Farmers, Tribes Have Stake in River Ruling

SACRAMENTO —  As the clock runs out on the Clinton administration, one of U.S. Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt’s last key decisions is expected to be whether to dramatically increase the flow of Northern California’s once-roaring Trinity River.

His choice could pit the interests of farmers and power users against American Indian tribes and a struggling tourism industry. Tribal leaders, environmentalists and tourism promoters are all eager for him to make up his mind before November’s presidential election, which they fear could cause delays regardless of the winner.

The proposal would double Trinity River flows to 595,000 acre-feet a year. This could significantly increase fish for the Hoopa and Yurok tribes. Bolstering the river’s flow would also enhance its wild beauty, which could draw increasing numbers of white-water river rafters, recreational anglers and other tourists to the state’s northwest corner, which has been struggling since the decline of the timber and fishing industries.

The volume of water at stake, however, generates enough electricity to supply 31,000 Sacramento-area households. Replacing it could cost $12.5 million a year, a cost that would be passed on to consumers. It also irrigates 150 square miles of some of the world’s richest farmland across the San Joaquin Valley, where many farmers have seen their water supplies dwindle in the last decade.

“Science shows the quantity of water remaining in the Trinity is a big factor in the health of the [fish population],” said David Hayes, deputy Interior secretary. “But water back in the Trinity is water that is no longer in the Central Valley.”

Competing for Babbitt’s attention are several other key environmental matters, each with its own set of supporters and detractors. He is expected to decide whether to recommend that the Paria Plateau in northern Arizona be declared a national monument, and whether to expand the Craters of the Moon National Monument in southern Idaho. Babbitt also must decide whether to sign off on a final plan to reduce traffic in Yosemite National Park.

Restoring water to the Trinity, which originates in the jagged Trinity Alps and flows west across Trinity County before emptying into the Klamath River, would mark a continuing reversal of a historical decision. In 1962, the river was dammed and much of its flow--at times as much as 90%--was diverted into the Sacramento River to serve farms and cities by irrigating crops and generating power.

But the diversion came at the expense of fish populations, which have declined over the decades. The river’s Coho salmon, for example, are listed as threatened.

After more than 15 years of study, the federal government released a plan last October to nearly double the river’s flow. Pressure is mounting on Babbitt, who is expected to render a final decision in several months.

In determining what to do about the Trinity, Babbitt is revisiting a decision made in a bygone era when little importance was placed on free-flowing rivers--an attitude that began to shift after the environmental movement of the 1970s, according to Michael Hanemann, a professor in UC Berkeley’s Department of Agriculture and Resource Economics.

“What we’re seeing today is a part of a change in the importance that people place on keeping water in the river rather than extracting it and putting it to human use,” Hanemann said. “It’s clear that there’s been a real shift.”

If Babbitt restores the Trinity to roughly half of its natural flow, it could spell hard times for western San Joaquin Valley farmers who have seen their supplies dwindle as more water is dedicated to fish.

Federal officials contend that Babbitt’s decision is not expected to affect water allocations for farmers south of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta that were laid out in the broad state-federal water plan unveiled in June. But farmers are skeptical.

Many of them who rely on Central Valley Project water to irrigate their crops can expect to receive 65% of the supply they anticipated this year. They make up the shortage by pumping water from the ground, shopping for pricey surplus supplies or both.

Dan Errotabere, a third-generation farmer who grows vegetables and cotton on 1,200 acres near Huron, said uncertainty about water supplies has changed the way banks do business with farmers.

“The question that never used to be asked by the banks that is asked now is, ‘What is your alternative supply for water?’ ” Errotabere said. “It’s difficult to loan money to an operation that can’t show how it will meet its water needs.”

He worries that further reductions will force farmers out of business and perhaps stifle his young son’s dreams of following family tradition by becoming a farmer.

“I just hope what we have is sustainable,” Errotabere said, as he watched the first of his family’s tomato crops being harvested. “I think it would be a terrible legacy for this to turn into fallow land.”

But the Yurok and Hoopa Indian tribes have traditions of their own, and fish have long played a role in them.

Federal law entitles the two tribes to half of the Trinity and Klamath rivers’ harvestable fish. Restoring water to the Trinity could dramatically increase the amount of fish tribal members have to eat and fuel hopes of operating viable commercial fisheries.

“Fishing is a way of life,” said Troy Fletcher, executive director of the 4,200-member Yurok tribe. “It’s part of our culture and part of our traditions.”

Returning water to the river could also aid the economy of struggling Trinity County, which is home to 13,500 residents and in recent years has endured a decline in fishing and timber.

“As you drive up and down the Trinity River, there are dozens of businesses boarded up and campgrounds that are empty,” said Tom Stokely, Trinity County’s senior planner. “This is due to the decline of the fisheries.”

Increasing river flows can have a dramatic effect on tourism. After the Department of Interior began guaranteeing a Trinity River flow of at least 340,000 acre-feet a year in the early 1990s, David Steinhauser said his river-rafting business skyrocketed from 100 trips a year in 1988 to more than 2,000 a year a decade later.

“People in the white-water community are excited about the possibility of getting more water in the river,” Steinhauser said. “It’ll make it a better flow on some of the runs and sustain the season.”

Critics of the restoration plan contend that less water is needed to restore the Trinity.

Brian Jobson, a principal contract specialist for the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, said his agency advocates restoration by means of increased water flows, removal of sediment and silt traps, and control of vegetation. The combination would require less water than what is being proposed.

“We feel this method would have equally successful results at restoring the habitat,” Jobson said. “It’s a better way to accomplish the restoration, given the fact that there are so many water and power customers that depend on diversions from the Trinity River.”

Barry Nelson of the Natural Resources Defense Council countered: “What they’re trying to do is engineer a way around putting more water in the river.

“But what they overlook is that rivers need water. It’s that simple.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has also weighed in on the issue. She sent Babbitt a letter last month urging him to consider the alternative proposal by the Sacramento Municipal Utility District.

She also noted Northern California’s recent heat wave, the state’s strained energy supply and skyrocketing power prices for residents and businesses in the Bay Area and Southern California.

“For at least the next two years,” Feinstein wrote, “California will have real problems in meeting its energy needs.”