Last weekend, the Delta water story took me to Oakland to attend the 2009 Salmon Aid Festival. The main event happened on Saturday, June 20 to Sunday, June 21, with a special Native American ceremonial salmon bake on Friday, June 19. More than two dozen organizations “including commercial, recreational and tribal fishermen, conservation organizations, chefs, restaurants, scientists, and many others” worked together to create Salmon Aid to “raise awareness of the plight of west coast salmon populations, the rivers and streams they spawn in, and the many coastal and inland communities that rely on salmon for their livelihoods and survival.” Salmon advocates came from California, Oregon, Alaska, Idaho, Nevada and other faraway places to support the event. The festival had education booths, activities, food, environmental film screenings and music to showcase the human connection to the fish as well as educate the public.

I had the opportunity to interview Jessie Reader, a Salmon Aid event organizer. She is also an organizer for the Tuloumne River Trust, a Native American organization concerned about the salmon declines. Below is the Q & A interview.

What did you think of the event?

Bigger and better than last year, SalmonAid 2009 featured 10 great musical acts, including Bay Area favorite Afro-Dance Band Albino!.  We had sustainable seafood from some of the West Coasts finest restaurants, film screenings from the Wild and Scenic Environmental Film Festival, kids activities, and information from over two dozen organizations who work for sustainable salmon fishing and protection of our rivers and streams.  Two sunny days brought out a great crowd from around Oakland and the Bay Area.

Was it a success? And why?

SalmonAid 2009 was a great success on a number of fronts.  Working closely together to put on this event has significantly strengthened our unlikely but growing coalition of commercial fishing groups, recreational fishing groups, environmental organizations, and tribes.  We built a platform for over 2 dozen organizations that would not have had the means to make such an outreach event happen on their own.  Politically, we see that we are making an impact.  Congressional Representative Barbara Lee sent a commendation, and Representative George Miller sent one of his senior staffers to read a statement of support.  The festival mobilized over 1300 letters to President Obama and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Administrator Jane Lubchenco (the Federal Agency charged with enforcing the Endangered Species Act when it comes to Salmon)  As we move forward, President Obama’s Administration and Congress will continue to hear from our many diverse groups speaking with one voice.

Why is it so important to have the Salmon Aid Festival this year?

The 2009 SalmonAid Festival couldn’t have come at a better time.  Many of California’s native fish populations, including salmon, have crashed during the past eight years, when agency science was politically manipulated to allow ever-increasing amounts of water to be exported from the Bay-Delta - the West Coast’s largest estuary.  As water exports from the Bay-Delta estuary increased to record levels, these fish populations plummeted to historic lows.  Due to these steep declines, thousands of West Coast commercial, recreational, and tribal fishermen are enduring another fishery closure in California and Oregon this year, as they did in 2008. Economic losses in 2009 are predicted to total $270 million and nearly 2,700 jobs.

The June 4 release of the Biological Opinion on Sacramento River salmon from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS – an agency under NOAA) is one of the first signs that the Obama Administration is following through on their promise to reinstate sound science into policy.  This Biological Opinion replaces a scientifically corrupt Bush-era opinion that a federal court threw out as legally invalid.  In contrast, the 2009 Sacramento River BiOp underwent two separate peer reviews to ensure that it was based on the best available science.  We are encouraged to think that the means the Administration cares about the fate of wild Pacific salmon and the many human communities (as well as other creatures) that depend on this magnificent fish.  The BiOp sends a message of hope to the many people who depend on the salmon economy across the West Coast.

SalmonAid 2009 also comes on the heels of a failed attempt by Congressman Nunes to pass an amendment that would have prohibited NMFS from spending any funds to implement the BiOp and enforce the Endangered Species Act.  Nunes’ desire was to stop any potential cutbacks to the amount of water being taken out of the Delta for agribusiness, and the rational was that the ESA was going to hurt the CA economy.  Our rebuttal is this:  We are facing cutbacks because the water agencies have severely mismanaged the water resources; they have promised water that isn’t available.  Endangered fish are a very small part of the story.  (To use an analogy, this proposal is akin to repealing drunk driving laws because one would like to to get drunk.  We don’t repeal laws because they are sometimes inconvenient to follow.)  SalmonAid commends Congressional Reps. Miller and Thompson for their leadership in defeating this dangerous amendment.  We expect that this is only the first of numerous attack on the integrity of the NMFS BiOp.  The SalmonAid 2009 festival is well timed, and our coalition is actively calling on the rest of Congress to defend the ESA.  Congress needs to wake up and address the real problems - which are the mismanagement of our natural resources, not our environmental laws.

How many people attended?

Jack London Square estimates that about 9,000 people came through the Festival.

What were the goals for the event?

The political goals of the festival were to educate the public about the current crisis of wild Pacific salmon, the direct effects that crisis is having on so many human communities, and the solutions for this crisis which require major improvements to the way we manage water systems in this state, as well as the restoration of key rivers and estuaries.  We wanted to get our “Restore Rivers, Recover Salmon, Rebuild Jobs” message out, and at that we’ve succeeded quite well.  We also wanted to collect 1000 signed postcards to President Obama and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Chief Dr. Jane Lubchenco, and we got over 1300.

Other goals include educating consumers about the health and environmental differences between farmed and wild salmon, and to encourage them to “Vote with their fork” by asking for Wild Salmon only at their restaurants and supermarkets.  Food at SalmonAid was provide by several fine restaurants that have taken a pledge never to serve farmed salmon.

A final goal of the SalmonAid festival was to celebrate the central role these magnificent fish play in our West Coast economy, ecology, and culture.  We wanted to create a positive event with a positive message, and to have a lot of fun – which worked out quite well!

What is the most important environmental goal to your organization, the Tuolumne River Trust?

The Tuolumne River Trust’s goal was to educate the urban Bay Area public about how water conservation on our part can play a key role in salmon recovery.  Over 2.5 million people in the greater Bay Area get tap water from the Tuolumne River.  The Trust recently won a 5 year campaign to stop the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission from implementing a plan that would have taken an additional 25 million gallons of water per day out of this salmon-supporting river – that’s enough to fill 1,000 swimming pools per day.  In a compromise decision, we now have 10 years to hit water conservation and recycling targets, so that we don’t have to revisit the idea of taking more water out of this wild and scenic river down the road.  Keeping enough cold flowing water in our rivers and streams is vital to salmon being able to successfully reproduce.  In the last decade, salmon populations on the Tuolumne River have crashed from 18,000 to less than 500 fish.

For concerned folks, how can they most help the salmon?

People can most help wild Pacific salmon by:
1) Communicating to elected officials (federal, state, and local) that they value wild salmon and the rivers that support us all
2) Joining their local watershed/salmon protection organization and learning about their local issues
3) Requesting that their local restaurants and supermarkets serve only wild salmon/asking “do you serve wild salmon” whenever buying fish at a restaurant or market

More information about the National Marine Fisheries Services’ recent biological opinion concerning the salmon populations and the State Water Project and federal Central Valley Project can be found here.

Environmentalists concerned about the water quality of the Sacramento - San Joaquin River Delta are accusing California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s State Water Resources Control Board as “discarding long-existing regulations protecting water quality (and fisheries) in order to protect the Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation from their continuing violations of the Public Trust and Bay-Delta water quality standards.”

On Thursday, June 25, the California State Water Resources Control Board will hold a public hearing to determine whether to modify Order WR 2006-0006 that, in part, adopted a Cease and Desist Order (C&D) against the DWR and the Bureau. The Order basically enforces a water quality standard in the Delta. Like most of the debate surrounding the Delta, the standards go back a long way.

In order to measure and control the salinity levels in the Delta waters, the State Board adopted standards in 1978 and reaffirmed them in 1995 and 2006.  These Board standards required the DWR and the Bureau to implement the 0.7 mmhos/cm electrical conductivity (EC) water quality objective for agricultural beneficial uses applicable from April through August of each year at the interior southern Delta compliance locations (i.e., San Joaquin River at Brandt Bridge, Old River near Middle River, and Old River at Tracy Road Bridge).  These measures became known as the interior southern Delta salinity objectives (Order WR 2006-0006) and were adopted on February 16, 2006.

After its passage, the Board ordered DWR and the Bureau “to take corrective actions under a time schedule to obviate the threat of noncompliance with thier permit and license conditions.” This plan included implementing permanent barriers to control the salinity in the Delta. To comply, the DWR and Bureau submitted a plan and schedule to create permanent operable gate structures in the southern Delta through the South Delta Improvement Program (SDIP) by July 1, 2009. According to the State Board, this gate project was contingent upon environmental documentation, regulatory requirements and compliance with the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

Since completion of the plan and schedule, the DWR and Bureau have failed to meet the salinity standards and install the permanent barriers. The organizations submitted various biological opinions from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Marine Fisheries Service to the State Board, which stated the barriers could not be constructed for several more years—- thus, not meeting the July 1, 2009 deadline for compliance.

Environmentalists from organizations like the California Sport Fishing Alliance and Restore the Delta contend that the salinity standards were protective of the Delta agriculture and the aquatic ecosystem and must be enforced.

Bill Jennings, Executive Director of California Sport Fishing Alliance, issued the following statement regarding the effects on the Delta’s fish, wildlife and water.

However, it became obvious by early 2007 that the gate structures (barriers) faced huge problems and would be delayed and likely would never be constructed. The US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) expressed serious concerns about the project’s effects on fish and wildlife. In fact the recently released Biological Opinion from NMFS on Delta operations states that DWR shall not implement the South Delta Improvement Project and barriers because the project would adversely modify critical habitat and NMFS has not identified an alternative to the permanent gates that meets the requirements of the federal Endangered Species Act.

However, Barbara Barrigan-Parilla, Campaign Director of Restore the Delta, thinks there is a bigger plan behind the water salinity standards hearing.

“The Delta’s water quality has failed to meet the standards.  So, (the DWR and the Bureau) are pushing through emergency legislation because they don’t have to enforce the law,” said Barbara Barrigan-Parilla, Campaign Director for Restore the Delta, an environmental organization created to promote awareness of Sacramento - San Joaquin River Delta issues.

“They don’t want to enforce the law because it weakens the standards,” said Barrigan-Parilla.  “It’s another reason for Schwarzenegger and the Department of Water Resources to promote the canal.”

Although Jennings didn’t mention the contentious perperhal canal, he agreed with the suggestion that the State Board doesn’t want to enforce the standards.

“Rather than enforce the Cease & Desist and require the DWR and Bureau to implement measures from the many available identified options that would ensure compliance with water quality salinity standards, the State Board has scheduled a hearing to consider modifying the C&D to immunize the DWR/Bureau from their repeated violations,” said Jennings.

Jennings explained that the Cease & Desist order had several options for the DWR and Bureau to stop the salinity violations. These measure included “additional releases of water from upstream Central Valley Project (CVP) facilities or south of the Delta State Water Project (SWP) & CVP facilities, modification in the timing of releases from SWP/CVP facilities, reduction in exports, recirculation of water through the San Joaquin River, purchases or exchanges of water under transfers from other entities, modified operation of temporary barriers, reductions in highly saline drainage from upstream sources or alternative supplies to Delta farmers.”

The upcoming hearing will determine if the State Water Board will make any modifications to the Order WR 2006-0006 (Part A) and any protective measures for the Delta. And it may answer the environmentalists charges concerning the Governor’s commitment to the Delta.

The age-old battle over “blue gold,” commonly known as water, is boiling over in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta - America’s Most Endangered River. Most analysts are calling it the fight between the people versus the fish. However, there is more to this battle than meets the eyes.

On the surface, the farmers, fishermen, urban users and environmentalists are all fighting over the dwindling water supply in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta. Overextended water rights, climate change, population growth, less snow pack runoff and drought conditions for the past three years has resulted in a decreased water supply. The dwindling river and continued water exports have put salmon, steelhead and green sturgeon fish populations on the endangered lists as well as the Northwest Pacific killer whales that rely on this food supply. For the past two years, salmon seasons have closed early because of the declining fish populations. As a result, federal judge Wanger had issued an executive order decreasing the amount of water exports for agricultural and urban uses to protect the fish populations.

Although the fishing industry is pleased with any decision to protect the fish, ecosystems and consequently their livelihoods, agribusiness users who rely on the exports are screaming bloody murder as their water exports are decreased, their crops threatened and their livelihoods hanging in the midst. And major metropolitan areas like Los Angeles, which receives about 30 percent of its water from the Delta, stand to lose a portion of their dwindling water supply.

This past week, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) issued a biological opinion that the Delta’s fish populations face “dire environmental conditions unless irrigation from the federal Central Valley Project and the California State Project – already at historic lows – are curtailed even further.”

Specifically, the NMFS’ directive called for a reduction in irrigations supplies by another 5 to 7 percent a year as well as measures to help the endangered fish species. For example, the agency recommended opening the Red Bluff Diversion Dam on the Sacramento River completely to allow the Chinook salmon and sturgeon unimpeded passage, which would aid their reproduction.

California Gov. Schwarzenegger is not pleased with the order.  In a statement, he said the plan “puts fish above the needs of millions of Californians and the health and security of the world’s eighth-largest economy. The piling on of one federal court decision after another in a species-by-species approach is killing our economy and undermining the integrity of the Endangered Species Act.”

The San Francisco Bay Area, San Joaquin Valley, Central Coast and Southern California stand to lose about 330,000 acre feet per year in water deliveries based on the new restrictions, according to NMFS. So, urban users, water districts and the farming industry plan to fight back through lawsuits that challenge these orders. The Westlands Water District, which supplies water to the mega farms in San Joaquin Valley, will be a major player in the upcoming legal battle.

“If it were allowed to stand, this ... would be a death sentence for large parts of California’s economy. Communities in the San Joaquin Valley are already experiencing 40 percent unemployment rates,” Fresno-based Westlands, the nation’s largest water district, said in a statement.

Water reductions, endangered fish, imperiled ecosystems have set the stage for a political and legislative battle to determine how the Delta’s precious resource will be divided and saved. (There are currently 16 pending bills before the California Legislative, which attempt to tackle the various challenges in the Delta.)

My reporting will continue to cover the ongoing battle over the water in the Delta as well as the political fight staged over the resolutions – namely the peripheral canal and the stalled implementation of the Delta Vision Task Force’s recommendations. It will lift the curtain on why the Governor, who established the Delta Vision Cabinet Committee and supported its recommendations, is now, according to his critics, trying to ignore its strategic initiatives and move full speed ahead on the highly controversial peripheral canal – which scientists think will not solve the Delta’s problems.