As covered by the Times Standard. At the Board of Supes meeting yesterday they discussed short term and long term solutions. Supervisor Jill Duffy suggested that in order to tap into state emergency funds the District may have to impose mandatory conservation measures.
Sohum Parlance II
Everything Southern Humboldt and more
14 comments
Comments feed for this article
July 8, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Anonymous
Telling people what to do? No way!
July 8, 2009 at 7:54 pm
Heraldo
Daniel Mintz also covered this on KMUD tonight.
July 9, 2009 at 7:48 pm
Anonymous
Can’t they fix the problem without it being brought to the level of Mandatory water rationing. it seems that they should be able to extend the pump intakes back to the river channel without creating a giant inconvenience for all of us in redway. yes they need permits, but why is it that the bureaucrats need to create an emergency to get anything done, why can’t they sign the fucking permit and mail it off, seems like someone needs to start working and stop thinking about how to make it difficult for anyone else to work. don’t they realize we are going to move the intakes back to the river channel sooner or later and making it difficult is only going to make it difficult.
July 10, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Skippy
The article says that the problem is not lack of water but simply a change in the location of the channel.
So those who responded to the earlier post by asserting that there was a water shortage due to the river “drying up” because of homesteaders — it turns out that those folks were jumping to conclusions.
Since the solution seems to be a fairly simple feat of engineering, yet the permit problem is delaying it, it appears that bureaucratic red tape is the immediate problem, not overuse of water.
That being said, it’s always desirable to conserve water, and we should be doing that anyway.
July 10, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Eric Kirk
Well, there is also a shortage which was reported on KMUD over a week ago. Whether it’s due to homesteaders is a matter of debate, but the water level is much lower than it was at this time last year. If it’s attributable to homesteaders, I would say it’s mostly on the Mendo side of the county line as there aren’t many large subdivisions south of Redway in the Eel River watershed. Red and Blue Rock come to mind, but after that it’s Spy Rock and whatever you have in Long Valley and Laytonville. I’m pretty sure Nielsen Ranch is in a different watershed. And of course there’s Garberville and the businesses and ranches along 101. Am I missing anything?
July 10, 2009 at 2:04 pm
milt
The South Fork of the Eel River begins west of Branscomb, which is west of Laytonville. Spy Rock and those other areas you mention are near the South Eel River. It can be confusing, but they are no where near each other.
From Branscomb to Leggett it passes mainly through timber land and is fairly remote. Who knows what’s happening there, but the major populations do indeed start in Humboldt County. Lot of new homesteads have popped up just west of the Eel across from Reed Mt. Then there’s the Kimtu area and the CP with a couple of newly added river wells. Any homesteads that are dependent on wells as opposed to upland springs may be inadvertently contributing to the problem as they reduce the water tables that supply the underground or bottom layer of the river. Even spring diversion deprives the river of it’s usual sources. Bottom line: It’s a cumulative problem amplified by drought conditions.
How does this fit into the GPU arguments?
July 10, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Eric Kirk
Yeah, but Spy Rock is in a valley opposite of the south eel river at say Dos Rios. I don’t see how the rain in Laytonville or Spy Rock west of the range can get anywhere but to the south fork, not above ground anyway. There’s nothing but hills in between Laytonville and Dos Rios. I’d be very curious to see how it could run anywhere but towards Branscomb or whatever the tributary is running just west of 101 at Rattlesnake Ridge. I have to assume that everything from Spy Rock runs there too, and through the valley to the west of the highway meeting somewhere at the south fork at or south of the Highway 1 Bridge.
July 10, 2009 at 4:26 pm
milt
Spy Rock is well north of Dos Rios. Like 10-12 miles. Now, a small part of the Spy Rock water shed to the south west, or the first mile or so of the SR road, does drain to the Ten Mile River which does feed into the SF Eel, however, most of the homesteads up there are on the loop part of SR road, and there are a shit load of them, and they are all in a well defined water shed that drains to the South Eel River. I have the advantage of having a Mendo Map in front of me.
Back in the 60’s there was a lot of land speculation going on there because of a rumored/potential PG&E damn going in on the South Eel, which would have made a lot of properties, Lakeside premiums. I almost bought a piece there in the mid 70’s and to this day I thank my lucky stars that that deal fell through. If you like your action on the heavy side, that’s the place to be. It’s a long way for an ambulance to drive. But that was years ago so maybe it’s been Gentrified.
July 10, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Eric Kirk
Spy Rock is in the 10 Mile River watershed? Huh.
July 10, 2009 at 6:21 pm
milt
What I said was: Now, a small part of the Spy Rock water shed to the south west, or the first mile or so of the SR road, does drain to the Ten Mile River which does feed into the SF Eel. That’s only the very near east side of 101 or beginning part of Spy Rock Road. Picture a lasso with a short lead. Once the SR road reaches the loop knot, about a mile or so up, that’s where the heaviest concentration of homesteads begin, east, north,and south. They all are in the downhill drainage to the South Eel River. Spy Rock Road would have rimmed that speculated lake.
The Ten Mile River, even in good years, doesn’t pack a lot of punch. You can see for yourself when you drive along that stretch near Black Oak Ranch.
Whatever is happening to your water in Redway, Spy Rock and those environs have little to nothing to do with it. Try closer to home.
July 10, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Skippy
Using better water conservation technologies (which would include the legalization and increased use of currently “illegal” alternative waste systems like composting toilets and greywater recycling) can be an important part of the solution to our water worries.
Cultural factors may be equally important to conservation efforts — do you REALLY need to wash your car every week? Why? Do you really need to have an acre or more of water-wasting, golf-course-like lawn? Why? These certainly aren’t survival issues, they are just cultural / status issues. The phrase “live simply, so that others may simply live” takes on real meaning here.
Meanwhile, winter water storage is the only real answer to the supply problem. We get hundreds of inches of rain here in the winter, a huge surplus that largely runs into the sea at a time of year when the rivers already have more than enough water, and withdrawing enough for storage for the summer would cause no significant harm whatsoever.
But rather than storing the winter water surplus, we take water from the rivers, streams and springs all summer long, including during very dry conditions when withdrawing that water is the death knell for salmon and other river species — all because it’s a bit cheaper and easier, in the short term, anyway, than it would be to store it for the winter.
Really, if we can put people on the moon, and robots on Mars, you would think we could manage to build some water tanks and store the bounty of water that nature provides us every winter!
July 10, 2009 at 7:53 pm
olmanriver
Thank you Skippy!
E-When milt is saying South Eel River, he is referring to the middle fork of the Eel, not the SF Eel.
That damn project was the subject of a Heraldo post earlier this year, and I found a book on the topic in a used book store. What a foul deed that would have been to bury so much beautiful land. Together with the Red Mountain open pit mine, that is two Big project bullets that the north coast has dodged.
July 14, 2009 at 2:24 pm
Joelle
The 10 Mile River is a watershed south of the South Fork Eel River just over the hydrologic divide. It’s a coastal stream, north of Fort Bragg. The 10 Mile Creek is a tributary to the SF Eel. It’s the one of those you can sort of see as you drive up the 101. The other trib you see along the highway in the north of Laytonville area is Rattlesnake Creek. The 10 Mile Creek does a loopyde doop (that’s fancy hydrologist talk) around Brush Mountain and goes into the SF on the west side of the mountain. The mainstem of the SF Eel coming from out Branscomb way enters the SF around Leggett. If you ever get a chance to check out the upper waters of the SF Eel, you should. It’s beautiful. It’s also listed as a Wild and Scenic River. Elder Creek is an “unmanaged” Dougals Fir Forest- no roads, no timber harvest-ever. Goggle Elder Creek South Fork Eel River and get map directions for a good hike.
and yeah, water conservation is the way to go. I’ve got some work to do on that front myself.
July 14, 2009 at 7:16 pm
olmanriver
thanks jonelle for the clarity and traveltips!
i am reading about an el nino weather pattern forming in the ocean. it would be a good year to get those raincatchment storage tanks. every neighborhood should have ‘em.