Del Puerto Canyon Dam Delayed By Court Ruling
Del Puerto Canyon photo by Elias Funez
On Halloween 2022, Stanislaus County Judge John Mayne gave nature lovers a small treat. While Judge Mayne denied all the environmental claims presented by Friends of the River and its coalition partners, he did send Del Puerto Canyon Dam project back to the drawing board by ruling that the proposed road relocation violated the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This will require that the Del Puerto Water District prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report. This ruling will significantly stall the project.
The Del Puerto Canyon Dam is a proposed reservoir near the town of Patterson, California. The reservoir will be capable of storing 84,000 acre-feet of water and will drown over 1,000 acres of grasslands, oak woodlands, and riparian habitats. The project threatens the survival of golden eagles, red-legged frogs, and tiger salamanders that are already endangered and protected by state laws. The canyon is also home to rare plant species such as the diamond-petaled California poppy, big tar plant, and Lemmon’s jewel flower.
The Court found that the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was deficient as it did not adequately address the planned relocation of Del Puerto Canyon Road. The EIR did not provide a roadway location and left it up to future planners to decide. Friends of the River and its coalition partners had also raised questions regarding the extent to which the Del Puerto project would harm the downstream riparian habitat, native wildlife, water and air quality, and the scenic and social health of the watershed. Unfortunately, Judge Mayne ruled that these factors were adequately addressed in the EIR.
“Del Puerto Canyon reservoir will destroy a beautiful canyon and will only fuel increased demand among the agricultural interests”
- Jann Dorman, Friends of the River
However, the environmental groups who successfully challenged the EIR view this as a victory. “Considering how much this dam would damage local wildlife and an already strained ecosystem, the court made the right call in denying this project,” said Peter Broderick, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “With this outcome, the imperiled species of Del Puerto Canyon will live to see another day. We hope this ruling sends a clear message that cutting corners on environmental review and the disclosure of a project's impacts is not acceptable,” said Isabella Langone, conservation program manager for the California Native Plant Society. Jann Dorman, executive director of Friends of the River stated, “Del Puerto Canyon reservoir will destroy a beautiful canyon and will only fuel increased demand among the agricultural interests in the San Joaquin Valley, worsening dependence on the already strained Delta. This project takes inexpensive taxpayer-subsidized federal water, puts it in a reservoir, evaporates a lot of it, warms it up, privatizes it, then sells it to the highest bidder.”
The Del Puerto Water District’s spokesman downplayed the ruling calling it “a minor setback.” The next step for the district is to prepare a Supplemental EIR, with an actual roadway location. This process may take between six and eighteen months, or perhaps longer. The Court may again be called upon to review the Supplemental EIR, assuming these or additional environmental groups find fault with the new roadway location. This litigation may take another nine to twelve months.
There are many variables in play here. After the State CEQA and litigation process has concluded, there could be federal regulatory hurdles and lawsuits to overcome. The water that is to fill the proposed reservoir is federal water, the canals to transport the water are federal, and the San Luis Reservoir, another federal facility will also be part of this process. The environmental claims previously raised may be revisited as well. Then, the federal regulatory ruling can be challenged in federal court, adding perhaps an additional three years to this process. While it is very difficult to predict how long state and federal regulatory hearings and lawsuits will take, it is possible that breaking ground on the project may not occur for as long as five or six years from now. This will also depend on the availability of tax-payer funds and the future political climate which may not be favorable to the environment.
Looking at the big picture, the environmentalists have won one victory in a long and costly war. Every delay in building the dam increases costs for the builders. Inflation and high interest rates will substantially raise the cost of the dam, perhaps to a point where its so-called benefits are deemed to be outweighed by the costs. Apparently overlooked is the fact that taxpayers are paying for the dam and all the regulatory and court battles, while the dam builders are expected to sell the dam water to future farmers at an untold profit.
A version of this article was published as an opinion piece in the Modesto Bee on November 11, 2022
