Environmental groups took legal action this week, stating that water users along the Sacramento River misused water that should have gone to endangered winter-run salmon.
The complaint will be added onto existing litigation the groups have filed against the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and Sacramento River settlement contractors. That previous lawsuit is about water use that allegedly fails to protect the delta smelt, also an endangered species.
Under the Endangered Species Act, species on the ESA list cannot be killed or harmed without a permit, said Doug Obegi, senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, which is joined in the lawsuit by Earthjustice, San Francisco Baykeeper, The Bay Institute, the Winnemem Wintu Tribe, and Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman’s Association/Institute for Fisheries Resources.
This year the amount of cold water in Lake Shasta ran out, Obegi said. Cold water is critical for the survival of salmon eggs in the Sacramento River, as well as survival of the juvenile salmon later in the season.
This year and last, the Bureau of Reclamation was not able to keep the water temperatures at the level crucial for egg and young salmon. Eggs and young fish died.
Naming the settlement contractors in the legal documents may persuade the courts to renegotiate water delivery contracts, Obegi explained.
California will experience droughts in the future, droughts that will again threaten salmon in the Sacramento River, he said.
By naming water users, the legal action is targeting farmers of 450,000 acres of land in the Sacramento Valley.
In 2014 and 2015, the most challenging of the recent drought, water users delayed water deliveries so more cold water would be available in Lake Shasta, a letter from the water users states. Water diversions were also cut back for even those with the most senior water rights.
The lawsuit also accuses water users of “illegally” diverting water, an accusation the water groups firmly refute.
Water users worked very closely with federal water managers, going beyond their legal right to water during the drought, the group says.
Lewis Bair is manager of Reclamation District 108, which provides water to farmers in the Colusa area. He said water districts, wildlife and fisheries agencies, and the Bureau, worked together to work out water diversions.
One of many issues is that salmon are not the only endangered species. The giant garter snake relies on wet land near rice fields for survival. If water was completely cut off for winter-run endangered salmon, another species would be in peril, Bair pointed out as one example.
The NRDC lawsuit states 95 percent of juvenile winter-run salmon died during the past drought year, Bair said. That’s terrible, he said. Yet, even in a good year 80 percent of young salmon would be eaten by predators or die in other ways in the river.
Bair said farmers worked more closely with federal water managers this year than they ever have in the past. To accuse them of illegally diverting water is unfair, the group says.
As a result, there was 440,000 acre-feet more water in Lake Shasta at a time critical for fish, the group of irrigators said.
Bair said the water districts are working on projects to increase fish habitat, such as the Painter’s riffle project near Redding, which cleared gravel to create a side channel for fish.
“Our livelihood depends on the survival of salmon” Bair said.
Litigation such as this doesn’t help the fish, he said. What’s needed is for groups to work together to solve problems, he said.
Obegi, of the NRDC, said the past two years have been so extreme that the survival of the endangered winter-run salmon has been touch-and-go.
If there were just a few more years that warm water killed the remaining fish, the species could be lost forever, he said.
Contracts need to be changed so that fish survival takes precedence, he said. This could mean farmers waiting longer in the season to receive water.
Also, the bottom line is that water users do not have permits that allow them to “take winter run” fish, which are endangered, he said.
“We believe that is illegal under the” Endangered Species Act.
The defendants in the lawsuit include San Luis and Delta Mendota Water Authority, State Water Contractors, Westlands Water District, California Department of Water Resources, California Farm Bureau Federation, Glenn-Colusa irrigation District, Natomas Central Mutual Water Company, Pelger Mutual Water Company, Princeton- Codora-Glenn Irrigation District, Provident Irrigation District, Reclamation District 108 and River Garden Farms.