The Environmental Protection Information Center, an environmental nonprofit based out of Arcata, is among the groups listed in a potential lawsuit over the mishandling of coho salmon in the Shasta River as part of “enhancement of survival” practices by private entities taking water from this stream.
On Thursday, The Western Environmental Law Center announced its intent to file a federal lawsuit against the National Marine Fisheries Service, an agency operating under the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, regarding a “safe harbor” conservation program the filing parties believe is flawed. The Environmental Protection Information Center, or EPIC, is listed as a plaintiff along with Yreka-based group Friends of the Shasta River.
The safe harbor program allows private farm interests diverting water from the Shasta River to be exempted from legal consequences laid out in the Endangered Species Act for the “take,” an encompassing term including the act of harming, capturing, polluting and killing, of endangered coho salmon in exchange for net conservation actions to mitigate baseline habitat conditions. A press release announcing the notice of intent states the National Marine Fisheries Service’s program is based on ” incorrect biological opinions”.
EPIC executive director and staff attorney Tom Wheeler explained the safe harbor program was added to the Endangered Species Act in an effort to encourage individuals to do good deeds, but is now being used by farmers and entities diverting water from the river to bypass ESA penalties.
“The safe harbor agreement was intended for a different category of people, and because it was intended for a different category of people, the legal requirements are lower. What is happening is that the federal government is exempting these large, rich, rural landowners from citizen enforcement or government enforcement of the ESA and its take prohibition in exchange for very minor trifling improvements in habitat,” he said.
The baseline habitat improvements can vary from site to site. As an example, Wheeler stated planting trees to lower river temperatures at certain sites where water is above the species’ sub-15 degree Celsius range can be a measure taken as part of the agreement, even if it does nothing to prevent damage to a large number of coho specimens.
“It might be an improvement because if we keep water at 17.9 degrees, that might be better for the salmon than 18.5 degrees, but it’s not sufficient to allow for the recovery of the species and to prevent routine and ongoing partaking of salmon in the Shasta river,” Wheeler said. “At the same time, (the program) prevents groups like EPIC and Friends of the Shasta River from using the Endangered Species Act to try to force improvements in management behavior that will actually result in a reduction in taking that will actually pave the way to recovery.”
Karuk Tribal natural resources consultant Craig Tucker said that while there have been a few good actions taken as part of the safe harbor agreement, he says the majority of mitigation acts are insufficient.
“We view a lot of them as being really weak commitments that are not deserving of an Endangered Species Act permit,” Tucker said.
The Shasta River, a tributary of the Klamath River, is historically one of the waterways which produces the most salmon in California. The river’s subterranean spring origin created the perfect cold water conditions to host the species. Channeling from upstream waters and farm diversions have severely impacted the river and the species of salmon living on the Shasta.
“In 1930, it was reported 80,000 adult salmon were returning to the Shasta. That’s a ton of fish. Now we get 80,000 in the whole Klamath sometimes,” Tucker said. “So where fish used to come up the Shasta to find one of these springs close to the river that created a cold water refuge area, they’re diverting spring water on to the cow pasture. The water gets full of cow poop, gets hot and the tailwater comes back to the river and pollutes the river … So what they’re doing is destroying the most productive salmon stream, maybe in California, to divert water to grow cows.”
While the Karuk Tribe is not involved in the lawsuit, Tucker says the tribe agrees with the case plaintiffs.
“We have filed pretty strong comments with NOAA saying we do not support the safe harbor permits,” Tucker said.
Mario Cortez can be reached at 707-441-0526.
