March 18, 2011
To: Wendy, Derek, and Ben Floyd,
YBSA appreciates the chance to voice our observations and concerns. A lot of things in the Plan represent progress, including improved tools for water management, fish and wildlife restoration, continued conservation, and the chance to work together. The Department of Ecology seems to be taking a lead role that, in the past, has been basically a responsibility of the Bureau of Reclamation. However, those of us with long memories see pervasive shadows that, we fear, will pull our cohesive efforts apart, and we are eager to raise those concerns here so that the Work Plan can be the vehicle to succeed where other efforts have failed. None of these concerns are new, and we will continue to be cooperators as long as we see hope that all elements of the Plan are given equal attention in implementation.
We believe the water supply elements are inadequate for the following reasons:
1. Climate change forecasts indicate a need for additional irrigation water to sustain future increases for crop consumptive use.
2. Forecasts show increased drought frequency and magnitude. This will reduce the water supply available in summer months and carryover.
3. Climate change will reduce snowpack storage and further reduce summer water supplies for crops and instream flows. see Climate Change Report
4. Ground water supply problems are not adequately resolved by the package and could lead to ground water adjudication which would most likely freeze federal investment. Ground water utilization by homes and farms has already significantly reduced instream flows in the lower Yakima River. see Yakima Herald Republic Article
5. The success of fish passage elements are severely compromised by inadequate volumes of water, which compromises smolt survival around the dams, and transit and production in the lower Yakima River. In fact we are displeased to see the plan further reduces the instream flows in the already degraded lower Yakima River.
6. We believe that higher flow volumes in the lower Yakima River are required to improve water quality problems of temperature, phosphorous and other parameters. We believe that DOE may be required by the courts to resolve these water quality issues. YBSA believes the plan and process can be improved. see Water Quality Lower Yakima River
7. The current plan has not been adequately analyzed for costs and benefits which will inhibit national investment. This process must compare previously investigated alternatives by the same metrics, and is best accomplished with a scorecard or matrix.
8. The lack of financial analysis will inhibit political support. The public needs to know who is expected to pay and how much. We note that many items have yet to aired and public hearing are not far off.
9. We believe that the integration of pumped storage provides the financial strength to justify this project, and the political support of a large constituency. If the plan delays the implementation of it, consensus will be very difficult to maintain. see below "A Water Supply . . . Integrated Water Resource Management Workgroup"
10. Sequencing the elements will lead to a piece meal implementation and breaking up the structure that is essential for everyone around the table to stand together -and we believe- is at odds with Representative Hastings written comments to the workgroup. see Doc Hastings Letter
11. While we admire the ingenuity of the Department of Ecology in attempting to bring a number of environmental interests through uncertain and unpriced mitigation to support the Plan for water storage, the list of those who openly oppose Bumping and Wymer is daunting, and with the help of the ESA, other restrictive regulations, and the actions of individual citizens, history shows these two reservoirs will most likely never be built after decades of infighting. see Bumping Map & Wymer Map
12. The implementation of the Work Plan shifts to new levels as the federal agencies must step away, and moves to a much broader base involving the private sector and the political arena. We believe that the Implementation Committee must be expanded to seven members to provide a greater opportunity for new points of view.
Sincerely,
Sid Morrison
Chair YBSA
A water supply and funding investigation that can be blended synergistically with the work of the Integrated Water Resource Management Workgroup
March 9, 2011
Several years ago, the late, great, John Keyes told me that The Yakima River Basin had "done it all" except for storage. He was referring to the incremental improvements for fish and wildlife, conservation, water management, water quality, and environmental restoration as the decades have gone by under Title 12, with millions of dollars invested. More recently, I heard the Secretary of the Interior, echoed by the Secretaries of Energy and Commerce, saying words like "No more federal mega-projects, but we are eager to be part of new partnerships, including public-private investments with new environmentally-sound ideas and shared costs."
How do these voices from far away impact the concept I want to share with the Workgroup today? They seem to fit the opportunity that is "blowing" our way, and we would be turning our backs on reality if we did not want to build on it. This is not to undermine the workgroup plan that we are advancing, but to potentially augment it, and bring us closer to actually getting something done when we need partners with money and ideas that save energy. In addition to my passion for finding water for the future of the Yakima Basin, I serve as Chair of the Executive Board of Energy Northwest, producing enough carbon-free energy from nuclear, solar, hydro and wind to keep the lights on and the factories running in all of Seattle. What I say here is the result of a lot of years and miles, and meetings.
What we are presenting today is a concept based on communication with a lot of people and actions that have recently been taken by BPA in dealing with efforts to balance the power generated by northwest sources with market opportunities. This balance has changed dramatically from when the BOR and BPA made a measurement of pumped storage about 4 years ago, and failing to act has a potential cost to regional utilities in the tens of millions of dollars.
What follows is a more scholarly description of the "Columbia Renewable Energy Storage Project" as envisioned in early March of 2011, with exploration and organization by Jim Waldo, an experienced water attorney known to many of us in the Yakima and Columbia Basins.
Sid Morrison
+ The Columbia Renewable Energy Storage Project ("CRESP") is an energy storage project, currently in the conceptual phase, designed to help reliably integrate the region's rapidly growing wind generation fleet into the region's power grid. Because recent changes in the energy markets have placed a premium on energy storage, we believe CRESP can be leveraged to help address water storage and fisheries issues in the Yakima Basin.
* As an initial concept, the project would draw water during periods of high flows and low power market prices from the pool of the Priest Rapids Project into a pumped storage reservoir (or reservoirs) at higher elevations, with the stored water returned to the Priest Rapids Pool through generators when prices are high.
* The primary function is to store electricity during periods when generation from intermittent renewable resources or from the Columbia River dams is surplus to system needs (including environmental) or market demands.
* Secondary functions, if the primary function proves operationally and economically feasible, are to store water from the Columbia River to help meet agricultural, fisheries, and municipal objectives in the Yakima River Basin.
* CRESP is different from the Black Rock project both conceptually and in terms of proposed project configuration. However, CRESP builds on certain analytical work already done for the Black Rock project which will help reduce the costs of the planning level analysis of CRESP that is now needed.
+ Initial high-level reconnaissance suggests the CRESP concept may be economically viable in view of recent rapid growth of the wind energy fleet in the Columbia Basin and the challenges facing system operators in integrating that growth while accommodating fisheries needs at the Columbia River dams.
* For example, during the June 2010 "high wind/high flow" event, Bonneville was forced to give away power for free. As the BPA has recently observed, there is a reasonable chance of the events of June 2010 recurring over a six to eight week period this spring, and if it occurs, "the cost will be in the tens of millions of dollars," with costs continuing to grow in the future as the Pacific Northwest's wind generation capacity continues to expand.
* In the future, it is likely that power will be available at very low prices during the spring high-flow periods, creating an opportunity for CRESP to economically remove water from the Columbia during the spring freshet and return it later in the year when power prices are high and river flows are low.
* CRESP offers a number of additional potential benefits, including removing water from the Columbia during high spring flows and returning it later in the year when it is needed to meet fish conservation obligations under the Vernita Bar Agreement.
* Offering a means to manage transmission congestion in the mid-Columbia region, thereby enhancing the the value of existing transmission assets and possibly avoiding the need for difficult and expensive additions to transmission.
* Offering a means to maximize the value of the region's wind generation fleet. During last June's high wind/high flow event, BPA required wind generators to curtail production, resulting in the loss of tax credits and renewable energy credits that are tied to the volume of wind production. BPA estimates that future events alone could cost wind producers alone more than $50 million. CRESP offers a means of storing energy when it cannot otherwise be used and releasing it when it is needed, rather than forcing generators to stop producing at times when wind and water are abundant and demand is not, and thereby preserves the value of wind generation.
* Potential "customers" of energy storage services include wind generation operators, public utility districts, investor owned utilities, BPA, and others in the utility industry
+ These favorable initial results point to the need for a more authoritative engineering/economic analysis at the planning and scoping level, with multiple objectives:
*Engineering/economic analysis of the costs and benefits of the energy storage concept, taking into account recent trends in the regional energy market and environmental needs, and examining alternative sites in the region.
*For storage sites and designs that "pan out" technically and economically from an energy storage standpoint, evaluate the costs and benefits of adapting them to support regional fisheries and agricultural objectives while taking advantage of revenues from energy storage operations to help defray the costs of adapting and operating the system to serve these additional functions.
+ The CRESP investigation would complement the efforts of the Workgroup by potentially making additional water available in the lower Yakima Basin, and increasing the flexibility of flows in the entire Yakima River system. It is an independent effort, operating on its own timeline. It holds the potential to be self-funding, reducing the taxpayer burden by accessing private capital while working synergistically with the water and fisheries solutions currently being developed by the Work group.
+ We expect more details from Jim Waldo as the investigation continues
New Video from Cle Elum River
The Yakama Nation reintroduced Sockeye Salmon in Lake Cle Elum. Two types of Sockeye Stock, Wenatchee and Okanogam, were caught in an adult fish trap in Priest Rapids Dam and trucked to Lake Cle Elum and released in 2010. The video link that follows shows the Sockeye spawning in the Cle Elum River watershed above Lake Cle Elum.
Life Cycle of Spring Chinook on the Cle Elum River Video
Sockeye above Lake Cle Elum Video
 
Bob Tuck Salmon Walk
on the American River
Full Video
Prior to Euro-American development, there was one huge salmon run with the largest number of salmon returning during the summer. Unfortunately, water development projects on the tributaries of the Yakima, as well as the mainstem, have eliminated those runs that migrated during the summer, or utilized habitat in areas that are now unsuitable because of floodplain habitat alterations or water temperature.  Thus we are left with species and runs whose migration timing and habitat areas are compatible with our water development. Fall Chinook migrate, spawn, and rear in the Lower Yakima River during times of the year when water temperatures are not excessive. Spring Chinook avoid high water temperatures by migrating through the lower river during the spring, and spawn and rear in the upper watershed where water temperatures are not normally a concern. Steelhead hold in the Columbia River and do not enter the Yakima River until water temperatures have moderated in the early fall, and complete their migration in the spring.
Historic Fish Runs in the Yakima Basin Video
 Each species and run has different habitat requirements. Spring Chinook spawn in smaller streams, such as the upper Yakima, Cle Elum, Teanaway, American and Little Naches rivers. Juvenile spring Chinook spend 1 year in freshwater and then migrate to the ocean. Fall Chinook are big river spawners; the Columbia and Snake rivers and the lower Yakima River. Juvenile fall Chinook only rear in fresh water for approximately 3 months and then go to the ocean; which means their juveniles migrate during late spring and early summer, thus avoiding high water temperatures in most years. Summer Chinook are in between, literally; they return during the summer and exhibit life cycles similar to both fall Chinook and spring Chinook. Summer Chinook spawn primarily in the Wenatchee and Okanogan Rivers in Washington, as well as the Snake River drainage in Idaho. Washington juvenile summer Chinook migrate to the ocean during the spring and summer of their first year, much as fall Chinook, while Snake River summer Chinook behave more like spring Chinook, in that the juveniles rear in freshwater for a full year before migrating to the ocean.
Historically, The Chinook run in the Columbia River was one long silvery parade, beginning in February in the Lower Columbia River and lasting into November. Summer Chinook constituted the majority of this enormous bounty. Now we have 3 much-reduced humps on the graph representing small numbers of salmon in the spring, summer, and fall migration periods, instead of one big continuous curve.
Summer Chinook, along with sockeye and coho are extinct in the Yakima Basin. The Yakama Nation is in the process of re-introducing coho and sockeye. In 2010, approximately 13,000 Spring Chinook were counted at Prosser Dam, along with several thousand fall Chinook, coho, and steelhead.
A female Salmon digs a redd, or nest, in the gravel in the bottom of the river to deposit her eggs. When she is ready to lay a portion of her eggs, she releases pheromones to attract the male. Once the male  joins her in the bottom of the redd, she releases some of her eggs and the male fertilizes them. The male then departs, while the female digs on the upstream edge of the redd, which covers the eggs while she excavates a new depression. When this depression is ready, she releases pheromones and repeats the process of laying eggs while a male fertilizes them. Each female will engage in 5-7 egg-laying episodes before she has deposited all of her 3000 to 5000 eggs in the gravel. When she completes her task, all of the eggs will be covered by 12-16 inches of gravel, which provides protection for the eggs. After spawning is completed, all Pacific salmon die; this final sacrifice provides essential nutrients for the food chain that will support the juvenile salmon during their time rearing in freshwater.
Life Cycle of Spring Chinook on the Cle Elum River Video
In December, the eggs hatch. The alevins, or sac fry, stay in the gravel and gradually absorb the orange-colored yoke sac. The fry remain in the gravel through the winter and into the spring. In May, when the water is warming up and food production in the river accelerates, the yolk is completely absorbed and the fry have to emerge from the gravel and begin to feed on their own. Spring Chinook spend a full year in freshwater before migrating to the ocean the following spring. Instead of swimming to the ocean, they ride the high water, or “freshet”, created by the melting mountain snow-pack. This high water is equivalent to a human catching a bus and riding to the mouth of the Columbia River.
"The Bus" Catching the High Water Video
Research results indicate that the survival of spring Chinook in the Yakima Basin from the egg phase to migrating to the ocean as smolts averages approximately 5%. When they return, the surviving adults will spawn in the same area of the river that they themselves came from. The ability to locate their natal gravel is one of the marvels of the natural world.
 
Return to Natural Production Video
The best basin to do significant restoration of natural production in the Columbia River system is in the Yakima Basin. To be sure, we have challenges in water management and flows. But, if we provide a large quantity of water in the Yakima River basin dedicated to salmon restoration, there is no reason we can’t produce greatly increased salmon runs. There is a lot of potential in this Basin but we must have a vision as big as the potential.
Yakima Basin Low Flow Problems Video
We can’t maintain agriculture at the current acreage, provide that acreage with sufficient water during droughts, and produce greatly increased salmon runs with the water supplies from the Yakima Basin. There is only one place to get the large quantity of water to provide for both irrigation and fish restoration, and that is from the Columbia River.
How to Save Agriculture and Fish in the Yakima Basin Video
Bring water out of the Columbia River and put it in the Roza and Sunnyside canals and then unhook those districts from the Yakima River. The Yakima Basin water supply formally used by those two districts could then be utilized to support salmon restoration throughout the basin, while still providing the water needed for irrigation from the Columbia River. In addition, we need to build passage at the storage dams, and purchase, protect, and restore floodplain and riparian habitat. Central to this restoration strategy is the restoration of the 100 miles of the lower Yakima River.
We had a vision 30 years ago; what was once only a vision, a dream, is not reality. We can go see this new reality, we can stand on it; most importantly, we can watch it spawn in the river. We have constructed fish ladders and fish screens throughout the Yakima Basin; we have modified water management to protect redds and aid migrating fish.
Yakima Basin Flip Flop Process for Fish Video
 We now need to move on to a new vision, so that 30 years from now that, too, will be reality. That vision is a secure and prosperous agricultural economy, and vastly increased salmon runs in the Yakima Basin. That vision requires new solutions and bold approaches. The idea of pumping water out of the Columbia River is not new. It is already being done on the Umatilla River, and planning to implement a similar project in the Walla Walla River is well underway. The Umatilla Project has been successful in supplying the irrigation water needed while providing water for fish. In addition, pumping out of the Columbia River is the probable solution to declining groundwater in the Odessa area.
Pattern of Water Exchange in River Basins Video
Twenty years from now climate change is really going to be a driver of our water supply in the Yakima Basin. It will affect either the timing or total amount, or both. The water exchange project with the Columbia River would allow us to meet this unprecedented challenge without causing economic and social upheaval.
Climate Change Video
Sockeye above Lake Cle Elum Video
The choice is ours: Boldly prepare for the future, or be prisoners of the future. Control our own destiny, or have our destiny determined by outside forces and decisions.
By Bob Tuck
Yakima
Herald-Republic Editorial Board
This editorial appears in the Yakima Herald-Republic on April 12, 2009.
Study stymies new storage, but need for water remains
It looks like those involved in the search for water enhancement in the Yakima River Basin have finally agreed on one thing: We don't need another endless cycle of studies.
"Since the 1980s there's been no end to this stuff," said Jerry Kelso, area manager for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation in Yakima. "There needs to be an end."
We couldn't agree more.
Kelso's pronouncement came a week ago after the bureau ended a five-year, $18 million study that concluded none of the suggested new water storage projects -- from a tiny reservoir off the Yakima River to the behemoth Black Rock reservoir east of Yakima -- are worth pursuing.
However, that doesn't mean the Yakima River Basin has an adequate water supply to meet the needs of irrigators, cities and migrating fish -- now or into the future. Far from it. Water experts predict worsening conditions due to climate changes will lead to increased threats of drought. Within the next 50 years, the region could be experiencing eight drought years out of every 10.
Right now, California is facing critical water shortages with farmers taking more than 1 million acres out of production. For the Yakima Valley, that type of flexibility is not possible. Tree fruits dominate our ag crops. When a tree dies in a drought, a return to production takes years, not to mention vast new expenditures. The result would be economic chaos.
Though the bureau has said the options for new storage are not worth pursuing, that also doesn't mean the debate has ended, especially with respect to Black Rock. The bureau essentially gave the proposed 1.6 million-acre-foot reservoir a stay of execution. The controversial project has at least as many pluses going for it as it does minuses.
Critics say its ballooning estimated cost of construction, now projected at $4 billion-plus, is far too much and that its return on each dollar invested of 13 cents is way too low. Then there's the ticking time bomb of predicted seepage, which could speed pollutants to the Columbia River from the Hanford nuclear reservation to the east.
Proponents counter by saying the bureau's analysis of costs is flawed and does not calculate the value of such amenities as recreation. They also say Black Rock is the only proposal on the table that satisfies the three-pronged mandate handed down by Congress when it authorized studies for the Yakima basin: water for fish, water for people and water for irrigators.
The project would draw water from the Columbia River when it has excess water, pump it uphill and store it behind a 600 foot-high dam about 30 miles east of Yakima. That would allow greater flows in the Yakima River by providing irrigation water for area crops.
But added storage is only one aspect of a realistic solution. Better water conservation and fish habitat, along with improved fish passage at dams in the upper reaches of the Yakima River, must also be in play.
Bringing all of these elements together will be the goal of one last study by the state Department of Ecology. The department is attempting to determine the best alternative to meet the most needs.
Then comes the crucial effort to get all of the competing interests in the basin -- from the Yakama Nation to junior water rights holders within the Roza Irrigation District -- at the same table with the sole purpose of getting a thumbs up on a solution.
That's a tall order, but it is not out of reach.
Certainly those leading the Yakima Basin Storage Alliance have done the right thing at this time by agreeing to step back after years of guiding the discussion. The alliance is looking to the elected commissioners from the three-county basin to shoulder that new leadership role. This move should entice the Yakama Nation to join in the discussion -- which is critical if any legislation is to eventually be presented to Congress for funding.
We suggest taking one additional step. Why not invite Gov. Chris Gregoire and get her involved in a leadership role? The governor once oversaw the Department of Ecology and served as the state's attorney general as well. You couldn't ask for better qualifications, and they will be needed to get agreement from such a diverse group of water users, not to mention environmentalists.
Doing nothing is not an option. The future of the Yakima Valley demands action. And the sooner the better.
* Members of the Yakima Herald-Republic editorial board are Michael Shepard, Bob Crider, Barbara Serrano, Spencer Hatton and Karen Troianello.
Dr. Jack Stanford Visits Yakima Dr. Jack Stanford will be in Yakima September 24 to tell us his vision of how to restore 1,000,000 salmon and steelhead to the Yakima River Basin . He believes there is no better place to do so in the lower 48 States than the Yakima . He is an expert in Limnology (River Ecology) and river restoration who has worked extensively with rivers in the Northwest and around the world; in British Columbia , Russia , Europe and South America . He is the M. Bierman Professor of Ecology, at the University of Montana , where he is the Director of the Flathead Lake Biological Station as well as a member of the National Academy of Science, and other organizations.
Please join us to hear him speak at JM Perry auditorium in Yakima on September the 24th at 3:00.
We look forward to seeing you there.
1 Million Salmon and steelhead in the Yakima depend on us! |
