’s storage = 64,916af (vs 78,712af capacity) Water supply pool = 80.64% at an elevation of 1905.37. Its release is 216cfs
-With no water balance calculations to substantiate their future ‘needs’ to withhold Lake Mendocino water
– With 2 huge agricultural water “reuse” schemes being proposed to use as much recycled water as SCWA can sell in the bay frontage (North San Pablo Bay Restoration and Reuse Project) and in Alexander/Dry Creek areas (North Sonoma County Agricultural Reuse Project), both with huge funding requested from Bureau of Reclamation, rather than figure out how to use as much of that water as possible to displace potable water demand among its contractors and reduce the demands on the Russian and Eel Rivers and our overdrafted groundwater basins.
-While the CoE is about to start scoping an EIS/EIR on increasing Coyote Dam height and L. Mendocino’s capacity – who gets that water? fish??

I suspect this will become a ‘normal’ petition for SCWA, used more and more frequently as evidence that there isn’t enough water coming through to Lake Mendocino “for the fish”. Or for more development in the Ukiah Valley, perhaps.

SWRCB needs to know about this behavior pattern, especially when SCWA and their contractors are still not complying.

The 2/2/05 letter from SRWCB to SCWA and contractors have requested they come up with a “detailed plan of water conservation efforts that will offset future increases in demand, which in turn will result in no increase in Russian River diversions.”

SWRCB still has not figured out their response to the TU/PAS petition to correct overdrafting of the Russian, so once again the Eel River is being used to subsidize the Russian River basin’s profligate behaviors.

David Keller