Showing posts with label Owens River. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Owens River. Show all posts

March 28, 2017

LADWP scrambling to prepare dusty Owens Valley for possible floods

Overflow from the Owens River creates a mirror pond near Bishop reflecting the snow-capped Sierras. (Mark Boster / Los Angeles Times)

by Louis Sahagun
Los Angeles Times


Lone Pine, Calif. -- As snow continued to fall on the eastern Sierra Nevada on Monday, platoons of earth movers, cranes and utility trucks fanned out across the Owens Valley, scrambling to empty reservoirs and clean out a lattice-work of ditches and pipelines in a frantic effort to protect the key source of Los Angeles’ water.

With snowpack levels at 241% of normal, Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti a week ago issued an emergency declaration allowing the Department of Water and Power to take immediate steps to shore up the aqueduct and its $1-billion dust-control project on dry Owens Lake, which L.A. drained to slake its thirst in the last century.

DWP activities have always elicited concern in the Owens Valley, given the history of a water war that began when Los Angeles agents posed as ranchers and farmers to buy land and water rights in the area. Their goal was to build the aqueduct system to meet the needs of the growing metropolis 200 miles to the south.

The stealth used to obtain the region’s land and water rights became grist for books and movies that portrayed the dark underbelly of Los Angeles’ formative years, and inspired deep-seated suspicions about the city’s motives that linger to this day.

Officials insist that the current emergency poses a real threat not just to urban Los Angeles’ residents, but to the ranchers, farmers, outdoor enthusiasts and small-business owners living in the sage-scented high desert gap between the fang-like peaks, some taller than 14,000 feet, of the Sierra Nevada to west and the White and Inyo ranges to the east.

“Conditions of extreme peril” threaten residents and ecosystems, Garcetti said. The 1 million acre-feet of water expected to flow through the century-old aqueduct system this spring and summer could possibly overflow the web of concrete channels, spilling into fields, homes and businesses.

The danger of destructive flooding and the utility’s responses to it are raising tensions between Los Angeles and the Owens Valley towns along a 110-mile stretch of U.S. 395 in a rural region defined by water wars since the early 1900s.

The crews swarming the valley are focused on protecting DWP infrastructure and U.S. 395, the principle route between Southern California and eastern resort areas, leaving some townsfolk fretting they are being overlooked.

The emergency is already taking toll on the tourism industry in a stunning landscape of snow-capped peaks, cascading streams, dormant volcanoes, small towns and sage plains dotted with irrigated pastures — most of them leased from the DWP.

The Bishop Chamber of Commerce & Visitors Bureau, for example, was forced to cancel the 50th annual Blake Jones Trout Derby scheduled for March 11 after the DWP rescinded its permission to hold the event because of dangerously high waters spilling over the banks of the Owens River, just north of town.

“Losing the derby was a $300,000 hit to the local economy,” said Tawni Thompson, director of the chamber. “We’ll never know how many vacationers decided not to come through Bishop because they were scared of dying in a flood.”

“I’m going to declare a state of emergency,” she added, “if our tourism industry goes down the toilet.”

Bernadette Johnson, superintendent of the Manzanar National Historic Site on U.S. 395, has been getting nowhere with requests for additional flood control measures along streams on DWP land just outside the boundaries of the location that was a Japanese American internment camp during World War II.

“We were hit by destructive flooding earlier this year, and in 2013 and 2014,” Johnson said. “But the DWP is saying that when all hell breaks loose they won’t have enough resources and manpower to help us. We have to wonder about their priorities.”

In long legal battles spanning decades, the DWP was eventually forced to give up significant amounts of water to steady water levels in Mono Lake, re-water parts of dry Owens Lake to help prevent dust storms and restore a 62-mile stretch of the Lower Owens River.

Many residents suspect that the DWP plans to use emergency declarations to bypass rules and regulations that have prevented it in the past from constructing paved roads, for example, on Owens Lake, which is owned by the State Lands Commission.

Richard Harasick, head of the DWP’s water system, dismissed that notion: “The department is not using this emergency declaration to take some sort of advantage or build special projects that would otherwise have to go through the normal regulatory process.”

“It is as much to help us manage the anticipated floodwaters as to aid in public safety,” he said. “It allows us to get goods, services and contracts faster, from heavy equipment to riprap needed to shore up banks and channels.”

This week, Inyo, Kern and Mono counties were expected to issue their own emergency declarations, making them eligible for state and federal assistance in the event of flooding.

“My proclamation will ask for critical resources,” Inyo County Administrator Kevin Carunchio said. “In the meantime, I want every DWP facility, ditch, diversion bypass, canal and conveyance structure available and operating as soon as possible.”

The region has a history of destructive floodwaters rushing off the High Sierra.

In August 1989, for example, cloudbursts driven by 60-mph winds gouged out the underpinnings of the aqueduct near Cartago and closed a 63-mile stretch of U.S. 395.

Jon Klusmire, administrator of the Eastern California Museum in Independence, isn’t taking any chances with the little institution located along a usually docile creek.

“I’ve devised a survival strategy for a worst-case scenario,” he said. “I’m going to jam some boards in a nearby DWP diversion gate, then dig a ditch to divert the water away from the museum and into the streets.”

The big question for Kathy Jefferson Bancroft, tribal historic preservation officer for the Lone Pine Paiute-Shoshone Reservation, is this: “How could it be that Los Angeles never developed a plan B in a place where massive snowpack and destructive flooding go with the terrain?”

Standing on a berm overlooking on the plots of vegetation, gravel and shallow flooding the DWP has constructed across 50 square miles of dry lake bed over the past 20 years, Bancroft said, “They’ve reduced dust pollution here by 96% with these projects, and they’re all going to be underwater soon.

“Honestly, I’m looking forward to seeing this lake filled up again, like it is supposed to be,” she said.

That vista will be short-lived. The runoff is expected to evaporate within 12 to 18 months, leaving behind an already existing repair job for dust abatement and system improvements expected to cost up to $500 million, officials said.

The rebuilding effort will be done in cooperation with state and federal regulatory agencies, local authorities and stakeholders, the State Lands Commission, which owns the lake bed, and the Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, which is responsible for protecting the health of Owens Valley residents.

“When we’re done, it’ll be something different than what exists today,” Harasick said. “That’s because we plan to make it more flood-resilient.”

June 12, 2008

Inyo County supervisors slam wilderness bill


By Mike Gervais
Inyo Register


Elected officials from Inyo County responded to the controversial Eastern Sierra and Northern San Gabriel Wild Heritage Act by declaring that the newly introduced legislation does not, in fact, contain any notable compromise.

The five members of the Inyo County Board of Supervisors all agreed Tuesday that some crucial language in the Eastern Sierra Northern San Gabriel Wild Heritage Act, which intends to designate 400,000-plus acres of Eastern Sierra lands as wilderness, must be changed to protect the rights of property owners and commercial business owners.

The board is also seeking to gather input from residents, and has scheduled two tentative public meetings with representatives of both Congressman Buck McKeon and Senator Barbara Boxer, the act’s sponsors, in attendance. The board also expressed hopes of having a representative from Senator Dianne Feinstein’s office on hand as well.

The first meeting is tentatively scheduled for Tuesday, July 1 at the American Legion Hall in Independence and the second for Wednesday, July 2 at the Tri-County Fairgrounds in Bishop. Both are scheduled to take place at 4 p.m.

Prior to scheduling the public meetings, the supervisors took the opportunity to air their grievances, and share some unflattering words for McKeon and Boxer’s legislation.

Fifth District Supervisor Richard Cervantes called the new wilderness bill “short-sighted at the least and irresponsible at worst.”

According to Fourth District Supervisor Jim Bilyeu, the legislation, which is being hailed by conservationists and its supporters as a triumphant compromise, “There is very little compromise in this bill, which I think is the downfall. I personally feel it was underhanded.”

McKeon (R-Santa Clarita) is the sponsor of House Resolution No. 6156, with a companion wilderness bill in the U.S. Senate being introduced by Boxer (D-California). The two legislators had been working on their respective bills in unison of late, in an effort to gain bipartisan support for their passage in both Houses of Congress.

The two bills seek permanent wilderness status for tracts identified as the White Mountain Wilderness, Hoover Wilderness Additions, the Granite Mountain Wilderness, John Muir Wilderness Additions, the Owens River Headwaters Wilderness, the Pleasant View Ridge Wilderness, the Magic Mountain Wilderness, as well as waterway protection status for the Amargosa Wild & Scenic River, the Owens Headwaters Wild & Scenic River, and the Piru Creek Wild & Scenic River.

First District Supervisor Linda Arcularius drafted a lengthy letter to Congressman McKeon explaining her concerns regarding the wilderness legislation.

The other board members commended Arcularius for her letter, and Supervisor Bilyeu even requested that in addition to it being sent with Arcularius’ signature, the board make a couple amendments to it, and send that copy to McKeon “under the full authority” of the Board of Supervisors with the county letterhead and signatures from all five board members.

Among the supervisors’ grievances is the possibility that the areas omitted from the legislation, as part of the “compromise” for multiple-use advocates, are not protected from future wilderness designations.

“The lands that have not been designated wilderness have gained no protection for their current uses,” the letter from Arcularius states. “Those lands that were not designated have no permanent protection. They have only escaped this round of wilderness designation.”

“There is no protection for these other lands,” no guarantee that they will remain open to the public, Bilyeu said.

According to Arcularius, state representatives also have an obligation to rethink provisions in the legislation that prohibit new claims or mining.

Cervantes commented that, with the rising cost of metals and minerals, Inyo County could possibly cash in on new mining claims, as areas of the White Mountains are rich in such minerals, but the Eastern Sierra and Northern San Gabriel Wild Heritage Act has the potential to limit that.

Arcularius’ letter further states that “the strength of this nation is in the ground. Our natural resources have provided for the ability of our nation to grow and prosper since our nation’s founding. They have contributed to our wealth, self-reliance and sustainability as a nation.”

The board also discussed how the new legislation could potentially steer would-be recreators away from Inyo County.

Bilyeu noted that it is illegal to stock non-native fish in wilderness areas. He also said that in some cases, streams, creeks and other waters flowing out of designated wilderness are off-limits for stocking, as the non-native fish may swim up-stream into the wilderness area.

According to Cervantes, many of the areas designated as wilderness in the Wild Heritage Act don’t technically qualify as wilderness. The supervisors explained that wilderness designations were originally designed to protect “unspoiled” areas never before used by humans.

“Not by the wildest stretch of imagination does this fit the definition of wilderness,” Cervantes said, noting that humans have used the areas outlined in the legislation for years for recreation.

“By designating wilderness that does not meet the true meaning of the definition of wilderness, the truly unique and special characteristics that set wilderness apart from our other public lands is diminished,” the letter from Arcularius states.

While the Inyo County Board of Supervisors was discussing the Wild Heritage Act on Tuesday, its counterpart in Mono County hosted a public hearing in Lee Vining with representatives from Feinstein, McKeon and Boxer’s offices.

The Inyo County supervisors are hoping to bring all those people to the table again in Inyo so the representatives can hear the concerns of constituents here.

“A public meeting to address this is important and imperative,” Arcularius said.