DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Resource Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Resource Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement LAKE CASITAS Final Resource Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement February 2010 Prepared by United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Mid Pacific Region South Central California Office LAKE CASITAS Final Resource Management Plan / Environmental Impact Statement Prepared by United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Mid Pacific Region Sacramento, California South-Central California Area Office 1243 “N” Street Fresno, California 93721-1813 (559) 487-5116 February 2010 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT LAKE CASITAS RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN Lead Agencies: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), Mid-Pacific Region, South-Central California Area Office, Fresno, California Cooperating Agencies: Casitas Municipal Water District (CMWD) This Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS) has been developed for the new Resource Management Plan (RMP) for the Lake Casitas Recreation Area and the 3,500 acres of Open Space Lands to the north (together known as the Plan Area), in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended. The RMP is a long-term plan that will guide future actions in the Plan Area and is based on a comprehensive inventory of environmental resources and facilities and input from local, state, and federal agencies, the CMWD, and the general public. The Final EIS is a program-level analysis of the potential environmental impacts associated with adoption of the RMP. The development of the RMP is based upon authorities provided by Congress through the Reclamation Act, Federal Water Project Recreation Act, Reclamation Recreation Management Act, and applicable federal agency and United States Department of the Interior policies. The RMP will have a planning horizon of 25 years. The purposes and objectives of the proposed RMP are: • Ensure safe storage and timely delivery of high-quality water to users while enhancing natural resources and recreational opportunities. • Protect natural resources while educating the public about the value of the resources and good stewardship. • Provide recreational opportunities to meet the demands of a growing, diverse population. • Ensure recreational diversity and the quality of the recreational experience. • Provide the framework for establishing new management agreement(s) with the managing partner(s). The purpose of the RMP is to provide a program and set of policy guidelines necessary to encourage orderly use, development, and management of the lake and the surrounding lands. The RMP will provide outdoor recreational opportunities, enhanced by Lake Casitas and its shoreline, compatible with the surrounding scenic, environmental, and cultural resources. In addition, the RMP proposes uses that will be compatible with the obligation to operate the lake for storage and delivery of high-quality water. Reclamation has considered comments on the Draft EIS during the public review period that concluded on October 31, 2008, and included a public hearing on August 28, 2008. The Final EIS includes editorial and technical changes, factual corrections, and clarifications made in response to public comments. Reclamation will not make a decision on the proposed action until 30 days after the release of the Final EIS and notice in the Federal Register, and will then complete a Record of Decision (ROD). The ROD will state the action to be implemented and will discuss factors leading to the decision. For further information regarding this Final EIS or to provide comments, contact Mr. Jack Collins, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, South-Central California Area Office, 1243 “N” Street, Fresno, California 93721-1813, (559) 349- 4544 (TDD 559-487-5933) or [email protected]. Executive Summary The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) in cooperation with the Casitas Municipal Water District (CMWD) developed the Lake Casitas Resource Management Plan (RMP) to establish management objectives, guidelines, and actions for the Lake Casitas Recreation Area (Park) and the 3,500 acres of Open Space Lands north of the Park, which together comprise the Plan Area. The RMP is a long-term plan that will guide future actions in the Plan Area and is based on a comprehensive inventory of environmental resources and facilities and input from local, state, and federal agencies, the CMWD, and the general public. The primary emphasis of the RMP is to protect water quality, water supply, and natural resources, while enhancing recreational uses at the Park. The recreational uses must be compatible with the primary obligation to operate the reservoir for storage and delivery of high-quality water. The development of the RMP is based upon authorities provided by Congress through the Reclamation Act, Federal Water Project Recreation Act, Reclamation Recreation Management Act, and applicable federal agency and United States Department of the Interior policies. The purpose of the RMP is to provide a program and set of policy guidelines necessary to encourage orderly use, development, and management of the surrounding lands. The RMP will provide outdoor recreational opportunities, enhanced by Lake Casitas and its shoreline, compatible with the surrounding scenic, environmental, and cultural resources. The planning process for the Lake Casitas RMP involves the integration of issues, opportunities and constraints; management actions; and management zones. It follows the guidance of federal planning mandates and proposed actions that balance recreation opportunities with natural and cultural resource stewardship. The following are the basic elements of the planning process: • Define the overall goals and objectives • Describe the resource categories that group the issues • Identify the issues, opportunities, and constraints • Determine management actions to address the issues • Define the management zones for Lake Casitas. The environmental impacts of the RMP are assessed in a programmatic Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) that has been included as part of this joint RMP/FEIS document. The environmental review focuses on the potential for management actions to cause adverse or beneficial environmental impacts to natural and cultural resources such as water quality, endangered species, and historic resources. The Final RMP and FEIS included in this document are the result of several planning and document preparation steps described above and in Sections 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 in the FEIS. A summary of this process includes: • Identification of goals, objectives, issues, opportunities, and constraints • Public and Agency scoping • Formulation of Alternatives, Management Zones, and Management Actions associated with each Alternative • Preparation and Issuance of Public Draft RMP and EIS X:\X_ENV\_PERMIT\BUREC\CASITAS\_FIRST ADMIN FINAL\TEXT_021010.DOC ES-1 Executive Summary • Public Comment Period • Preparation of Response to Comments and Identification of the Preferred RMP Alternative • Issuance of Final RMP and Final EIS The contents of this Final RMP and FEIS include responses to all public comments received (Appendix E). In addition, necessary changes to the Public Draft text are identified. The changes are indicated in track changes to the Public Draft RMP and EIS and precede the responses to comments. The Final RMP and FEIS also include identification of the Preferred Alternative (Alternative 2). Also, in accordance with CEQ regulations, the environmentally superior alternative is identified (Alternative 2). Prior to the issuance of the Public Draft RMP and EIS, three planning alternatives were formulated to address the issues, opportunities, and constraints in the Plan Area. The No Action and two action alternatives are as follows: • No Action (Alternative 1)—This alternative manages land and activities with the continuation of current management practice. • Enhancement (Alternative 2)—This alternative balances natural resource protection and recreation opportunities. • Recreation Expansion (Alternative 3)—This alternative emphasizes expanded recreation opportunities. Under the No Action Alternative, current resource and recreation management direction and practices at Lake Casitas would continue unchanged. However, some infrastructure improvements would be implemented that are common to all the alternatives. The No Action Alternative provides the benchmark for making comparisons in the EIS between possible future changes under Alternatives 2 and 3. The objective of Alternative 2 is to enhance current recreational uses and public access at the Park in order to increase recreational opportunities, while protecting natural resources with new or modified land and recreation management practices. These activities propose upgrades and improvements for many of the Park’s existing facilities and utilities. Examples include building connectors to the Los Padres National Forest and Ojai Conservancy trail heads in the Open Space Lands and expanding boating support by increasing the marina and boat ramp capacity. Other infrastructure improvements include expanding the water park, building an amphitheater, and modifying some campsites to be compatible with multiple uses. Park infrastructure improvements are also included in Alternative 2. These include road repairs, relocating and screening the storage area, and improving the Park entrance. Alternative 3 would expand recreational uses and public access by implementing new or modified land and recreation management practices. This alternative is included to demonstrate a scenario
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2021 03 11 Notice of Errata Re Status Conference Report By
    66413950 Mar 11 2021 11:07AM 1 ARNOLD LAROCHELLE MATHEWS Exempt From Filing Feeses PuPursuantrsuau ntnt VANCONAS & ZIRBEL LLP to Government Codee §6103§61003 2 Robert N. Kwong (State Bar No. 121839) [email protected] 3 300 Esplandade Drive, Suite 2100 Oxnard, CA 93036 4 Telephone: 805-988-9886 Facsimile: 805-988-1937 5 Co-Counsel: 6 RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP David B. Cosgrove (State Bar No. 115564) 7 [email protected] Douglas J. Dennington (State Bar No. 173447) 8 [email protected] 18575 Jamboree Road, 9th Floor 9 Irvine, CA 92612 Telephone: 714-641-5100 10 Facsimile: 714-546-9035 11 Attorneys for Cross-Defendant CASITAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, 12 a California special district 13 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 14 FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE 15 SANTA BARBARA CHANNELKEEPER, a Case No. 19STCP01176 California non-profit corporation, 16 Hon. William F. Highberger; Dept: 10 Petitioner, 17 NOTICE OF ERRATA RE STATUS v. CONFERENCE REPORT OF CROSS- 18 DEFENDANT CASITAS MUNICIPAL STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL WATER DISTRICT 19 BOARD, a California State Agency; CITY OF SAN BUENA VENTURA, a Further Status Conference Hearing: 20 California municipal corporation, incorrectly DATE: March 15, 2021 named as CITY OF BUENA VENTURA, TIME: 1:30 p.m. 21 DEPT.: 10 Respondents. 22 CITY OF SAN BUENA VENTURA, a 23 California municipal corporation, Date Action Filed: September 19, 2014 Trial Date: None Set 24 Cross-Complainant, 25 v. 26 DUNCAN ABBOTT, et al. 27 Cross-Defendants. 28 -1- 159/029518-0003 16225308.1 a03/11/21 NOTICE OF ERRATA RE STATUS CONFERENCE REPORT 1 TO THE COURT, ALL PARTIES, AND ALL COUNSEL OF RECORD: 2 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Cross-Defendant CASITAS MUNICIPAL WATER 3 DISTRICT, a California special district (“Casitas”), hereby provides notice of errata and 4 correction as follows: 5 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C Ventura River Watershed Section
    Appendix C Ventura River Watershed Section Submitted by the Ventura River Watershed Council Ventura River Watershed Ventura River Watershed Section of the Watersheds Coalition of Ventura County Integrated Water Management Plan Update, 2014 May, 2014 Photo by David Magney Note: This document has been excerpted from a draft of the Ventura River Watershed Management Plan, which is still a work in progress. Some sections of that plan have not yet been written; the apparent mistakes in section numbering in this document reflect those unwritten sections. In addition, there could be cross-references to context that has been omitted in this excerpted version. Ventura River Watershed Section Watersheds Coalition of Ventura County Integrated Regional Water Management Plan Update 2014 1 Part 1 - Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 4 1.2 Ventura River Watershed Council ...................................................................................................... 4 1.2.1 Participants .................................................................................................................................. 4 1.2.2 Council History, Structure & Governance ................................................................................... 5 1.2.3 Council Milestones .................................................................................................................... 18 1.2.4 Council Funding ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ventura River Reaches 3 and 4 Total Maximum Daily Loads for Pumping & Water Diversion-Related Water Quality Impairments
    United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 9 Ventura River Reaches 3 and 4 Total Maximum Daily Loads For Pumping & Water Diversion-Related Water Quality Impairments Draft December 2012 Table of Contents 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Regulatory Background.................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Elements of a TMDL........................................................................................................ 2 1.3 Environmental Setting...................................................................................................... 3 1.3.1 Land Use ................................................................................................................... 5 1.3.2 Hydrology ................................................................................................................. 7 1.3.3 Southern Steelhead Trout Life History in the Watershed......................................... 9 2 Problem Identification ........................................................................................................... 11 2.1 Water Pumping and Diversion History in Ventura River Watershed ............................ 11 2.2 Water Quality Standards ................................................................................................ 12 2.2.1 Beneficial Uses ......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • To Oral History
    100 E. Main St. [email protected] Ventura, CA 93001 (805) 653-0323 x 320 QUARTERLY JOURNAL SUBJECT INDEX About the Index The index to Quarterly subjects represents journals published from 1955 to 2000. Fully capitalized access terms are from Library of Congress Subject Headings. For further information, contact the Librarian. Subject to availability, some back issues of the Quarterly may be ordered by contacting the Museum Store: 805-653-0323 x 316. A AB 218 (Assembly Bill 218), 17/3:1-29, 21 ill.; 30/4:8 AB 442 (Assembly Bill 442), 17/1:2-15 Abadie, (Señor) Domingo, 1/4:3, 8n3; 17/2:ABA Abadie, William, 17/2:ABA Abbott, Perry, 8/2:23 Abella, (Fray) Ramon, 22/2:7 Ablett, Charles E., 10/3:4; 25/1:5 Absco see RAILROADS, Stations Abplanalp, Edward "Ed," 4/2:17; 23/4:49 ill. Abraham, J., 23/4:13 Abu, 10/1:21-23, 24; 26/2:21 Adams, (rented from Juan Camarillo, 1911), 14/1:48 Adams, (Dr.), 4/3:17, 19 Adams, Alpha, 4/1:12, 13 ph. Adams, Asa, 21/3:49; 21/4:2 map Adams, (Mrs.) Asa (Siren), 21/3:49 Adams Canyon, 1/3:16, 5/3:11, 18-20; 17/2:ADA Adams, Eber, 21/3:49 Adams, (Mrs.) Eber (Freelove), 21/3:49 Adams, George F., 9/4:13, 14 Adams, J. H., 4/3:9, 11 Adams, Joachim, 26/1:13 Adams, (Mrs.) Mable Langevin, 14/1:1, 4 ph., 5 Adams, Olen, 29/3:25 Adams, W. G., 22/3:24 Adams, (Mrs.) W.
    [Show full text]
  • Ojai Valley Area Plan
    VENTURA COUNTY GENERAL PLAN OJAI VALLEY AREA PLAN Last Amended 03-24-2015 Ventura County Planning Division VENTURA COUNTY GENERAL PLAN OJAI VALLEY AREA PLAN 1990-1995 Decision-Makers and Contributors Ventura County Board of Supervisors Susan K. Lacey First District Frank Schillo Second District Maggie Kildee, Chair Third District Judy Mikels Fourth District John K. Flynn Fifth District Ventura County Planning Commission Rev. Johnnie Carlisle, Chair Betty Taylor Laura Bartels Michael Wesner Sue Boecker Ojai Valley Area Plan Advisory Committee Thomas Jamison, Chair Tony Thacher James D. Loebl, Vice-Chair Thomas Munzig Lanie Jo Springer William Prather Marjorie Emerson Joseph Amestoy Gerhard Orthuber *William Slaughter Michael Frees *Joan Kemper *Former Member Ventura County Planning Division Keith Turner, Director, Planning Section Bruce Smith, Supervisor, General Plans Section Lisa Woodburn, Project Manager Word Processing Graphics and Mapping Ventura County Word Processing Center Kay Clark, Carlos Mendoza, Yvonne Tello, Karen Avers, Joyce Evans Richard Paschal, Ramon Hernandez Kathy Evans, Nancy FaGaines County of Ventura Resource Management Agency Planning Division 800 South Victoria Avenue Ventura, CA 93009-1740 (805) 654-2494 FAX (805) 654-2509 VENTURA COUNTY GENERAL PLAN OJAI VALLEY AREA PLAN Adopted by the Ventura County Board of Supervisors - July 18, 1995 Amended - December 10, 1996 Amended – October 28, 1997 Amended - July 13, 1999 Amended - November 19, 1999 (S.O.A.R. Election - March 7, 2000/Effective - April 7, 2000) Amended
    [Show full text]
  • Board of Directors
    Board of Directors Russ Baggerly, Director Pete Kaiser, Director Angelo Spandrio, Director Brian Brennan, Director CASITAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Meeting to be held at the The meeting will be held via teleconference. To attend the meeting please call (877) 853-5247 or (888) 788-0099 Toll-free Enter Meeting ID: 992 4050 1594# Passcode: 309553 SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA November 12, 2020 @ 3:00 PM Right to be heard: Members of the public have a right to address the Board directly on any item of interest to the public which is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Board. The request to be heard should be made immediately before the Board's consideration of the item. No action shall be taken on any item not appearing on the agenda unless the action is otherwise authorized by subdivision (b) of ¶54954.2 of the Government Code and except that members of a legislative body or its staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights under section 54954.3 of the Government Code. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. AGENDA CONFIRMATION 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS Presentation on District related items that are not on the agenda - three minute limit. 5. CONSENT AGENDA 5.a. Accounts Payable Report for the period 10/15/2020 to 10/28/2020. Accounts Payable Report.pdf 1 1 5.b. Minutes of the October 28, 2020 Board Meeting. 10 28 2020 Min.pdf 6. ACTION ITEMS 6.a. Award contract to UGSI Solutions, Inc., for the Ojai East Reservoir Residual Management System equipment, Specification No.
    [Show full text]
  • VENTURA RIVER LEVEE SECTION 905(B) (WRDA 86) ANALYSIS VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
    US Army Corps of Engineers Los Angeles District VENTURA RIVER LEVEE SECTION 905(b) (WRDA 86) ANALYSIS VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DRAFT-FINAL REPORT APRIL 2012 VENTURA RIVER LEVEE SECTION 905(b) (WRDA 86) ANALYSIS VENTURA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA DRAFT-FINAL REPORT Prepared by: Tetra Tech, Inc 17885 Von Karman Avenue Irvine, CA 92614 APRIL 2012 Table of Contents Page 1. STUDY AUTHORITY.................................................................................................................1 2. STUDY PURPOSE.......................................................................................................................1 3. LOCATION OF STUDY, NON-FEDERAL SPONSOR AND CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS...................................................................................................................................1 4. PRIOR REPORTS AND EXISTING PROJECTS.....................................................................2 5. PLAN FORMULATION..............................................................................................................3 a. National Objectives ................................................................................................................4 b. Public Concerns ......................................................................................................................4 c. Problems and Opportunities...................................................................................................5 d. Planning Objectives ................................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • 3.4 Water Supplies and Demands
    3.4 Water Supplies and Demands 3.4.1 Water Suppliers and Managers ......................... 355 3.4.2 Water Supplies....................................... 365 3.4.3 Water Demands...................................... 399 Robles Canal Photo courtesy of Michael McFadden PART 3 • 3.4 WatER SUPPLIES AND DEmaNDs • 3.4.1 WatER SUPPLIERS AND MANAGErs 355 3.4 Water Supplies and Demands 3.4.1 Water Suppliers and Managers 3.4.1.1 Types of Suppliers The watershed has several different types of water suppliers; the dif- ferences are mostly in the type of ownership, methods of payment or reimbursement for water, and the governing bodies. Different regula- tions and procedures may apply to different types of water suppliers. The following descriptions are taken from the Ventura County Watershed Protection District’s Inventory of Public & Private Water Purveyors in Ventura County (VCWPD 2006). Cities—Any charter or general law city is a public agency that can pro- vide water service as a city function. Special Districts—Special districts are public agencies formed pursuant to general or special laws, generally for the local performance of govern- ment or proprietary functions within limited boundaries. Public or Special-Use Public Water Suppliers—These are public water suppliers other than cities or special districts. In the Ventura River water- shed these are parks, campgrounds, and County facilities. PUC-Regulated Private Water Companies—In a limited number of cases, the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) licenses and regulates water companies. These private companies have rates and service areas established by the State PUC. They are not owned by any public agencies or by the affected customers, but usually by shareholders who purchase stock or ownership rights via bond issues, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Matilija Dam Ecosystem Restoration Program Engineering Plans and Designs
    COASTAL CONSERVANCY Staff Recommendation October 27, 2005 MATILIJA DAM ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROGRAM ENGINEERING PLANS AND DESIGNS File No. 99-099 Project Manager: Neal Fishman/Carol Arnold RECOMMENDED ACTION: Consideration and possible Conservancy authorization to disburse up to $1,000,000 for preparation of engineering designs to implement the Matilija Dam Ecosystem Restoration Program, including but not limited to disbursement to the Ventura County Watershed Management District, for services provided by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. LOCATION: Ventura River Watershed, Ventura County (Exhibit 1 and 2). PROGRAM CATEGORY: Resource Enhancement and Coastal and Marine Resources Programs EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Regional and Vicinity Map Exhibit 2: Watershed Map Exhibit 3: Project Elements Exhibit 4: a. Draft Environmental Impact Statement b. Final Environmental Impact Report Exhibit 5: Design Cost Estimates Exhibit 6: Letters of Support Exhibit 7: Ventura County Statement of Overriding Considerations RESOLUTION AND FINDINGS: Staff recommends that the State Coastal Conservancy adopt the following resolution pursuant to Sections 31220 and 31251-31270 of the Public Resources Code: “The State Coastal Conservancy hereby (1) adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program attached to the accompanying staff recommendation as Exhibit 4b, Appendix A, and (2) authorizes disbursement of an amount not to exceed one million dollars ($1,000,000) for preparation of Page 1 of 15 MATILIJA DAM ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROGRAM detailed engineering designs and specifications, and for related activities to implement the Matilija Dam Ecosystem Restoration Program, including but not limited to disbursement to the Ventura County Watershed Protection District (District), as a portion of the non-federal share of the project.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Memorandum No
    MATILIJA DAM REMOVAL, SEDIMENT TRANSPORT, AND ROBLES DIVERSION MITIGATION PROJECT HYDROLOGIC ASSESSMENT FOR WATER SUPPLY SEPTEMBER 10, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Purpose & Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Historical Water Supply to Lake Casitas .................................................................................. 2 2.1 Background .......................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Historical Water Balance Data for Lake Casitas .................................................................. 5 2.3 Historical Stream Gage Data ............................................................................................... 9 2.4 Robles Diversion ................................................................................................................ 12 2.4.1 Environmental Water Requirements at Robles ..................................................... 14 2.4.2 Sedimentation Conditions at Robles ..................................................................... 14 3.0 Diversion Disruption Scenarios ............................................................................................. 14 3.1 Scenario 1: Lake Casitas levels without Robles diversion .................................................. 14 3.2 Scenario 2: Lake Casitas levels without Robles diversion during one major storm ........... 17 3.3 Scenario 3: Lake Casitas levels without
    [Show full text]
  • Ventura River Project History
    The Ventura River Project Thomas A. Latousek Bureau of Reclamation 1995 Contents The Ventura River Project.......................................................2 Project Location.........................................................2 Historic Setting .........................................................3 Prehistoric Setting .................................................3 Historic Setting ...................................................4 Authorization...........................................................5 Construction History .....................................................6 Post-Construction History................................................10 Settlement of the Project .................................................12 Uses of Project Water ...................................................13 Conclusion............................................................13 Bibliography ................................................................15 Manuscripts and Archival Collections.......................................15 Project Reports, Ventura River Project................................15 Government Documents .................................................15 Books ................................................................15 Articles...............................................................15 Interviews.............................................................15 Index ......................................................................16 1 The Ventura River Project Southern California's
    [Show full text]
  • United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______
    United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ CASITAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee. ______________________ 2012-5033 ______________________ Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in No. 05-CV-168, Senior Judge John P. Wiese. ______________________ Decided: February 27, 2013 ______________________ ROGER J. MARZULLA, Marzulla Law, of Washington, DC, argued for plaintiff-appellant. With him on the brief was NANCIE G. MARZULLA. KATHERINE J. BARTON, Attorney, Environment and Natural Resources Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for defendant- appellee. With her on the brief was IGNACIA S. MORENO, Assistant Attorney General. JENNIFER L. SPALETTA, Herum Crabtree, of Stock- ton, California, for amicus curiae Stockton East Water District. 2 CASITAS MUNICIPAL WATER DIST v. US RODERICK E. WALSTON, of Best Best & Krieger LLP, Walnut Creek, California, for amici curiae Westlands Water District & Sweetwater Company. CLIFFORD T. LEE, Deputy Attorney General, Cali- fornia Department of Justice, of San Francisco, Califor- nia, for amicus curiae, California State Water Resources Control Board. With him on the brief were KAMALA D. HARRIS, Attorney General of California, and MARK BRECKLER, Chief Assistant Attorney General. Of counsel on the brief was TARA L. MUELLER, Deputy Attorney General, of Oakland, California. JOHN D. ECHEVERRIA, Vermont Law School, of South Royalton, Vermont, for amicus curiae Natural Resources Defense Council. Of counsel on the brief was KATHERINE S. POOLE, Natural Resources Defense Council, of San Francisco, California. ______________________ Before NEWMAN, LOURIE, and SCHALL, Circuit Judges. SCHALL, Circuit Judge. Casitas Municipal Water District (“Casitas”) operates the Ventura River Project (the “Project”).
    [Show full text]