Questions about the Potter Valley Project and how it will impact the Russian River have increased over the last few months. What do PG&E’s plans mean for the Russian River? Will the water diversion from the Eel River to the Russian River stop? What can we do to make the most of any water we may have access to in the future?
To recap (more details can be found here), PG&E is currently going through the process of decommissioning the Potter Valley Project and removing its two dams on the Eel River. In a draft decommissioning plan released in late 2023, PG&E stated plans to completely remove all dams and related structures on the Eel River, before engaging in restoration efforts in the old dam footprint. PG&E stated a plan to implement their plan and start dam deconstruction in 2028. A high-level proposal was put forth by entities in both the Eel and Russian Rivers to take over some of the project facilities that would be necessary for a continued, run-of-the-river water diversion to the Russian River. PG&E recently decided not to include this separate plan in their proposal to avoid delays. The proposal for a continued diversion will now proceed on a separate, but more parallel track to the decommissioning process.
Several stakeholder groups and individuals in the Russian River Watershed have recently begun vocalizing their discontent with PG&E’s plan, and noting that the dams on the Eel River must be saved to protect the Russian River. This discontent is misguided, as it ignores significant present-day economic realities, and the numerous studies completed, and avoids the importance of taking this opportunity to prepare a more resilient water future in the Russian River.
The Need to Remove and Restore
The Eel River dams, and Potter Valley Project are quickly approaching the end of their life span with failing parts; and most recently, significant seismic issues at Scott Dam have been identified that could lead to a catastrophic dam failure. As we saw in the last dry period, when we’re having a drought on the Russian River, the Eel River has no water either. These combined factors listed have resulted in operational changes across the dams and Potter Valley Project, with less water being stored, loss of energy generation, and even further reduction in diversion quantity over the last few years. It is important to note that overall diversion quantity has been on a significant downward trend for the last 20 years.
Between the infrastructural failures and our changing climate, the monetary and operational feasibility of the dams and continued diversion are no longer viable to PG&E and are completely impossible for any other entity to take over.
The ongoing environmental and cultural harms to Eel River Tribes that have been perpetuated by the dams’ presence and resulting salmon fishery decline are a primary guiding component for complete dam removal and future diversion decisions. As the oldest water right holders on the Eel River, there are multiple efforts in place to perfect this right. The need to correct these historical harms is of extreme importance and only once those needs are met, can future diversion discussions be completed.
The Governor’s office released on January 29th a report laying out CDFW’s Salmon Strategy, and included in that report, is a State commitment to supporting complete Eel dam removals and continuing a winter diversion.
Russian River Water Supply Impacts
As we begin to understand what the Russian River will look like post Eel dam removal, it is increasingly clear that we must simultaneously look at what we can do within our own watershed to further protect water supply. There have been several projections put forth by local water agencies and suppliers that show Lake Mendocino could go dry without a future diversion. While this can be a scary thought on its own, we must qualify those projections and provide some additional context as there are still many options available to help mitigate those risks.
First, these projections are largely built on models that reflect no change in water use within our watershed. This means no water conservation or use reduction by urban, industrial, or agricultural users in the projections. It also doesn’t include various water storage expansions, recharge actions, or restoration efforts that can help increase water supply. We believe reliance on only this type of modeling does not help us confront the need for significant changes within our own watershed. Changes will inevitably have to occur in how our waters are used and managed in the Russian River—a continued diversion will help meet some demand, but it is only a temporary solution. As noted above, climate change can very quickly reduce any benefits of a continued diversion so it is vital that the Russian River community be able to extend any benefits for as long as possible.
By identifying and implementing necessary changes now the more our community will be able to adjust as changes occur, as opposed to us having to be reactive with time no longer on our side and potentially more harmful consequences (i.e. more widespread curtailment). Necessary changes cannot occur overnight, we need to start taking active steps today to help ensure practices and infrastructure are in place, or at least not at zero when we need them. For example, one of the immediate changes that is likely to occur with dam removal is the timing of the diversion itself since it will occur in winter when excess flows are available. This means that the majority, if not all, of the diversion will occur during our rainy season. As noted above, the Eel River’s dry and wet seasons typically coincide with our own. Thus, to take advantage of a winter diversion, there must be a plan in place to reliably store any excess water (e.g., groundwater recharge, individual onsite storage, a raised Lake Mendocino) as it is likely that our existing storage structures will already be full. Excess stored water can then be used in the dry season and when droughts occur.
To help extend the benefit of any diversion to when Russian River needs are most significant (i.e. Lake Mendocino reaches critical level), it is important that water managers have an accurate water budget to base decisions on and that a flexible program be in place to reduce the demand of all user types proactively, as opposed to reactively. For example, agricultural practices that increase the organic matter of soil also dramatically increase water retention levels, which then reduces later summer irrigation needs and helps increase groundwater recharge potential. By utilizing such conservation and budget programs in combination with increased storage of available winter flows, it is possible for us to extend our finite water supply even longer into a dry period and can help avoid curtailments as we saw in 2021. These and other similar changes will improve our resilience to climate change and help carry us through droughts, but such programs cannot be imposed overnight. We must start the work to implement these processes and programs now.
Russian Riverkeeper believes that there needs to be a focus on these important issues now. It is far too common for communities to be reactionary to such issues and that is not to anyone’s benefit. Through personal experience and the support of scientific studies, we know that it is going to be easier to achieve a goal via a series of smaller more proactive actions, rather than waiting until there is an immediate need.
There are a lot of issues surrounding the Potter Valley Project and dam removal that still need to be sorted out, and there is a lot of work ahead for us to ensure our watershed is resilient to those changes post-removal. However, the time for change is now. To ensure our watershed can withstand the growing extremes of climate change Russian River water users must become more self-sufficient within our watershed’s boundaries. We will work to keep you updated as new information is available. We’re rolling up our sleeves and getting to work. This is a problem that we can solve together to ensure our community and the river have enough water.