CalTrout News
On November 17, 2023, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) released the initial draft of its plan to remove two dams on the Eel River. The plan calls for the complete and expeditious removal of most of the Potter Valley Project facilities, and it provides a number of options for consideration by stakeholders for how the Project is decommissioned. We need your help to ask PG&E to urgently remove the Eel River dams by submitting a unique comment by December 22, 2023. Comments will help determine the outcome of a final draft of the plan which is expected in May 2024 and a subsequent final license surrender and decommissioning plan which is due to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in January 2025.
How to comment effectively:
It is important that PG&E and FERC hear unique comments in your own words. We hope you will take just a few minutes out of your day to:
- Explain your interest in the Eel River, why is it important to you?
- Use the suggested talking points below to request the urgent removal of both dams
- Thank PG&E for the opportunity to comment
At this phase, PG&E is asking the public to comment on the components of the draft and provide feedback on which options are preferred. There will be a subsequent comment period after more detailed plans are released in 2024.
Talking points
- I strongly support PG&E’s plan to remove both dams. Eel River fish don’t have time to waste. The benefits of dam removal are reduced if dam removal is delayed.
- PG&E’s priority should be removing both Scott and Cape Horn dams as soon as possible and restoring the Project footprint.
- Any proposal to maintain a diversion to the East Branch Russian River should only be included if it will not delay dam removal and if there is support for the proposal from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and representative governmental and non-governmental entities in the Russian and Eel River basins.
- PG&E must provide for environmental restoration of the Project footprint to satisfy state, federal, and local agencies. Restoration should include non-native species management.
- I support transferring recreation facilities such as campgrounds to interested parties rather than removing them.
- PG&E should consult with interested Tribes early and often and protect cultural sites.
All comments must be submitted by December 22, 2023.
The Eel River once supported runs of up to a million salmon and steelhead each year, but those numbers have plummeted to a fraction of historical numbers. Scientists recognize that a healthy and free-flowing Eel River has the potential to play a key role in the rebound of these fisheries throughout the North Coast region, and conservation and commercial fishing groups have long advocated for a free-flowing Eel River. In 2023, American Rivers named the Eel one of America’s Most Endangered Rivers, citing the Potter Valley Project dams as major factors driving Chinook salmon, steelhead, and Pacific lamprey toward extinction. Learn more about Eel River dam removal here.
Removing the Eel River dams would make the Eel California’s longest free-flowing river and would reconnect salmon and steelhead with almost 300 miles of cold-water habitat. Thank you for your support as we work together towards a free-flowing Eel River.
Cover Photo: Scott Dam. Credit: Kyle Scwartz
13 Comments
I strongly support PG&E’s plan to remove both dams. Eel River fish don’t have time to waste. The benefits of dam removal are reduced if dam removal is delayed.
PG&E’s priority should be removing both Scott and Cape Horn dams as soon as possible and restoring the Project footprint.
Any proposal to maintain a diversion to the East Branch Russian River should only be included if it will not delay dam removal and if there is support for the proposal from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and representative governmental and non-governmental entities in the Russian and Eel River basins.
PG&E must provide for environmental restoration of the Project footprint to satisfy state, federal, and local agencies. Restoration should include non-native species management.
I support transferring recreation facilities such as campgrounds to interested parties rather than removing them.
PG&E should consult with interested Tribes early and often and protect cultural sites.
Dear PG&E,
As a life-long Californian, I strongly urge you to remove both the Scott and Cape Horn dams as quickly as possible. The costs to both PG&E for the dam removals and to the environment and wildlife of the Eel River system will only increase the longer the removals take to be realized.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
I strongly support PG&E’s plan to remove both dams. Eel River fish don’t have time to waste. The benefits of dam removal are reduced if dam removal is delayed.
PG&E’s priority should be removing both Scott and Cape Horn dams as soon as possible and restoring the Project footprint.
Any proposal to maintain a diversion to the East Branch Russian River should only be included if it will not delay dam removal and if there is support for the proposal from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and representative governmental and non-governmental entities in the Russian and Eel River basins.
PG&E must provide for environmental restoration of the Project footprint to satisfy state, federal, and local agencies. Restoration should include non-native species management.
I support transferring recreation facilities such as campgrounds to interested parties rather than removing them.
PG&E should consult with interested Tribes early and often and protect cultural sites
As a native Californian sportsman and have watched the decline of our once abundant fisheries decline. The recreational sport and commercial fishery for salmon has been closed along the California coast up to Cape Falcon, Oregon. While there are many factors causing this catastrophe it cannot be denied that too many dams on our rivers have prevented the salmon and steelhead from reaching their historic 300 hundred miles of spawing grounds.
I am in full support of PG&E’s plan to remove both dams on the Eel River. Please do not delay the removal. The sooner the remnants of the once abundant salmon and steelhead runs have the opportunity to access native spawning grounds up stream of the dams the sooner they can recover their once abundant numbers. Instant fish, just add water.
Any proposal to maintain a diversion to the East Branch Russian River should only be included if it will not delay dam removal and if there is support for the proposal from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and representative governmental and non-governmental entities in the Russian and Eel River basins.
PG&E must provide for environmental restoration of the Project footprint to satisfy state, federal, and local agencies. Restoration should include non-native species management.
I support transferring recreation facilities such as campgrounds to interested parties rather than removing them.
PG&E should consult with interested Tribes early and often and protect cultural sites.
If salmon cannot survive and thrive, how long can human exist in a world stripped of the resources that sustain life. Save the salmon. Remove the Eel River dams and restore the riparian environment without delay.
As a dedicated steelhead fisherman, it has been with great alarm that I have witnessed the plummeting numbers of anadromous fish returning to the rivers of the West Coast, from Northern California up to, and through, British Columbia. Many of the dams built on these great rivers in the previous century now have little or no commercial viability but continue to have disastrous effects on fish populations. The Eel River is case in point. As I understand it, removing the Eel River dams of the Potter Valley Project would make the Eel River California’s longest free-flowing river and would reconnect steelhead and salmon with almost 300 miles of native spawning habitat.
I strongly support PG&E’s plan to remove the Scott and Cape Horn dams and would like to thank all of the involved parties who have worked diligently for this outcome.
Dear PG&E, We are running out of time to correct misguided practices that have harmed our natural ability to sustain a healthy lifestyle that also includes using our natural resources that support our California lifestyle, so valuable to all of us. With last year’s rainfall and this year’s, the timing would be perfect for deconstructing the out-of-use dams.
With a full calendar of repairs and upgrades, I’m sure that PG&E has many projects crowding one another! Yet, Mother Nature knows no such schedule! Best to strike while the wind is behind our backs! Please elevate the Scott and Horn dams to a priority and begin dismantling as soon as possible. We may still have time to resuscitate the “Spring Run” of the salmon and trout indigenous to that particularly valuable area!
Most Sincerely, Mary Hermansky
As a young man living in Ukiah in the 1960’s & 1970’s I spent considerable time fishing the eel rivers. At that time it was truly almost easy to catch salmon and steelhead. Now years later I have found it very difficult to hook either specie.
I truly support the removal of the 2 dams soon!
It is my opinion that the Indian Tribes should be involved in planning for and actual removal of the 2 dams.
So as Nike says Just Do It!!
Removal of the Eel River Dams would be really good Public Relations move by PG&E. Especially if recreation facilities were left to be maintained by local organizations.
In addition there would be the really good Public Relations for preserving a cold, fast habitat for the Steelhead. It’s a win for everyone.
Dear PG&E:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the abandonment of the Potter Valley Project.
I strongly support the removal of the Scott and Cape Horn dams as soon as possible.
Recent geologic and seismic studies along the Bartlett Springs fault system indicate a much more significant seismic hazard that might have possibly be considered and designed when these dams were constructed. We now better understand plate tectonics and in addition, we understand that smaller faults can be “connected” in generating larger than expected seismic events. Instead of a maximum 5.9 event a 7.0+ event might occur. It is good to keep the water level as low as possible until the dams can be removed.
Removal of the dams can increase anadromous fish habitat above Lake Pillsbury in both the Mendocino National Forest and the Berryessa Snow Mountain National Monument and mitigation for the project and dam removal should include upstream improvements to potential spawning habitat.
Recreational facilities should be transferred to interested parties. In addition, improvements, construction and maintenance of trails and other recreational facilities should be improved and expanded as mitigation for the loss of recreation at Lake Pillsbury.
It is critical that PG&E consult with interested Tribes during planning and implementation of the dam removal and mitigations. All cultural sites must be protected.
Sincerely,
Bob Schneider
2402 Westernesse Rd
Davis, CA 95616
verve2006@comcast.net
I enthusiastically support PG&E’s plan to remove the Scott and Cape Horn dams. I’ve spent 30 years rafting on the Eel River. The river and the fish desperately need summer flows from the headwaters. Summer flow will avoid bunching salmon in pools where the squawfish eat them and the cool water is essential for salmonids. Massive winter storm flows can still be diverted into the Russian River drainage. Rafting will be hugely improved as well since flows are never predictable with the dam diverting the snow melt.
I strongly support PG&E’s plan to remove both dams. Eel River fish don’t have time to waste. The benefits of dam removal are reduced if dam removal is delayed.
PG&E’s priority should be removing both Scott and Cape Horn dams as soon as possible and restoring the Project footprint.
Any proposal to maintain a diversion to the East Branch Russian River should only be included if it will not delay dam removal and if there is support for the proposal from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and representative governmental and non-governmental entities in the Russian and Eel River basins.
PG&E must provide for environmental restoration of the Project footprint to satisfy state, federal, and local agencies. Restoration should include non-native species management.
Dear PG&E,
As someone who is originally from Montana and grew up fishing, but is now a sophomore in wildlife management and conservation at Cal Poly Humboldt, I support removing the 2 Eel River dams in efforts to save chinook salmon and coho salmon from extinction. Dam removal research has already shown on the Klamath would help salmon. I can link the article here that Oregon State University published about it: https://today.oregonstate.edu/news/dam-removals-restoration-project-klamath-river-expected-help-salmon-researchers-conclude
Removing the dams on the eel would not only open up hundreds of miles of salmon habitat, it would creating better fishing conditions on the Eel giving more fishing opportunities which therefore could potentially help boost the economy in communities along the eel, the tribes such as the Wiyot have argued for dam removal to save a culturally and ecologically significant food source for them aka salmon, and the dams no longer even function as far as I’m aware of. There’s more pros than cons when it comes to removing the dams and I urge that the eel river dams get removed by 2028. Extinction does not work around our clock.
Sincerely ,
John Marchwick