▁in ▁the ▁down stream ▁river ▁during ▁the ▁dry ▁season . ▁It ▁would ▁also ▁give ▁dam ▁operators ▁the ▁advantage ▁of ▁being ▁able ▁to ▁maintain ▁the ▁river ▁to ▁a ▁lower ▁temperature ▁due ▁to ▁the ▁res er voir ' s ▁great ▁depth . ▁The ▁new ▁res er voir ▁would ▁provide ▁an ▁estimated ▁annual ▁yield ▁of ▁. ▁In ▁November ▁ 2 0 1 4 ▁the ▁dam ▁received ▁$ 1 7 1 ▁million ▁of ▁state ▁fund ing ▁from ▁Proposition ▁ 1 A , ▁though ▁project ▁back ers ▁had ▁sought ▁$ 1 ▁billion ▁in ▁fund ing . ▁ ▁However , ▁oppon ents ▁assert ▁that ▁the ▁upper ▁San ▁Jo aqu in ▁River , ▁which ▁is ▁already ▁controlled ▁by ▁do z ens ▁of ▁smaller ▁res er voir s ▁up stream ▁of ▁Mill erton ▁Lake , ▁will ▁not ▁provide ▁sufficient ▁dis charge ▁to ▁fill ▁the ▁res er voir ▁except ▁in ▁very ▁wet ▁years . ▁The ▁new ▁res er voir ▁would ▁flo od ▁ ▁of ▁the ▁San ▁Jo aqu in ▁River ▁including ▁white water ▁runs , ▁fish ing ▁areas ▁and ▁historic ▁sites . ▁It ▁would ▁also ▁in und ate ▁two ▁Big ▁Creek ▁H ydro ▁power h ouses , ▁causing ▁a ▁potential ▁net ▁loss ▁of ▁electric ity ▁generation . ▁There ▁would ▁be ▁significant ▁ev ap oration ▁losses ▁from ▁the ▁res er voir , ▁and ▁the ▁water ▁required ▁to ▁fill ▁it ▁would ▁put ▁further ▁pressure ▁on ▁already ▁str essed ▁water ▁resources ▁in ▁the ▁San ▁Jo aqu in ▁River ▁bas in . ▁ ▁E col ogy ▁and ▁environment ▁ ▁H undred s ▁of ▁years ▁ago ,