Sites Reservoir in FOR’s Sights
Antelope Valley, the proposed location of Sites Reservoir. Credit: Sue Graue, 2014.
After years in the making, the process to decide whether to issue a water rights permit for one of California’s biggest water boondoggles has begun. In August, the first hearings for the proposed Sites Reservoir were held by the State Water Resources Control Board’s Administrative Hearings Office. These proceedings, will ultimately determine whether or not the proposed reservoir is granted a water right, and, if so, under what operational conditions. It will address the legal and environmental implications of one of the largest surface storage projects in the state, and also send a strong signal about the future of water management in California.
The proposed reservoir, which would be built to store 1.5 million acre-feet diverted from the Sacramento River to an off-stream site east of Maxwell, is touted as “environmentally friendly,” and proponents claim that it would help the state adapt to climate change. But the truth is that Sites utterly fails to meet the test of 21st century water management. While the reservoir would be built to hold 1.5 million acre feet, on average, Sites would add less than 1% to California’s water supply, and could add as little as one tenth of 1% as operational rules change over time. Sites can’t fill with just a big gulp of floodwater, instead needing to run its pumps for nearly six months straight to fill the reservoir. This means that Sites would take water from the Sacramento River during critical times when the Bay-Delta ecosystem and endangered species desperately need these flows to survive. It would also be a greenhouse gas emitter, equal to adding 80,000 cars to the road annually. This is all for a price tag of nearly $5 billion dollars.
Read: Sites Reservoir Fact Sheet
Friends of the River (FOR) is at the forefront of opposing the Sites Reservoir water rights, helping to organize a broad coalition of environmental, fishing, tribal, Delta and other interests. In the water rights hearings, this coalition has recruited an incredible lineup of expert witnesses to present testimony and evidence demonstrating that the harms of the project will far outweigh any benefits.
P. tanacetifolia near the proposed location of Sites Reservoir. Credit: Greg Kareofelas.
A panel of Tribal experts will testify that Sites Reservoir is a continuance of inequitable water policy that has harmed Tribes, their rights, and ways of life. This panel includes Sherri Norris, Executive Director of the California Indian Environmental Alliance; Lester Marston, an attorney specializing in Tribal Law and Tribal Water Rights; Gary Mulcahy, Government Liaison of the Winnemem Wintu Tribe; Chairman Wayne Mitchum Jr. of the Cachil Dehe Band of Wintun Indians; and Vice Chair Malissa Tayaba of the Shingle Springs Band of Miwuk Indians.
Ron Stork, who has served on FOR’s policy staff for nearly 40 years, will testify that Sites Reservoir is a relic of outdated water management ideas from many decades ago, and is no longer suited to today’s values and challenges. He will especially focus on the fact that the Sites project would be a water export project without the same constraints as the state’s major water export projects (the State Water Project and Central Valley Project (SWP, CVP)). Sites would serve customers of the SWP and CVP, while continuing to allow those projects to evade their responsibilities – diverting only “surplus” water, maintaining Delta water quality, and others.
Other expert witnesses include:
Chris Shutes, California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, testifying on how the operation of Sites Reservoir will cause hydrological changes that will adversely affect fish,
Jacob Kann, PhD, and Eli Asarian, testifying on water quality impacts of Sites Reservoir,
Fisheries and water management scientist Christina Swanson, testifying for FOR on climate impacts of Sites Reservoir,
Baykeeper Science Director Jon Rosenfield, testifying on reduced freshwater flow impacts to fish, endangered fish, and hydrology,
Golden State Salmon Association’s Scott Artis, and the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations George Bradshaw, and Lisa Damrosch testifying on impacts of Sites Reservoir on the commercial and recreational fishing industries,
Ecologist Shawn Smallwood, testifying on impacts to terrestrial wildlife species,
Mark Easter, testifying for FOR on Sites Reservoir greenhouse gas emissions,
Economist Jeff Michael, testifying for FOR on financial feasibility and public interest of Sites,
Eli Asarian, testifying on alternative water supplies for agriculture,
Bruce Reznik, testifying on local water supply alternatives, and
Clyde MacDonald, testifying for FOR on Area/County of Origin law.
The thorough testimonies of these expert witnesses will challenge the project's viability from social, economic, and environmental perspectives. It will also demonstrate to the State Water Board and the public that claims about Sites Reservoir’s purported project benefits are false and misleading.
A rainbow over the proposed location of Sites Reservoir. Credit: Sue Graue, 2014.
In addition to our efforts in this hearing, FOR is actively opposing the Sites Reservoir project through many avenues. FOR and colleagues are in litigation over inadequate environmental analysis that did not sufficiently address the project's potential impacts(1). FOR, in collaboration with Patagonia, released a report(2) on greenhouse gas emissions associated with the reservoir. Additionally, FOR has urged the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to deny a $2.2 billion loan under the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA), which could undercut project financing. FOR is committed to ensuring that California’s water management strategies align with the needs of people, the economy, and the beautiful ecosystems of the state.
The Sites Reservoir project stands at a crossroads, and the outcomes of the water rights hearing and ongoing opposition efforts will play a critical role in shaping the state’s water future. The first phase of the hearing is scheduled to end in October 2024, and the next phases will likely continue through early 2025. As the debate continues, the claims of project proponents must be evaluated against the best available science, while aiming to achieve a sustainable water future for all Californians.
Sites Reservoir does not meet that test.
Wait, don’t go! Our work to prevent Sites Reservoir has placed a great strain on our organization and we need your help as we work toward a sustainable water future. Please donate or sign up for our newsletter to stay in the know.
Resources
(1) Sacramento Bee: CA environmental groups file appeal in Sites Reservoir challenge
