http://www.capitalpress.info/SiteImages/FileGallery/2470.pdf
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency held an informational
meeting on June 25 in Tulelake to discuss with
interested parties a 51-page draft water quality document that
will regulate the Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs)
for the Lower Lost River in Northern California.
Photo by Jacqui Krizo/For the Capital Press
Klamath Water Users Association President Luther Horsley, right,
and KWUA Executive Director Greg Addington were among those in the
audience who expressed concerns over the EPA’s Lost River water
quality regulations for Klamath Project irrigators. |
 |
Information
Comments addressing the draft TMDLs are due by July
6.
Address letters to Gail
Louis, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 75 Hawthorne
Street (WTR-3), San Francisco, CA 94105.
You may fax Louis at 415-947-3537,
or e-mail comments to
louis.gail@epa.gov, followed by a mailed hard copy. The draft
TMDL documents are available on the EPA website: www.epa.gov/region09/ |
|
In accordance with a consent decree, Pacific Coast
Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, et al. v. Marcus, the
TMDLs necessary for Lost River must be completed by 2007. The
State of California did not have the resources, so the EPA will
establish the TMDLs instead.
Gail Louis from the U.S. EPA explained how the agency looked at
water conditions and tried to identify which conditions came from
point sources like a pipe, non-point sources like fields, and
natural background conditions. The report calls for a 50 percent
reduction in nutrient loads in these waterways and contains more
than 65 “recommendations” for irrigators to perform, including
schedules and timetables.
Some of the recommendations include minimizing use of
fertilizers, not discharging irrigation tailwaters into
watercourses, lining ditches, building recovery ponds, providing
more wildlife habitat, establishing basin-wide monitoring program
and stations, establishing a memorandum of understanding with the
agency and more. |
Andrew Parker, from the Tetra Tech consulting firm, contracted by
the EPA, helped answer questions.
Irrigators expressed concern that much of the data for the TMDLs
was generalized. Parker said they averaged what data they had. He said
the TMDLs were based on 1999 conditions, they check samples at one
time, and there is a level of uncertainty. “They don’t mimic exact
timing and location on all water quality conditions,” he said. “If we
don’t have data, we have to make assumptions; there were a lot of
situations we made assumptions.”
Luther Horsley, president of Klamath Water Users Association, said
the standards seem unachievable given the historical natural
conditions of the huge nutrient load while irrigation has improved
water quality in some areas. “Are we trying to make the water quality
better than it was historically? In 1909 this water quality was
considered natural, but today they call the same quality ‘polluted.’”
Parker said natural conditions weren’t explicitly addressed.
Since the water quality was bad on some charts only 2 to 3 percent
of the time, a scientist asked why the load needed to be reduced 50
percent since the medium was below average for nutrients. Parker
responded that criteria were set at the mandatory minimum level.
John Hicks from the Bureau of Reclamation said that with this
document’s lack of data and uncertainty, every environmental group
could take the irrigators to court.
Greg Addington, executive director of the Klamath Water Users
Association, said, “EPA readily acknowledges they have no authority to
require an implementation plan, yet the draft TMDLcontains a
recommended implementation plan. If EPA feels they need to make
recommendations, they should do so in a separate document.”
Oregon State Sen. Doug Whitsett, commenting on the document, said
the Clean Water Act process for establishing TMDLs for the Lost River
has two basic flaws:
“The first flaw is that the Lost River is treated as a tributary to
the Klamath River even though it was historically a land-locked river
system. No background levels can be established for comparison with
current nutrient and temperature loads because the current river flow
as a tributary to the Klamath River did not exist historically.
“The second flaw is the assumption that certain predetermined water
temperatures or nutrient concentrations are achievable in all streams.
Those assumptions were not applicable to the Lost River before channel
modifications due to very low river gradient and very high background
levels of phosphorous, and they are certainly not applicable to the
river after channel modifications.” |