2023 Advocacy
Since 1981, TRT has been protecting the Tuolumne River from further degradation by blocking plans to build new dams and increase water diversions. “Revive the Tuolumne” seeks to reverse the damage that has already occurred. Our current effort is focused on ensuring there is enough water left in the river to improve water temperature, inundate floodplain habitat, provide better migration flows for salmon and steelhead, and improve recreational opportunities.
Our campaign seeks to increase flows in the river by engaging in two interrelated policy proceedings: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) licensing of Don Pedro and La Grange Dams, and the State Water Board’s update of the Bay Delta Water Quality Control Plan.
Improving river conditions through the licensing of Don Pedro and La Grange Dams.
In April 2023, the US Supreme Court opted to not take up the Modesto and Turlock Irrigation Districts’ peition to deny the State Water Board’s authority to issue a Water Quality Certification (with conditions) for the licenses for Don Pedro and La Grange Dams. Following two previous rejections by FERC and two by the DC Court of Appeals, this decision closed the book on the Districts’ attempt to sideline the State Water Board.
Key partners: California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, Morrison Foerster, LLC.
Advocating for higher unimpaired flows on the lower Tuolumne and San Joaquin Rivers as a requirement of the Bay Delta Water Quality Control Plan.
2023 has seen an increase in activity at the State Water Board. TRT testified at a meeting focusing on the Scientific Basis Report for Phase 2 of the Bay Delta Plan (Sacramento Basin and Delta inflow and outflow). We also were engaged in the Stanislaus, Tuolumne and Merced (STM) working group focused on the biological goals for Phase 1. The draft goals were finalized, and our NGO coalition testified at the Board meeting and submitted a sign-on letter.
In May, the Water Board hosted a meeting to receive comments on a possible amendment to the adopted Phase 1 of the Bay Delta Plan that would allow consideration of the Tuolumne River Voluntary Agreement (TRVA). An amendment would be necessary because the TRVA would not meet the Plan’s 30-50% unimpaired flow requirement. In advance of the meeting, TRT hosted a Zoom to prepare our supporters and then turned out 20 people to comment. Following the meeting, we submitted what we believe to be very convincing written comments.
TRT was invited to present our position on the Bay Delta Plan to the Stanislaus County Water Advisory Committee, comprised of elected officials, including some who serve on the Irrigation Districts’ and Groundwater Sustainability Agencies’ boards. Despite historic differences of opinion, our presentation was well received, and led to a productive conversation, including a focus on opportunities for collaboration. The Committee seemed to appreciate the opportunity to better understand our perspectives. We hope this will lead to more constructive dialogue in the future.
Key partners: California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, Defenders of Wildlife, Fly Fishers International, Friends of the River, Golden State Salmon Association, Golden West Women Flyfishers, NRDC, Restore the Delta, San Francisco Bay Keeper, Save California Salmon, Sierra Club.
Dedicating our water rights to permanent instream flow.
Our Section 1707 petition to dedicate the water rights that came with the Dos Rios Ranch acquisition was noticed, and we’ve had several productive meetings with the State Water Board. The next step will be to defend the petition against challenges.
Key partners: River Partners, Tom Hicks Law.
Encouraging the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA), and other Hetch Hetchy water users to drop their opposition to the Bay Delta Plan.
TRT has continued to identify and highlight SFPUC disinformation. After years of prodding, we finally convinced the Commission to direct staff to produce a report comparing the competing demand projections from their Water Enterprise with those of their Finance Bureau. The report acknowledged that both divisions have consistently over-projected demand, but Finance has been much more accurate. The Finance Bureau currently projects water sales will remain flat over the next decade, further supporting our position that demand projections are inflated.
The SFPUC released their Long-Term Vulnerability Assessment (LTVA) focused on how climate change might impact water supply. TRT’s requests for additional information were ignored, but through a Public Records Act request, we secured a document showing that the researchers had determined the return period (likelihood of occurrence) of the Design Drought was once in 25,000 years. Suspiciously, this information never made it into the final report.
At the seventh and final SFPUC workshop, TRT presented on the Design Drought. We cited evidence from the LTVA that the Design Drought is far too conservative and unnecessarily harms the Tuolumne River and Bay-Delta ecosystems. SFPUC staff did not present any evidence to justify the Design Drought, but instead simply made the case that the SFPUC could never be too conservative. The agenda item was “information only,” so the Commission did not take any action. We continue to push for a decision to reduce the length of the Design Drought.
Following the Commission’s lack of action, TRT turned out an average of 13 speakers at each SFPUC meeting for four months. Disappointingly, the Commission responded by voting to move General Public Comment from the beginning of their meetings to the end in order to dampen public engagement. This created quite a public backlash, but the Commission held firm.
Our complaint against the SFPUC for denying our Public Records Act request for data and calculations used to claim the Water Quality Certification would lead to 75%-90% rationing was heard by San Francisco’s Sunshine Ordinance Task Force. They voted unanimously in support of our position, and ordered the SFPUC to release the requested documents, which has yet to happen.
BAWSCA, which represents the SFPUC’s wholesale customers, updated their water demand projections, and TRT participated in their stakeholder group. We convinced them to include a sensitivity analysis to determine how different factors, such as population growth, might impact future demand. The study found that by using CA Dept. of Finance population projections (vs. inflated Plan Bay Area projections), demand would remain flat over the next 25 years. On the flipside, Plan Bay Area projections (which were used in Urban Water Management Plans) would lead to a 20% increase in demand.
Taking advantage of the exceptionally good water year, TRT emphasized how SFPUC policies needlessly harm the environment. During the recent drought, the SFPUC never had less than four years-worth of water in storage. So far this year, they have been entitled to enough water to last more than ten years. We generated articles in the San Francisco Chronicle and Palo Alto Daily Post, and participated in a program on KQED Forum. This year marks the ninth year in a row in which water demand in the SFPUC service area has been below 200 mgd.
We focused a lot of attention on the SFPUC’s budget and financial situation. Our main point is that the Design Drought and inflated water demand projections don’t just harm the Tuolumne River and Bay-Delta, but also could lead to unnecessary investments in expensive alternative water supplies. Our recommendations for a shorter Design Drought and use of realistic demand projections could save $300 million annually. We turned out more than a dozen speakers to make these points at a recent SFPUC meeting focused on their Alternative Water Supply Plan.
We were successful at encouraging the SF Board of Supervisors to hold a hearing on SFPUC water and wastewater rates, and they are considering conducting an audit of the SFPUC. We are well positioned to engage them on the alternative water supply issue, and will encourage them to pressure the SFPUC to address the Design Drought.
Key partners: California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, Golden State Salmon Association, NRDC, San Francisco Baykeeper, San Francisco League of Conservation Voters, Sierra Club.
