The Impacts of the State and Federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Acts
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
THE IMPACTS OF THE STATE AND FEDERAL WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS ACTS IN CONSERVATION EFFORTS ON CALIFORNIA’S TRINITY RIVER ———————— A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, Chico ———————— In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree Master of Arts in History ———————— by Michael I. Muraki Fall 2018 THE IMPACTS OF THE STATE AND FEDERAL WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS ACTS IN CONSERVATION EFFORTS ON CALIFORNIA’S TRINITY RIVER A Thesis by Michael I. Muraki Fall 2018 APPROVED BY THE INTERIM DEAN OF GRADUATE STUDIES: _________________________________ Sharron A. Barrios, Ph.D.____________ APPROVED BY THE GRADUATE ADVISORY COMMITTEE: _________________________________ Michael F. Magliari, Ph.D., Chair______ _________________________________ Jesse A. Dizard, Ph.D._______________ _________________________________ Timothy G. Sistrunk, Ph.D._________ __ TABLE OF CONTENTS ——————————————————————————————————————— PAGE List of Figures ........................................................................................................... iv Abstract ..................................................................................................................... v CHAPTER Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1 I. Planning for the Future, The Water Bank of California: 1957-1972 .............. 12 II. The California Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and the Fight to Preserve the North- Coast Rivers: 1968-1972 ............................................................................. 40 III. The Impacts of the California Wild and Scenic Rivers Acts of the Trinity River: 1972-1981 .................................................................................................... 76 IV. Impacts of the Wild and Scenic River Dual Designation on the Trinity River: 1981-2018 ..................................................................................................... 162 Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 181 Bibliography ...................................................................................................... 193 iii LIST OF FIGURES ——————————————————————————————————————— Figure 1. Schematic map of runoff: North Coastal Area 3 Figure 2. Map of the geographic distribution of precipitation and runoff in 4 California Figure 3. Map of the Trinity River Division and neighboring Shasta Division 6 Figure 4. Map of proposed and existing components of a state water in 1957 16 Figure 5. Map of the possible staging of major projects in the north coastal area 20 and west side Sacramento Valley 1964 Figure 6. Schematic of possible features of Trinity River Development in 1964 21 Figure 7. Photograph of Governor Ronald Reagan signing S.B. 107. 74 Figure 8. Map of rivers designated under the CWSRA and their classifications 78 Figure 9. Projected growth of electrical energy by primary source in 1970 104 Figure 10. Graph of California’s population and applied water use from 1960 to 109 2015 Figure 11. Map of the segments of the Smith River originally requested for 141 designation by California in 1980 Figure 12. Map of California’s wild and scenic rivers granted federal designation 142 in 1981 iv ABSTRACT ———————— River conservationists often proclaim the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and its state counterpart, the California Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, to be the most effective river-specific pieces of conservation legislation in the United States. The Trinity River, situated in northern California, was designated as “wild and scenic” under the state act in 1972 and the federal act in 1981. This study recounts the narrative of the Trinity River’s relationship with the state and federal Wild and Scenic Rivers acts with the goal of evaluating the impacts of both laws on the river and its struggling salmon and steelhead populations. While its inclusion in the state and federal wild rivers systems was symbolically important as the codification of intensifying public and institutional concern for the health and aesthetics of river ecosystems, this study finds that the acts had only modest practical impacts on conservation efforts along the Trinity River. Although the laws provided the river with its only formal protections from additional dams and reservoirs, a myriad of other factors suggest that it was highly unlikely that the numerous proposed water impoundment facilities would have been built, regardless of the Trinity’s wild and scenic designations. Because of public and institutional concern for the river’s anadromous fishery, most managing agencies were already taking precautions to prevent harming the river’s ability to support natural fish populations. Most importantly, neither acts contained the language to require the restriction of water diversions by the Trinity River Division of the Central Valley Project. v INTRODUCTION ———————— Prior to 1964, any raindrop that fell within the Trinity River’s 2,900 square mile watershed would eventually make its way to the Pacific Ocean through the mouth of the Klamath River.1 A raindrop that fell on the west side of Middle Ridge just six miles west of present day Interstate 5, for example, would trickle into the East Fork of the Trinity, glide gently through Trinity Meadows, meander westward through the mountains among the Wintu people, and tumble over large boulders deep within the Burnt Ranch Gorge. It would then flow past villages of the Hupa tribe, meet the Klamath River within the Yurok territory, and finally drop the last 190 vertical feet on its way to present day Klamath Glen on the Pacific coast. The Hupa, Yurok, and Wintu all relied upon the spring and fall runs of salmon and steelhead to sustain their impressive populations. Periodic flooding during the winter and spring would regularly provide these anadromous fish with the cold-water temperatures they needed to journey upstream as well as the gently sloping coarse gravel bars that furnished suitable spawning grounds and fry rearing habitat. The Trinity was included within a distinct hydrologic region that water experts called the North Coastal Area. The North Coastal Area encompassed all northern rivers that flowed directly into the Pacific Ocean, rather than converging with the Sacramento River and flowing out of the San Francisco Bay Estuary. The major river systems in the region, the Smith, Klamath, Mad, Eel, and Russian rivers, flowed westward from their sources directly to the Pacific. The region also included numerous smaller independent watersheds such as the Mattole, Navarro, and Gualala 1 The North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, Watershed Planning Chapter (Santa Rosa, California, February 2005), 177. 2 rivers and Redwood Creek. The Trinity, Salmon, and Scott rivers, although commonly referred to as distinct watersheds, are instead major tributaries of the Klamath River, while the Van Duzen flows into the Eel River. The Trinity, the Klamath’s largest tributary, represented the region’s third largest river by volume. The Trinity contributed one-third to one-half of all anadromous fish in the Klamath River system.2 Collectively, the north coast rivers accounted for 40 percent of California’s total average surface water runoff.3 Although the Trinity River watershed was frequented by trappers and explorers in the 1830s and 1840s, white settlement did not begin in earnest until the California Gold Rush. The century that followed proved disastrous for both the Native American and anadromous fish populations along the Trinity basin. Extensive hydraulic mining and dredging operations, a prospering timber industry, and increasing commercial fishing activities decimated salmon and steelhead runs. Similarly, conflicts with whites during the second half of the 19th century, disease, and declining anadromous fish populations drove the local Wintu to near extinction and confined the Yurok and Hupa to reservations in the lower Trinity and Klamath river basins. As early as 1911, federal and state officials began recognizing the potential for electricity generation and water storage within the Trinity watershed. A series of plans during the 1920s suggested that this potential be realized. Although these early plans were shelved due to lack of sufficient market need, water planners continued to consider the Trinity and other rivers within the north coastal area as the “water bank” of California. Proponents of dams on the Trinity eventually found a powerful ally in the late 1940s in north state Representative Clair Engle. Thanks to Engle’s 2 “Andrus Gives Trinity Higher Flows, Wild Status,” Trinity Journal, January 22, 1981. 3 The Resources Agency of California, Bulletin No. 3-57: The California Water Plan, prepared by the Division of Resources Planning, Department of Water Resources (Sacramento, 1957): 12. 3 Ddddddd Figure 1. “Schematic Map of Runoff: North Coastal Area,” in Resources Agency of California, Bulletin No. 136-64: Preliminary Edition: North Coastal Area Investigation, Department of Water Resources (Sacramento, September 1964). 4 asdf Figure 2. “Geographic Distribution of Precipitation and Runoff.” Note that the Shaded arrows represent the regions’ proportional share of total statewide runoff. In The Resources Agency of California, Bulletin No. 3-57: The California Water Plan, prepared by the Division of Resources Planning, Department of Water Resources (Sacramento, 1957). 5 fervent support, Congress approved The Trinity River