Matilija Dam, on the Ventura River, was constructed in 1948 and is completely ineffective today. Full of silt and sediment, it does nothing for flood control or water supply and it completely blocks Southern steelhead passage. Efforts to remove Matilija Dam started in the mid-1990’s. But, like many other environmental projects, the removal of the Matilija Dam on the Ventura River has been impacted by the world’s economic crisis.
A full spectrum of community stakeholders and agencies came together and by 2007, they had developed a preferred preliminary design, a budget (approximately $145 million), and a schedule. At that time, Congressional approval for the project was obtained.
The project design included: the removal of the Matilija Dam structure, the disposal of the 6 million cubic yards of sediment currently sequestered behind the dam, and the complete habitat restoration of the river canyon. Since 2007, however, the U.S. budget crisis has made it impossible to appropriate funds for progress on the Matilija Project.
In the face of bleak funding prospects, project leads (County of Ventura Watershed Protection District and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) went “off the reservation” and developed a modified, potentially less expensive project design that failed to meet the ecological restoration goals of the project. Instead, their plan would permanently store as much as 2.5 million cubic yards of the fine sediment in the river canyon itself, covering the existing riparian habitat (which includes native oaks, springs, and other critical habitat values) and constraining the river into an unnaturally inhibited channel.
CalTrout worked closely with Matilija Coalition Director, Paul Jenkin, to stop this “imposter project” and remind the agencies of the original intent of these efforts: 1.) to restore the Ventura River and the Matilija Canyon area for the benefit of Southern California steelhead (and other native species and habitat) by providing fish passage and habitat, 2.) to restore the natural processes that allow the river to carry and deposit the sediments that naturally replenish our Ventura beaches.
Over the course of a year and many meetings, CalTrout and Paul Jenkin successfully persuaded with stakeholders and agencies to reaffirm the eco-restoration project goals, and to consider and refine adjustments to the original 2007 “approved project.” These changes could potentially save money, prevent additional sediment accumulation behind the dam prior to its removal, and allow some forward motion to begin, even with the meager economic outlook.
Accordingly, the Matilija Dam Removal Project appears to be “back on the rails.” Plans to begin notching the dam to current sediment levels are being developed. And adjustments to the larger project are being explored – including non-habitat impact alternative storage areas for the sediment.
Progress on this work is constrained by funding. But the liability of the Matilija Dam and the threat of increase removal costs in the future if additional sediment accumulates are motivating continued efforts by agencies and stakeholders. Ventura County is moving ahead with the design and permitting for dam notching, and CalTrout will continue to work closely with the Matilija Coalition to assure that progress continues to be made.
Sign up to hear from California Trout! CalTrout’s mission is to ensure healthy waters and resilient wild fish for a better California. Hear about our work and how to get involved through our monthly newsletter, The Streamkeeper’s Blog, “Trout Clout” action alerts, article from our e-magazine, The Current, event invites, and much more! We respect your privacy and will never sell or share your information with other organizations.
Peter Moyle is the Distinguished Professor Emeritus in the Department of Wildlife, Fish and Conservation Biology and Associate Director of the Center for Watershed Sciences, at UC Davis. He is author or co-author of more than 240 publications, including the definitive Inland Fishes of California (2002). He is co-author of the 2017 book, Floodplains: Processes and Management for Ecosystem Services. His research interests include conservation of aquatic species, habitats, and ecosystems, including salmon; ecology of fishes of the San Francisco Estuary; ecology of California stream fishes; impact of introduced aquatic organisms; and use of floodplains by fish.
Robert Lusardi is the California Trout/UC Davis Wild and Coldwater Fish Researcher focused on establishing the basis for long-term science specific to California Trout’s wild and coldwater fish initiatives. His work bridges the widening gap between academic science and applied conservation policy, ensuring that rapidly developing science informs conservation projects throughout California. Dr. Lusardi resides at the UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences and works closely with Dr. Peter Moyle on numerous projects to help inform California Trout conservation policy. His recent research interests include Coho salmon on the Shasta River, the ecology of volcanic spring-fed rivers, inland trout conservation and management, and policy implications of trap and haul programs for anadromous fishes in California.
Patrick Samuel is the Conservation Program Coordinator for California Trout, a position he has held for almost two years, where he coordinates special research projects for California Trout, including the State of the Salmonids report. Prior to joining CalTrout, he worked with the Fisheries Leadership & Sustainability Forum, a non-profit that supports the eight federal regional fishery management councils around the country. Patrick got his start in fisheries as an undergraduate intern with NOAA Fisheries Protected Resources Division in Sacramento, and in his first field job as a crew member of the California Department of Fish & Wildlife’s Wild and Heritage Trout Program.
2 Comments
The “off the reservation plan” was not cheaper but recooped costs by developing levee protection for property down river in the flood plain. But then Katrina happened and the Corps of Engineers became a little leary of levees. Thank God it did not go futher with the potencial more housing(more need for water and yes a new dam) did not get served.
Taking the dam down little by little and washing annual subsquent the sediment down river is the simple and effective way to get it done. If we could have stuck to the plan this removal would be near completion by now. Shame on us…we have wasted a decade…this time can we stay commmitted to more than a dog and pony show to garner donations?
I wish more people had the common sense you have. Am now in my 70’s and would love to see that big steelhead run of yesteryear – – and maybe even fish for a few. But, the way we humans screw around I am not optimistic.