DSAA sponsored water seminar 9/15 @ Sugar Bowl

About fifty people gathered at Sugar Bowl’s village meeting hall for a water seminar on September 15. It was fascinating. Pat Malberg, new president of DSAA opened the meeting with introductory remarks introducing the three speakers: Peter Van Zant, Sierra Watch; Jason Rainey, SYRCL; and Otis Wollen, Placer County Water Agency.

Peter gave a quick overview of the CEQA process as implemented by Placer County: pre-development meeting, preliminary EIR, EIR and definitions, and impacts. After the procedures are followed, lawyers, he said, argue over the meaning of impacts, significant, and whether the process was conducted properly. The water component is very important in this case: how much water, where it comes from, and how it gets to the project are all studied in the EIR process.

Peter talked about the recent California Supreme Court Vineyards decision which requires that the EIR adequately discuss the likelihood that water supplies will be adequate, disclose uncertainties in supply, and require that there be no “paper water” in the supply equation. The water to be supplied must be really available. (see vineyards note at the end)

He then talked about local special districts that are like mini-governments with their own spheres of influence and specific duties such as SLCWD and DSPUD. The EIR process of the County will require that those utilities provide “will serve” notices saying that they can supply water and sewer services.

Next Otis Wollen talked about water rights. He is a five term elected member of the Placer County Water Agency Board. The agency cannot be a provider of water on the Summit, that is the function of the SLCWD, but the agency can provide consultancy functions and legal advice to the SLCWD and can provide Foster/Syme with advice. The American River water is completely allocated so there are no new water rights available in the Serene Lakes drainage which goes into the American River.

Otis launched into a discussion about the availability of water. He said that the SLCWD has rights to about 1000 acre feet but uses only a tenth of that. The developers want a lot of what is left. Is that possible? Otis said the issue is not strictly the numbers; there are other considerations such as how much is needed, what time of the year it is needed, how much is needed to preserve recreation, and how much is needed to preserve the aesthetics of the lakes.

The water district must devise policies that address the amount of water that needs to be set aside for houses. That is not necessarily the amount that is currently used per house. Water district policies, when written and implemented, may require that there be enough water set aside per house to accommodate community changes. For example, that may mean setting use requirements more equivalent to communities with permanent occupancy rather than part-time since Serene Lakes is changing and who can tell what the future will bring? The total amount of water set aside for current needs should also include the needs of the current Serene Lakes subdivsions at build out. The Placer County Water Agency figures .6 acre feet per dwelling. To put that in perspective, that would mean that the current Serene Lakes at build-out, approximately 1000 (currently 800 or so) units, would require about 600 acre feet of the 1100 acre feet in water rights the community has. That does not include recreation or aesthetic needs. Otis had many asides during his presentation, for example that it would be nearly impossible for the developers to build new dams (impoundments) such as are planned in the Lake Camp area.

Water supply and delivery are not the only considerations. Sediment needs to addressed and the effect on the lakes of withdrawal of water needs to be considered. There is little likelihood of enough groundwater (wells) being found because Serene Lakes is an area of fractured granite with soil overlaying; there is no aquifer. The addition of impervious surfaces will change water storage. Impervious surfaces will mean water will run off more quickly rather than sitting under the forest floor being stored prior to going to the lakes. That may mean that water will flow over the dam more quickly and so there will be shorter time during which the streams will flow. That also means there will be less moisture in the soil working its way down to the lakes. That, of course will affect the forests.

Mr. Wollen said there also needs to be more study of the conditions in place now. For example how long does it take for flows of underground water to reach the lakes? In some areas it can take 30 years. What happens in dry years that is different from wet years? What happens if we interrupt the natural flows? What can we expect as a result of climate change? How long does it take for water to move through our watershed from snow to the lakes? What is the effect of drilling on the lakes? Sediment is also a key consideration. The amount of sediment flowing into the lakes is directly affected by the change in surface areas above the lakes.

To answer those and other questions, Otis said a physical model is needed showing how water moves and what the results of different scenarios are. To construct a model information about the various soil types and topography is needed along with the sizes of those areas. That will tell us how much water can be held by the soils and how quickly it flows underground. Estimates need to be made about climate change so we can some idea of snow/rainfall. Historical information about snow/rainfall and snowmelt are also needed. He then demonstrated a model that worked something like a spreadsheet. Changing the parameters of soil type, climate expectations, etc. changed the water storage capabilities of the watershed and so how much could be delivered at different times for other than natural uses. Mr. Wollen will be very happy to help us develop a profile for the Serene Lakes watershed.

Other thoughts he had concerned, shouldn’t the developers have the burden of proof to show that more development will still allow water to flow and that sediment won’t come down to affect the lakes? What effects will drilling have on the lakes? Is there a relationship at all?

Parenthetically, one of the audience members, Chris Farrar, came from the USGS at the behest of Don Campbell, who is interested in the springs in the area and what can happen to them. Mr. Farrar listed a lot of data that should be collected in order to better understand the area. Interestingly, he said the USGS has little information about our area because it has never been studied. The problem with data collection is that we will begin now, but it will take years to collect data and understand how the different water components interact.

Finally, Otis Wollen launched into the presumed effects of climate change. He said the snow/rain line has moved up the mountains by 1000’ over the last twenty years. That means more rain and less snow. The effect of that is that the water will leave the mountains sooner as runoff rather than be stored as snow and melting off slowly. Rain on snow is a different picture than snow on snow. This means there will effectively be less water at the higher elevations in spring than before meaning there will be less storage and so less for development use. That will effect erosion as well. Snow melting slowly gets absorbed by the soil and moves down to the lakes underground. Precipitation falling as rain will rush down the lakes taking the soil with it.

Jason Rainey spoke ended the seminar. He talked about SYRCL, downstream water rights, Van Norden history, SYRCL’s desire to get Van Norden and restore it to its natural state, and what SYRCL is involved in generally. They are studying, for example, mountain meadows and their function in water storage and flow.

Include here Mr. Farrar’s list of items for study:

Isotopes in the wells for example when he sends them

Thanks to Sugar Bowl for providing the venue.

Vineyards Note:

The plaintiffs wanted long term supplies to be guaranteed but the

State Supreme Court disagreed. Public agencies (counties/cities)

need only demonstrate a "reasonable likelihood" that projected water

sources will be available. Cities may approve new developments as

long as they evaluate alternatives, acknowledge uncertainties, and

identify any environmental impacts. The developers lost the case,

true, but for other reasons. The EIR did not comply with CEQA for

example.

Other notes

Otis will make us a profile after 10/7

Groundwater.org

Placer County Water Agency

Ed Teeterman, lawyer for PCWA is free to us via Mr. Wollen

Wollen was very impressed water district has rossman and Schneider

Prescriptive water rights let go, don’t come back ---- like a prescriptive easement

i.e. SLCWD has not used water rights of 900+ A.F. are they gone?

There was a contradiction to that: uphill rights don’t go to downstream users

Suggests .6 AF/dwelling

Other news: County will require EIR address water needs, water sources, water delivery

Must assume 100% occupancy as per Crystal Jacobsen 9/19

Will requirement be 1 A.F/house?