 |
 |
Brenda Adelman
By BRENDA ADELMAN
Brenda Adelman is chairwoman of the Russian River Watershed Protection Committee
The Russian River Watershed Protection Committee is quite familiar with the issues addressed by Supervisor Efren Carrillo in the Oct. 19 Close to Home titled “Myths about sandbar plan.” We disagree with many of his assertions.
The column defends the project by stating the Sonoma County Water Agency will not close the sandbar; it won’t add pollutants to the Russian River; it will assure recreation and seals will continue, and it will save threatened fish species. The column specifically blames failing septic tanks for existing pollution in the river along with “other” sources. The article credits SCWA for hiring consultants to conduct extensive studies.
Carrillo then goes on to paint the Water Agency as the heroes in this matter for doing all this work for the fish, when agency workers are merely doing their jobs. It is their responsibility to assure a healthy and sustainable river and are paid well to do so, but there is a lot more that could be done.
The concerns of the Russian River Watershed Protection Committee about this project have been extensively documented in our comments over the last several years. (For more information visit www.rrwpc.org).
The estuary is a magnificent force of nature not suited to being controlled. This year, the mouth did not close once during the project period and the Water Agency was unable to conduct the project. Last year, it tried, but the mouth reopened within 12 hours, and it had to stop. Most river mouths north of the Russian never close.
Many factors about this plan are unknown, and public comments were necessarily limited.
The project is an experiment. Consultant studies only revealed tip-of-the-iceberg impacts. We don’t know the water quality impacts if the mouth is closed for five months and existing pollutants get to fester in the water all that time. How will fish be affected if they are found to be residing in mercury-laden waters for long periods?
Seals always leave the estuary when the mouth is closed. If lengthy closures occur, we may never see seals there in summer again. We have no idea how this situation will affect them, and they are a protected species also.
Heavy equipment will work on the dunes as many as 36 days during the summer season, greatly affecting access at the most popular beach in Northern California. State Parks is so concerned about this that they would only give the project a one-year permit rather than the 13-year permit requested.
The Water Agency has separated the estuary project from the “low flow” project (proposal to lower minimum flows at Hacienda Bridge by 44 percent), but they are closely related and should have been considered together. The only reason given for lower flows at Hacienda is to avoid flooding of a few properties in Jenner, the lowest of which is the Visitor’s Center, flooding at 9 feet. Since the project will be maintained at 8 feet, and surplus water can flow into the ocean, we fail to see the necessity for a low-flow project.
Furthermore, in a private meeting, we were told that the project could be managed at normal flows.
Finally, to single out failing septic tanks as the main source of pollution is a travesty. Agricultural practices, timber harvesting, gravel mining, wastewater discharges, dewatering of the tributaries, urban runoff and extensive use of pesticides and herbicides all contribute heavily to river pollution. It is the county’s responsibility to strictly enforce storm water runoff and other programs to control all pollution, instead of playing political favorites with certain polluters over others.
Subscribe by Email
Follow us on Twitter
Thank you, Brenda Adelman for being one of the only voices of reason regarding the ‘experiment’ at the mouth of the Russian River. As usual, when government tampers with the environment, there are all sorts of unintended consequences and exorbitant costs. Also, you point out that other sources of pollution going into the river are far more detrimental than a few failed septic systems along the river. Residents along the river, up to 2,000 feet away (is this true?) are being blamed and harrassed by the State Water Quality Board that is proposing subjecting them to costly inspections and system replacements. Yet they lack any substantial evidence that shows that the river’s impaired water quality has anything to do with septic tanks as far away as 2,000 feet.
There’s a public hearing on new septic tank regulations at the Wells Fargo Center in Santa Rosa on Wednesday November 2nd. The overly large 2,000 foot dragnet that could impose extreme hardship on families whose septic systems are in no way impairing anything represents an out of control regulatory blitz against property owners in rural communities. Most little towns are almost entirely within the 2,000 foot zone because of the benefits of living next to a waterway.
A couple years ago there were more than 3,000 people that attended similar meetings at the Wells Fargo Center to protest a similar proposal that pertained to All septic systems in the State. Don’t be fooled, this new approach will affect a huge percentage of rural residents. Plan to attend to express your disapproval of this unwarranted assault against our rural neighbors. Even if your property is spared from this new regulation, the next one could impact you. Property owners need to stick together to defend their rights against a punitive regulatory environment that is systematically being imposed on us.
The state department of water resources is promulgating a new set of regulations that impact people who own private sewage disposal systems within 2,000 feet of an impaired waterway (e.g., high colioform) . There is a function on the Department of Water Resources whereby you can give the address of a property and it will state whether the property is within the 2,000 foot zone. Owners of private sewage disposal systems within 2,000 feet of an impaired water will be required to have their septic systems inspected periodically and repaired if necessary. Among the remedies available to people who have failing septic systems in the 2,000 foot zone who cannot repair their septic systems are composting toilets and incinerating toilets.
This is an idea that is long overdue. I just purchase two composting toilets at retail for less than $1,000 each from Home Depot. The state should buy these devices in great quantity at appropriate discounts and install them in all properties within the 2,000 foot zone, allowing residents to pay in installments. It would be a lot cheaper than new sewer systems and easier on the pocketbooks of the people on the river.
“Finally, to single out failing septic tanks as the main source of pollution is a travesty.” Yes Brenda, but many of your neighbors, perhaps even you don’t even have septic systems; they’re still using redwood tank cesspools!
salmon come home salmon come home salmon come home salmon come home salmon come home salmon come home