DOCSLIB.ORG

Lower Yuba River Accord from Controversy to Consensus the Yuba River

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lower Yuba River Accord from Controversy to Consensus the Yuba River The Lower Yuba River Accord From Controversy To Consensus The Yuba River 2 • The Lower Yuba River Accord Contents Introduction 4 Background 5 From Controversy to Consensus 10 The Lower Yuba River Accord: From Controversy To Consensus The Fisheries Agreement 13 was prepared and published by the Water Education Foundation The Water Purchase Agreement 17 as a public information tool. The Conjunctive Use Agreements 22 Summary 23 Credits President: William R. Mills Executive Director: Rita Schmidt Sudman Authors: Susan Lauer and Sue McClurg The mission of the Water Education Editorial Assistance: Robin Richie Foundation, an impartial, nonprofit Design: Curtis Leipold organization, is to create a better Photography: Kathy Bishop understanding of water issues and Peter Grigsby, Office of the Governor help resolve water resource problems Jones and Stokes through educational programs. Dale Kolke, California Department of Water Resources MWH Gary W. Rose ISBN: 1-893246-88-4 Thomas Taylor Three Rivers Levee Improvement U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Published 2009 Yuba County Library Yuba County Water Agency ©Water Education Foundation Graphics: Courtesy of Yuba County Water Agency The Lower Yuba River Accord • 3 Introduction Cutting through the Sierra Nevada had reached a unique agreement on throughout the state. And on an Gold Rush countryside, the Yuba River managing the river. The State Water annual basis, 60,000 acre-feet will be has played a vital role in the state’s Resources Control Board (State Water dedicated to environmental flows for history. How its water should be used Board) adopted the Lower Yuba River the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. has been a focal point of controversy. Accord (Yuba Accord) in 2008. The Yuba The seven Conjunctive Use In the last 20 years, the river was the Accord agreements will be in effect at Agreements establish a new compre- epicenter of a classic water struggle as least through 2016, possibly longer. hensive groundwater program in Yuba environ mentalists and fish organiza- The Yuba Accord comprises three County to improve overall water supply tions fought to gain more water for important agreements governing the reliability for local farmers. threatened fish, such as spring-run stretch of the lower Yuba River below In a state such as California where Chinook salmon and steelhead, and Englebright Dam to its confluence with stakeholders often live up to the saying the Yuba County Water Agency (YCWA) the Feather River near Marysville. With attributed to Mark Twain – “whiskey is fought to preserve its rights to oper- no hatcheries on the Yuba River, this for drinking; water is for fighting over” ate New Bullards Bar Dam, part of its section of the river is home to some of – the Yuba Accord is an example of Yuba River Development Project (Yuba the Central Valley’s last wild Chinook how a collaborative process can yield Project). The Yuba Project provides salmon and steelhead runs. real water management solutions. hydropower and irrigation water, helps The Fisheries Agreement estab- “The Accord should serve as a control floods, maintains recreation lishes new variable instream flow levels model for building unique alliances to areas and fisheries habitat, and supplies to benefit wild salmon and steelhead find and implement integrated solu- water for transfer to other areas of on the lower Yuba River, increasing fish tions to California’s water challenges. California. flows by as much as 170,000 acre-feet The most short-sighted definition of Conflicts over all these water uses annually. success in California’s water wars is led to a series of lawsuits over the The Water Purchase Agreement ‘beating the other side,’” said Chuck course of nearly two decades before creates a new long-term water trans- Bonham, director of Trout Unlimited, a these legal disputes ultimately moved fer program under which Yuba River signatory of the Accord. “The operative from the courtroom to the negotiating water will be transferred to other users spirit of the Yuba Accord is collective table. Three years later, a diverse group in California. In 2009, about 180,000 problem-solving by unlikely partners; of 18 agencies and nongovernmental acre-feet of water will be transferred the result is a lasting outcome.” organizations announced that they to drought-stricken farms and cities The Yuba River 4 • The Lower Yuba River Accord Background The Yuba River begins as three stream to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Daguerre Point Dam, built in 1906 separate forks – the north, south Delta located south of Sacramento. by the California Debris Commission. and middle – in the Sierra Nevada In the Delta, water flows out to San Another debris dam, Englebright Dam, Mountains northeast of Sacramento. Francisco Bay, is diverted for use on was built in 1941 by the U.S. Army The Yuba River is an important water local Delta farms or is exported by the Corps of Engineers (Corps). supply far beyond local cities and farms State Water Project or federal Central But downstream levees were not because the Yuba is a major tributary Valley Project. enough to stop the flooding and in the to the Feather River, which, in turn is Twenty percent of the Yuba River’s 1960s, New Bullards Bar Dam was built the major tributary to the Sacramento water is diverted out of the upper Yuba on the North Yuba to provide upstream River – a vital source of water for the River watershed to other watersheds flood protection. The dam is part of Bay Area, Central Valley and Southern for water supply and hydropower YCWA’s Yuba Project and it also gener- California. The Yuba River also provides production. Sixteen percent is diverted ates hydro power and provides water valuable habitat and water for three by YCWA and other local districts for for local farmers. runs of Chinook salmon, steelhead irrigation. Primary crops raised in Yuba Some water from the Yuba Project trout, other fish species, birds and County include rice, peaches and also is transferred to cities and farms mammals. plums. throughout California, generating During an average year, the annual But runoff into the Yuba River can revenue that YCWA has used to finance snow and water runoff to the Yuba be substantially higher – reaching a regional flood protection projects such River is about 2.4 million acre-feet. record high 4.9 million acre-feet in as strengthening levees. Since the late That’s enough water to meet the annual 1982. Compounding these high flows is 1980s, YCWA has sold water to various indoor and outdoor water needs of a Gold Rush legacy – millions of cubic Northern California cities, the California 2.4 million to 4.8 million people. (One yards of dirt and rocks washed into the Department of Water Resources (DWR), acre-foot equals about 326,000 gallons, Yuba River from hydraulic mining. This the Environmental Water Account or enough water to cover an acre of debris raised some stretches of the (EWA) program, other water districts, land – about the size of a football field Yuba’s riverbed by as much as 30 feet. and multiple state-managed drought – one foot deep. The typical California To protect themselves from floods, water banks and dry-year purchase household uses one-half to one acre- settlers in the valley began building programs. foot of water each year.) levees in the late 1800s. Upstream, “Reducing our flood risk is a priority About 64 percent of the runoff debris dams were constructed to for YCWA, and it’s why the Yuba Accord stays in the Yuba River and flows down- capture mining debris; including is so important,” said Mary Jane Griego, Rice is Yuba County’s No. 1 crop The Lower Yuba River Accord • 5 With so many diverse interests depending on water from this river, the balancing act to serve all the stake- holders through the years frequently erupted into controversy and lawsuits prior to the interest-based negotiations that led to the Yuba Accord. The Yuba Accord’s three interconnected agree- ments offer a cumulative benefit for the Yuba watershed and other areas of California. The Yuba Accord also provides for a $6 million long-term lower Yuba River fisheries monitoring, Chinook salmon studies and enhancement program and required no federal or state legislation. a Yuba County supervisor and YCWA water to spawn. Historically these fish “The Yuba Accord is a precedent- director. “The Yuba Accord allows YCWA spawned high up in the Yuba water- setting solution to the imperative of to improve fishery conditions and raise shed but the construction of federal improving environmental flows in hard revenue for our desperately needed Englebright Dam, which does not working rivers of the Central Valley in a flood control measures.” have fish ladders, cut off their passage. manner that also sustains – indeed, The Yuba River hosts a number of Although New Bullards Bar Dam is enhances – water supplies,” said Gregory fish species, but the focus of the Yuba located upstream of Englebright, state Thomas, president of the Natural Heri- Accord is on anadromous salmonids fishery managers and environmental- tage Institute (NHI). “It was also a pro- – Chinook salmon and steelhead ists always sought more water for the cess model in its collaborative, consen- that migrate from the ocean to fresh- benefit of fish. sus-building, science-based approach.” History of the Yuba River Long before California gained and flumes – to sluice out the elusive mined 100,000 tons of gravel per day statehood in 1850, the Yuba watershed shining metal. In the 1850s, water and used 16 billion gallons (32,000 supported a number of Native American was harnessed and blasted into acre-feet) of water each year. By the tribes. In 1820, Spanish Captain Luis hillsides to dislodge gold in a prac- mid-1880s, an estimated 11 million Arguello explored the upper parts of the tice called hydraulic mining.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Impacts of the State and Federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Acts
    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 ............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Sacramento and Feather Rivers and Their Tributaries, Sacramento Slough and Sutter Bypass
    Section 319 NONPOINT SOURCE PROGRAM SUCCESS STORY Stakeholders Cooperate to ReduceCalifornia Diazinon in Runoff from Dormant Season Spray Widespread use of the organophosphate (OP) pesticides diazinon Waterbodies Improved and chlorpyrifos in California’s Central Valley resulted in aquatic toxicity in the Sacramento and Feather rivers and their tributaries, Sacramento Slough and Sutter Bypass. As a result, in 1994 the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CV-RWQCB) added a 16-mile segment of the Sacramento River, a 42-mile segment of the Feather River, the 1.7-mile-long Sacramento Slough, and the 19-mile-long Sutter Bypass to the CWA section 303(d) list of impaired waters. In 2001, the Sacramento River Watershed Program (SRWP) developed and implemented a water quality management strategy for the two rivers, which included installing on-site best management practices (BMPs). Diazinon concentrations decreased, prompting CV-RWQCB to remove Sacramento Slough and Sutter Bypass from the CWA section 303(d) list in 2006. The state has recommended the removal of the Sacramento River and Feather River segments (58 river miles total) from the 2010 CWA section 303(d) list for diazinon impairments. UV162 Figure 1. Problem Map showing The Sacramento River is California’s longest river, Orchards locations of flowing from Mt. Shasta to the confluence with the Sacramento San Joaquin River at the Sacramento-San Joaquin and Feather UV45 Delta. The Feather River is the primary tributary to h rivers g l o u C S and their the Sacramento River (Figure 1). The Sutter Bypass o Colusa k r l e tributaries, u c i v is a floodwater bypass that diverts excess water a R s J a b Sutter from the Sacramento River between two large a Sutter u Y S 30 u UV B S Co.
    [Show full text]
  • San Luis Unit Project History
    San Luis Unit West San Joaquin Division Central Valley Project Robert Autobee Bureau of Reclamation Table of Contents The San Luis Unit .............................................................2 Project Location.........................................................2 Historic Setting .........................................................4 Project Authorization.....................................................7 Construction History .....................................................9 Post Construction History ................................................19 Settlement of the Project .................................................24 Uses of Project Water ...................................................25 1992 Crop Production Report/Westlands ....................................27 Conclusion............................................................28 Suggested Readings ...........................................................28 Index ......................................................................29 1 The West San Joaquin Division The San Luis Unit Approximately 300 miles, and 30 years, separate Shasta Dam in northern California from the San Luis Dam on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. The Central Valley Project, launched in the 1930s, ascended toward its zenith in the 1960s a few miles outside of the town of Los Banos. There, one of the world's largest dams rose across one of California's smallest creeks. The American mantra of "bigger is better" captured the spirit of the times when the San Luis Unit
    [Show full text]
  • Sacramento River Flood Control System
    A p pp pr ro x im a te ly 5 0 M il Sacramento River le es Shasta Dam and Lake ek s rre N Operating Agency: USBR C o rt rr reek th Dam Elevation: 1,077.5 ft llde Cre 70 I E eer GrossMoulton Pool Area: 29,500 Weir ac AB D Gross Pool Capacity: 4,552,000 ac-ft Flood Control System Medford !( OREGON IDAHOIDAHO l l a a n n a a C C !( Redding kk ee PLUMAS CO a e a s rr s u C u s l l Reno s o !( ome o 99 h C AB Th C NEVADA - - ^_ a a Sacramento m TEHAMA CO aa hh ee !( TT San Francisco !( Fresno Las Vegas !( kk ee e e !( rr Bakersfield 5 CC %&'( PACIFIC oo 5 ! Los Angeles cc !( S ii OCEAN a hh c CC r a S to m San Diego on gg !( ny ii en C BB re kk ee ee k t ee Black Butte o rr C Reservoir R i dd 70 v uu Paradise AB Oroville Dam - Lake Oroville Hamilton e M Operating Agency: CA Dept of Water Resources r Dam Elevation: 922 ft City Chico Gross Pool Area: 15,800 ac Gross Pool Capacity: 3,538,000 ac-ft M & T Overflow Area Black Butte Dam and Lake Operating Agency: USACE Dam Elevation: 515 ft Tisdale Weir Gross Pool Area: 4,378 ac 3 B's GrossMoulton Pool Capacity: 136,193Weir ac-ft Overflow Area BUTTE CO New Bullards Bar Dam and Lake Operating Agency: Yuba County Water Agency Dam Elevation: 1965 ft Gross Pool Area: 4,790 ac Goose Lake Gross Pool Capacity: 966,000 ac-ft Overflow Area Lake AB149 kk ee rree Oroville Tisdale Weir C GLENN CO ee tttt uu BB 5 ! Oroville New Bullards Bar Reservoir AB49 ll Moulton Weir aa nn Constructed: 1932 Butte aa CC Length: 500 feet Thermalito Design capacity of weir: 40,000 cfs Design capacity of river d/s of weir: 110,000 cfs Afterbay Moulton Weir e ke rro he 5 C ! Basin e kk Cre 5 ! tt 5 ! u Butte Basin and Butte Sink oncu H Flow from the 3 overflow areas upstream Colusa Weir of the project levees, from Moulton Weir, Constructed: 1933 and from Colusa Weir flows into the Length: 1,650 feet Butte Basin and Sink.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 Purpose and Need
    TESTIMONY OF STEPHEN GRINNELL, P.E., YUNG-HSIN SUN, Ph.D., AND STUART ROBERTSON, P.E. YUBA RIVER INDEX: WATER YEAR CLASSIFICATIONS FOR YUBA RIVER PREPARED FOR YUBA COUNTY WATER AGENCY PREPARED BY BOOKMAN-EDMONSTON ENGINEERING, INC. Unpublished Work © November 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................................1 SACRAMENTO VALLEY INDEX AND SAN JOAQUIN RIVER INDEX .................................................1 NEED FOR YUBA RIVER INDEX ..................................................................................................................2 DISTRIBUTION OF YUBA RIVER ANNUAL UNIMPAIRED FLOWS...........................................................................3 FUNCTIONS AND PURPOSES OF EXISTING FACILITIES..........................................................................................4 YUBA RIVER INDEX........................................................................................................................................6 INDEX DESIGN ...................................................................................................................................................6 INDEX DEFINITION .............................................................................................................................................7 WATER YEAR CLASSIFICATIONS OF YUBA RIVER ..............................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • SWFSC Archive
    Historical Population Structure of Central Valley Steelhead and its Alteration by Dams STEVEN T. LINDLEY1, ROBERT S. SCHICK1, ADITYA AGRAWAL2, MATTHEW GOSLIN2, THOMAS E. PEARSON2, ETHAN MORA2, JAMES J. ANDERSON3, BERNARD MAY4, SHEILA GREENE5, CHARLES HANSON6, ALICE LOW7, DENNIS MCEWAN7, R. BRUCE MACFARLANE1, CHRISTINA SWANSON8 AND JOHN G. WILLIAMS9 ABSTRACT Effective conservation and recovery planning for Central Valley steelhead requires an understanding of historical population structure. We describe the historical structure of the Central Valley steelhead evolutionarily significant unit using a multi-phase modeling approach. In the first phase, we identify stream reaches possibly suitable for steelhead spawning and rearing using a habitat model based on environmental envelopes (stream discharge, gradient, and temperature) that takes a digital elevation model and climate data as inputs. We identified 151 patches of potentially suitable habitat with more than 10 km of stream habitat, with a total of 25,500 km of suitable habitat. We then measured the dis- tances among habitat patches, and clustered together patches within 35 km of each other into 81 dis- tinct habitat patches. Groups of fish using these 81 patches are hypothesized to be (or to have been) independent populations for recovery planning purposes. Consideration of climate and elevation differ- ences among the 81 habitat areas suggests that there are at least four major subdivisions within the Central Valley steelhead ESU that correspond to geographic regions defined by the Sacramento River basin, Suisun Bay area tributaries, San Joaquin tributaries draining the Sierra Nevada, and lower-ele- vation streams draining to the Buena Vista and Tulare basins, upstream of the San Joaquin River.
    [Show full text]
  • Yuba River Temperature Monitoring Project
    YUBA RIVER TEMPERATURE MONITORING PROJECT Prepared for the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Sacramento/San Joaquin River Fishery Restoration Office Michael L. Deas, P.E. February 28, 1999 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents.........................................................................................................2 1. Introduction ...........................................................................................................3 1.1 Project Objective.............................................................................................3 1.2 Project Organization and Acknowledgements..................................................3 2. Project Summary.....................................................................................................4 2.1 Monitoring Locations......................................................................................4 2.2 Deployment/Field Work..................................................................................5 2.3 Quality Control ...............................................................................................5 2.4 Additional Data Sources..................................................................................5 2.5 Data Sets.........................................................................................................7 3. Findings..................................................................................................................8 3.1 Important Processes ........................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • SIERRA RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN and RECORD of DECISION
    United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management SIERRA RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN and RECORD OF DECISION For the Folsom Field Office California December 2007 _________________________________________ William S. Haigh, Folsom Field Office Manager __________________________________________ Mike Pool, California State Director Sierra Resource Management Plan and Record of Decision_____________________________________ This page intentionally left blank. Sierra Resource Management Plan and Record of Decision__________________________ Table of Contents 1.0 Record of Decision ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Changes from the Proposed RMP to the Approved RMP.......................................................... 1 1.2 Alternatives.............................................................................................................................2 1.3 Management Considerations...................................................................................................3 1.4 Mitigation ...............................................................................................................................3 1.5 Plan Monitoring.......................................................................................................................4 1.6 Public Involvement..................................................................................................................4 1.7 Administrative Remedies.........................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • The Mighty Yuba River
    The Mighty Yuba River The sounds of the Yuba River as it slowly winds its way down stream, are both peaceful and relaxing. But, upstream, the river sings quite a different song. The river begins as three separate forks, the north, south, and middle, high in the Sierra Nevada Mountains. The forks flow wildly through canyons and channels, over boulders and rock bars, and will occasionally rest in pools of clear green water. There are two stories as to how the river was named. One story, tells of a scoutinggp expedition finding wild g gpgrapes growing on the river’s banks. They called the river, Rio de las Uvas (the grapes). “Uvas” was later changed to Yuba. A second story, tells of an ancestral village named Yuba, belonging to the Maidu tribe, that was located where the Feather River joins the Yuba River. The river has changed a great deal over the years. It was mined extensively during the Gold Rush and once ran abundant with Chinook salmon and steelhead trout. Mining on the Yuba River is more recreational today and the Chinook salmon and steelhead still have a strong presence in the river. The Yuba River is also part of the Yuba Watershed. It’s truly an amazing river that has many more stories to tell. th ©University of California, 2009, Zoe E. Beaton. Yuba River Education Center 6 - Yuba River #1- YREC North Fork of the Yuba River Middle Fork of the Yuba River South Fork of the Yuba River ©University of California, 2009, Zoe E. Beaton. Yuba River Education Center 6th Yuba River #2- YREC .
    [Show full text]
  • Yuba River Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan
    CHAPTER 7 – INTERPRETIVE PLAN Interpretation Interpretation is ‘value added’ to a byway experience. Effective interpretation forges a connection between the visitor and the byway. It provides a memorable moment for the visitor to take home – a thought, image or a concept that reminds them of their experience. It helps them to recognize the byway as a unique and special place and to see and appreciate attributes that may not be readily apparent. It encourages them to spend more time and to return or tell their friends about their experience. The sustainable recreation framework (2010) highlights interpretation as one of the most important agency tools to develop deeper engagement between Americans and their natural resources. Visitor Needs Visitor needs are typically arranged into a hierarchy: orientation, information and interpretation. Once a visitor is comfortable and oriented they are receptive to interpretive information. Orientation and general information will be addressed as part of this interpretive planning effort. Orientation The first priority for visitors is to understand where they are and where they can meet their basic needs – restrooms, food, lodging. This orientation information is typically placed at either end of a byway in the form of signage or at visitor information centers. It is a part of welcoming the visitor and assists them in planning their experience. Information After basic orientation, visitors typically seek general information about the area, including the locations of points of interest and other options for how they may choose to spend their time. These locations where the visitor is likely to stop, dictate where and in what form interpretation is appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • The Great New Year's Flood of 1997 in Northern California
    The Great New Year's Flood of 1997 in Northern California by Maurice Roos' The New Year's flood of 1997 was probably the largest in the 90-year Northern California record which begins in 1906. It was notable in the intensity, volume of flood water, and the areal extent from the Oregon border down to the southern end of the Sierra. Many new flood records were set. This was a classic orographic event with warm moist winds from the southwest blowing over the Sierra Nevada and dumping amazing amounts of rain at the middle and high elevations, especially over a 3 day period centered on New Year's Day. The sheer volume of runoff exceeded the flood control capacity of Don Pedro Dam on the Tuolumne River and Millerton Reservoir on the upper San Joaquin River with large spills of excess water. Most of the other large dams in northern California were full or nearly full at the end of the storms. Amounts of rain at lower elevations were not unusual. For example, downtown Sacramento in the middle of the Central Valley had 3.7 inches during the week from December 26 through January 2. But Blue Canyon, at the one-mile elevation between Sacramento and Reno, had over 30 inches, an orographic ratio of over 8, far more than the usual 3 to 4 for most storms. Many Valley folks could not understand that there was a problem because they were not seeing a lot of rain. Meanwhile, the entire northern Sierra was observing 20 inches, some 40 percent of average annual precipitation.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Central Valley Salmon and Steelhead Recovery Plan
    Draft Central Valley Salmon and Steelhead Recovery Plan for Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon Central Valley spring-run Chinook Salmon Central Valley Steelhead National Marine Fisheries Service Southwest Region November 2009 1 Themes of the CV Recovery Plan • This is a long-term plan that will take several decades to fully implement • The recovery plan is intended to be a “living document” that is periodically updated to include the best available information regarding the status or needs of the species • Implementation will be challenging and will require the help of many stakeholders • The plan is intended to have realistic and attainable recovery criteria (i.e, de-listing criteria) 2 What are Recovery Plans? • Purpose of the Endangered Species Act: To conserve (recover) listed species and their ecosystems • Required under section 4(f) of the ESA for all Federally listed species • Provide the road map to species recovery • Must contain objective, measurable criteria for delisting a species • Guidance documents, not regulations 3 Winter-run Chinook salmon (Endangered) 4 Status of Species – Winter-run Chinook 5 Central Valley Spring-run Chinook salmon (Threatened) 6 Status of Species – Spring-run Chinook Declining abundance across range: Extinction risk is increasing Central Valley Spring-run Chinook Salmon Adult Summer Holding Escapement Rivers/Creeks 25,000 Sacramento Battle 20,000 Clear Beegum 15,000 Antelope Mill 10,000 Deer Big Chico 5,000 Butte 0 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 7 Central Valley steelhead (Threatened) 8 Key
    [Show full text]