YBSA Monthly Report
November, 2010

Meeting with Virgil Lewis, Sr.: YBSA executive committee met with Virgil Lewis, Sr., member of the Yakama Nation Tribal Council and Chairman of the Fish, Wildlife, Law and Order Committee, to review items that the Yakama Nation and YBSA have in common. Some issues have not been resolved by the Work Group developing the integrated plan. Subordination of power generation, use of Columbia River water, and mitigation plans have not been agreed upon. Virgil mentioned the need for more surface water for the Wapato Irrigation Project, the need to reclassify the District so grants can be obtained, additional funding for repairs of the WIP and to make the idle land on the Reservation usable to improve the economy. YBSA supports Yakama Nation’s goal. Improving the economy on the Reservation benefits everyone in the Yakima River Basin.

Request of Model Run: YBSA sent a letter to the Bureau of Reclamation requesting a model run to estimate salmon production in the Yakima Basin based upon a future that includes enough water to fully engage all potential habitat features. A plan for maximizing the number of returning salmonids to the Yakima Basin would be of great benefit to the Yakama Nation.

Pumped Storage and Wind Generation: Sid Morrison met with Jim Waldo, a Tacoma attorney who has worked in the natural resource arena across the Pacific Northwest for the last thirty years, to discuss the possibility of a pumped storage project using the Black Rock configuration. Pumped storage and wind integration programs are being developed throughout the west and would buy down the cost of storage. There is a large variation in the price of power, when there is high water and wind at the same time power is discarded. The discarded power could be used to pump water.

Work Group Meeting Information: At the Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project Work Group meeting the Integrated Plan updated hydrologic modeling results without on of the three major storage projects would provide; less water for irrigation and would not meet the 70% prorationing water supply goal, less water for instream flow benefits, and less carry over storage. The effects of potential climate change on the Integrated Plan benefits would reduce summer flows and increase needs for storage, would deliver comparable benefits under the predicted climate change scenarios, and not meet the 70% prorationing goal under moderately adverse scenarios.

Two thirds of the water needed for out of stream use and instream needs is provided by the snowpack in the Cascade Mountains that water the Yakima Basin. The other one third is met by water stored in our five major reservoirs. With climate change potentially reducing snowpack additional stored water will be required to meet the current water needs. Storage makes all the other projects included in the Integrated Plan possible and enhances the economy of the Yakima Basin.

The following cost information was provided for the November Work Group meeting.

November 17, 2010
Integrated Plan Construction and Annual Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs
Construction Costs Cost/acre-foot Annual O&M
Volume Estimate Lower Upper
(acre-feet) (million dollars) (dollars) ($1,000)
Water Supply
Storage
Bumping Lake Enlargement (New) 156,300 402.5 322.0 563.5 2,600 210.0
Wymer (Option 1, pump to Wymer) 162,000 1,309.7 1,047.8 1,833.6 8,100 3,980.0
Kachess Inactive (tunnel) 200,000 253.8 203.0 355.3 1,300 270.0
Groundwater Infiltration 100,000 74.6 59.7 104.5 750 2,145.0
Cle Elum 3-foot raise 14,700 16.8 13.5 23.6 1,100 500.0
Total 633,000 2,057.4 1,646.0 2,880.5 3,300 7,105.0
Water Conservation
Agriculture
Enhanced Basin-Wide Program 170,000 549.9 439.9 769.9 3,200
KRD Canals (Main-South Branch) 35.9 28.7 50.3 25.0
Wapatox Canal (Option 1) 59.3 47.5 83.1 210.0
Municipal and Domestic 1.0
Total 645.1 516.1 903.3 236.0
Total Water Supply 2,702.5 2,162.1 3,783.8 7,341.0
Specific Fish Enhancement
Fish Passage 324.3 259.4 454.1 2,640.0
Fish Habitat
Tributaries 180.0 144.0 252.0
Mainstem 279.7 223.8 391.6
Keechelus to Kachess pipeline 190.7 152.5 266.9 90.0
Total Specific Fish 974.7 779.7 1,364.5 2,730.0
Future Study
Columbia River Pump/Storage 3.8 3.0 5.3

Total Integrated Plan 3,681.0 2,944.8 5,153.6 10,071.0

Options
Wymer (Option 2, Thorp Pump) 541.2 433.0 757.7 3,390.0
Kachess Inactive (Pump) 225.7 180.6 316.0 590.0
Wapatox Canal (Option 2) 82.1 65.7 115.0 210.0

Construction costs: “Estimate” is that prepared by the consultants and includes contingencies plus 30% for design and permit costs. “Lower” is -20% of the “Estimate” and “Upper” is +40% of the “Estimate”.
Cost/acre-foot: “Estimate” divided by “Volume” (capacity) or in the case of agriculture water conservation the estimated “saved water”.
Bumping Lake Enlargement: Total capacity is 190,000 acre-feet which includes 33,700 acre-feet of existing capacity (replacement) and 155,300 acre-feet of new capacity.
Options: Measures that could be substituted for those listed in the table; i.e Kachess Inactive (pump) substituted for Kachess Inactive (tunnel). The inclusion of these would change the total costs of the Integrated Plan shown in the table.

See updated information that includes video of salmon spawning in the Yakima River Basin at www.ybsa.org

YBSA Monthly Report
October, 2010

YBSA Supports IWRMP: Yakima Basin Storage Alliance (YBSA) remains committed to support the Integrated Water Resource Management Plan (IWRMP) to solve the Yakima Basin’s water supply problems that exist now and will be more prevalent in the future.

The Following is from the Report to the September 23, 2010 Work Group Meeting:

Climate Change: The climate change report showed the integrated plan scenario results for meeting the water supply needs do not meet the 70% prorationing water supply goal seven times in the 20 year period between 1985 and 2005.

Adjusted Storage Scenario: The adjusted scenario without Bumping Lake Enlargement, Wymer Reservoir, or Kachess Inactive Storage with Keechelus to Kachess Pipeline does not meet the 70% proration water supply goal, provides less water for irrigation and instream flow benefits, and less carryover storage following dry years.

Environmental, Policy and Legal Barriers: Major impacts on storage projects that could prevent or delay a project include impacts that cannot be mitigated and not include all possible environmental impacts and a high potential for historic and cultural resources in the Yakama Nation ceded territory and historic structures.

Bumping Lake Expansion eliminates some old-growth, Northern Spotted Owl, and Bull Trout spawning habitat. It would inundate several large public and private recreation facilities. Kachess Lake inactive storage would affect Bull Trout passage and habitat.

YBSA’s Perspecitve on Proposed IWRMP: For the past 65 years the failure to provide sufficient volume of water for both instream and out-of-stream use has jeopardized the economy, the return of salmonoids, and municipal and rural growth. A plan needs to include enough water to ensure a healthy economic environment and a return to a more historical hydrograph in the Yakima River. The following was provided to the Work Group explaining YBSA’s position:

YBSA’s perspective on the proposed
Integrated Water Resource Management Plan for the Yakima Basin
This paper explains YBSA’s position October 2010, and list elements we deem critical for the plan to succeed.

Why do we support 800 kaf for the Yakima River Basin when others are OK with 400 kaf?

I. Support for Out-of-Stream Needs

We support:

1) 70% criteria as a target for dry-year proratable agricultural water supply which in a year like 2001 requires an additional 355,000 acre-feet for irrigation

2) 45,000 acre-feet for future municipal/domestic water.

Therefore Out-of Stream needs total 400,000 acre-feet additional water storage.

3) In addition the USGS report presented at the September workgroup meeting shows we need an additional 50,000 acre-feet of water within reservoir storage for aquifer recharge.

Total needs for out-of-stream identified to date equals 450,000 acre-feet.

However, we are very concerned that significant out-of-streams needs for water in the Yakima Basin have not yet been quantified. These include:

1. Water for multiple-year droughts that may last 3 years, or more. How much water would be required to meet the 70% supply target in year 2 or year 3 of a drought?
2. The USGS groundwater report estimates that approximately 145,000 acre/feet of water is being lost from the lower Yakima Basin. No replacement water is included in the 450,000 acre/feet figure.
3. Climate change will inevitably change the nature and timing of precipitation and runoff regime in the Yakima Basin. Since approximately 2/3 of the annual irrigation water supply is derived from snowmelt in the spring and early summer, the impact of reduced snow-pack could be severe, even if annual precipitation is not greatly reduced. How much water, under various climate change scenarios, will be required to compensate for the reduced snow-pack?

II. Support for In-Stream Needs

Instream flow needs have not been adequately quantified.

What are the optimum flows in the river for salmon recovery?

1. We believe the best flow regime for recovery is the unregulated hydrograph; modified to the extent we have good data to support a deviation from it. We also know that storing more Yakima River water deviates further from the unregulated flows. Instream flows are seriously deficient in significant reaches of the Yakima River and tributaries; most notably the lower 100 miles of the mainstem Yakima. Despite the need for significant flow increases throughout the Yakima Basin, as well as flow reductions in some reaches, instream flow needs have not been quantified. Any water planning effort in the Yakima Basin that does not include quantification of the instream flow needs is fatally flawed. Although not quantified, it appears obvious to us that the quantity of water needed for instream flows is of such magnitude that we believe that only water from the Columbia can satisfy this need.

2. Current water quality conditions in the lower Yakima River, in particular temperature, preclude salmon spawning or rearing and significantly inhibits migration as well. These conditions have been documented in a number of reports, and are summarized in the 2001 Yakima Subbasin Summary, the 2005 Yakima Subbasin Plan, and the 2008 Yakima Steelhead Recovery Plan. Restoring salmon production in the lower Yakima River will require a determine effort over an extended period of time, but we strongly believe that restoring salmon production in this reach is not only possible, but necessary for the future well-being of the Yakima Basin. We are profoundly disappointed that the current planning effort has failed to effectively address this issue.

III Feasibility of Specific Projects as Proposed in the plan
1. Comparing. For this plan, or any plan to succeed, all options should be listed on a matrix to compare costs and benefits on the same basis, and the criteria should be the same as those of the current plan.
We also know that the cost of the package will be high, which is why we advocate that recreation and power value be maximized so as to attract private funding to reduce taxpayer expense.

2. The Public. Perhaps most importantly, the public has to be apprised of the options, and given a chance to comment. Without their support, congressional passage is not likely.

3. Sequencing. Further, all parties should be aware of the sequence, timing and triggers for substitute projects if it appears that a given project becomes unfeasible or unlikely to begin construction within a predefined period. A project schedule for each element of the Integrated Plan should be developed. This schedule should include project costs and timing for construction, mitigation elements (if necessary), and operation and maintenance costs.

4. Triggers. Within the project schedule, there should be objective measures to determine if a project will move forward on schedule. If it is determined by these objective measures (e.g. timely appropriation, engineering/cost feasibility, absence of litigation to forestall a project) that a project will not move forward according to the schedule, other projects would be moved forward and accelerated.

For example, the expansion of Bumping Reservoir is one critical element to the performance of the Integrated Plan in meeting goals. There have been repeated attempts in the past to expand Bumping Lake. However, opponents to this expansion and the soundness of their arguments have not been reduced by time, and have in many ways increased. Additionally, recent conversations concerning potential mitigation exchanges which may significantly add to the cost of this project must also be more fully considered by the Workgroup before being included in the Integrated Plan and subsequent funding request.

The Workgroup will see model scenarios that quantify the effect of loss of the major project components. The Plan should include backup provisos that reliably ensure the water supply needs of the basin to account for contingencies such as the infeasibility of one or more major project components. Project sequencing, timelines and triggers are required to establish the probable loss of such components and prevent potential failure of the Plan in meeting its goals. Given the potential for one or more Integrated Plan elements to be infeasible to construct, we propose the Columbia River water exchange, in combination with other elements of the Integrated Plan, be the next project proposed for implementation. We agree it offers the best opportunity for addressing the Yakima River basin water issues as they stand today and in the future and also provides the opportunity for integration of wind power into the Federal Columbia River Power System and to meet expected changes in hydrologic timing of Yakima River basin runoff due to climate change.

5. Legislation. To assure the water supply of the Integrated Plan it is imperative that specific provisions be included in the Plan and in Federal/State authorizing legislation for appropriation of funds for
a) planning and selecting a Columbia River water exchange project, and
b) construction of the least cost per acre-foot Columbia River exchange project as a replacement project for a major water supply project that does not move forward and/or to meet additional water needs as may subsequently be required. And
c) that the Bureau of Reclamation’s withdrawal right of Columbia River water for a water exchange in the Yakima River basin shall be continued.
d) The pumping power rate used for the Columbia River water exchange project shall be consistent with the rate for the delivery of surface water to the Odessa Groundwater Area of the Columbia Basin Project.
e) Storage, conservation and passage must proceed concomitantly, and must be so linked in the legislation.

SUMMARY: What we have learned from the past 65 years is that failure to provide sufficient volume for both instream and out of stream use jeopardizes both, and we will repeat our past; fighting in court for drops, when we need thousands of acre feet to resolve this long standing unresolved conflict, and realize the basin’s potential. The additional water needs to be enough for to compensate for climate change, multiple year droughts, ground water replenishment, and enough to protect and restore fish life throughout the Yakima Basin, but most specifically in the lower Yakima River, and to address emerging ESA issues.

YBSA remains committed to support this opportunity to resolve the basin’s inadequate water supply with substantive long-term solutions. We appreciate the opportunity to provide our perspective, to voice our concerns and ideas, to have them addressed so that we may support the In-Stream and Out-of-Stream Needs Recommendations and ultimately the IWRMP for the Yakima River Basin.

See updated information that includes video of salmon spawning in the Yakima River Basin at www.ybsa.org

YBSA Monthly Report
September, 2010

Work Group Instream/Out of Stream Recommendation: YBSA continues to support the process being used by the Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project Work Group. After 16 months into the study the Work Group was asked to “support” or “do not support” the proposal and why, regarding the instream and out of stream committee recommendations.

A concern was expressed on the instrream recommendation due to insufficient information about how much water would be needed to meet the needs of the proposed fish enhancement projects and how many more salmonoids would return to the Yakima River Basin with the program in place.

The out of stream proposal for water needed during a single year drought was between 300,000 and 400,000 a/f without considering any additional water needed due to climate change. With multi year droughts, and climate change, the need could be as high as 800,000 a/f. In addition to the recommended need for more water, the storage structural proposals may not provide the water necessary. The storage proposals include enlarging Bumping Lake Reservoir, enlarging Cle Elum Reservoir three feet, build Wymer Reservoir and use water from Lake Cle Elum or the Yakima River to fill it, pump the water from the bottom of Lake Kachess (inactive storage) and put a pipeline from Keechelus to Kachess.

Opposition to Bumping Lake Enlargement: The environmental community has opposed enlarging Bumping Lake for decades and the Work Group received a letter from Brock Evans, President of the Endangered Species Coalition, stating their opposition

Preliminary Cost Estimates: The first preliminary cost estimates for structural projects were presented at the September 23rd Work Group meeting. The cost was listed as high as $3.270 billion without all the proposed projects being included.

Pump Storage Benefits: YBSA continues to request pump storage from the Columbia River be included in the discussion. Pump storage would provide around 800,000 a/f even during consecutive droughts. In addition Columbia River water would provide water for irrigation purposes. The Yakima River water would be used for instream flow (fish recovery), out of stream needs along with Columbia River water (preventing droughts which cripple the economy and create a large number of job losses), and the water for municipal growth. Additional water in the Yakima Basin would help solve the problem and eliminate the need for a moratorium on all wells in the Yakima Valley. Senior water rights could be protected.

Salmon Walks: Each fall Bob Tuck, a fish biologist, who has been instrumental in improvements for fish recovery in the Yakima Basin provides salmon walks on the American, Little Naches, and Cle Elum Rivers. Bob provided salmon walks with discussion of the number of fish and the need for more water and habitat to make a significant improvement in salmon runs. This year with the importation of Sockeye from Wenatchee and Okanogan planted in Lake Cle Elum spawning is occurring this fall (now) in the upper Cle Elum River. The Sockeye will need to navigate Cle Elum Dam to get to the ocean and be trucked around the dam when they return to spawn. YBSA has filmed the spawning on the American River with narration by Bob Tuck. Copies of the DVD of salmon spawning are available. Email your request to yakimabasinstoragealliance@yahoo.com.

Fair: Come and see us at our booth at the Central Washington State Fair through October 3rd.

See updated information at www.ybsa.org

YBSA Monthly Report
August, 2010

Integrated Water Resource Management Plan: The proposed Integrated Plan is moving forward with water supply projects (storage) being included which may not be completed. The current plan with all the proposed storage projects still is inadequate to supply the water to meet the identified needs during drought years. The amount of water available and costs, including operational costs, of the five structural projects proposed (Keechelus-to-Kachess Pipeline, Kachess Inactive Storage, Wymer Reservoir, Enlarged Bumping Reservoir, & Enlarged Cle Elum Reservoir) has not been identified and the probability of any of those five being completed in time to (or maybe not at all) improve anadromous fish runs, ensure our agricultural economy, a constant water supply, and provide water for municipal growth.

Climate Change Inclusion: Climate change scenario has not been incorporated in each of the proposed parts of the plan including habitat and fish passage. A detailed review of climate change should be part of the plan because it affects the storage and water supply available.

Effects of Climate Change: As published in the Environmental New Service Michael J. Scott, staff scientist at the Department of Energy’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Richland, Washington, said, “Our behavior where we live must change with the climate if we are to stave off economic and natural catastrophe and meet the challenge Mother Nature may hand us in the next few years.”

The Yakima River Valley is a vast fruit basket, with 370,000 irrigated acres of orchards, vineyards and other crops covering 6,150 square miles from the river’s headwaters in the Cascade Range east of Seattle to the Yakima’s terminus at the Columbia River in Richland. In a typical year, five reservoirs and stream runoff provide agriculture with 2.7 million acre-feet of water. In a typical year at mid-21st century, the amount is forecast to fall an average of 20 to 40 percent.

“The expected losses to agriculture along in the Yakima Valley over the next several decades will be between $92 million at two degrees Centigrade warming and $163 million a year at four degrees,” or up to nearly a quarter of total current crop value, Scott said.

Those losses will result from a projection based on shortage of water for irrigation. That water comes from reservoirs and runoff that are, in turn, tied directly to the amount of snow that accumulates in the Cascades over the winter, the snow pack.

Salmon River Walk: Bob Tuck provided a Salmon walk on the American River August 9th & 10th. The groups had an opportunity to view a female preparing a place in the riffle to deposit her eggs. The male stayed nearby to fertilize those eggs. The fertilized eggs were then covered with fine gravel until they hatch. Another Salmon walk will take place in the Cle Elum River during two weeks in the middle of September. Bob explained the hazards the smolts and returning Salmon face in their lifetime. Additional water made available in the Yakima River basin by using Columbia River water for irrigation purposes would provide the flows needed to enhance the existing salmon runs and provide an opportunity for those historical runs that are almost extinct to be restored.

See updated information at www.ybsa.org

YBSA Monthly Report
July, 2010

Columbia River Water Exchange:

1. The Yakima River Basin has a long history of an inadequate water supply to meet competing water resource needs. Each year we are faced with the need for an adequate snowpack to sustain and enhance our anadromous fishery resources, provide water to irrigate our agricultural crops (a mainstay of our economy), and meet the municipal and domestic needs of our growing population. We have attempted to address this matter through the Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project and other programs focusing on conservation measures to reduce irrigation diversions; while progress has been made we are nevertheless faced with the fact that additional infrastructure is necessary (particularly storage) if we are to assure a reliable water supply for the future.

2. YBSA believes a Columbia River water exchange provides us with the best opportunity – – substituting water from the Columbia River to irrigate some of our crop lands and leaving Yakima River water, current diverted, instream for our anadromous fishery.

3. A Columbia River water exchange addresses the Yakima River basin’s water resource issues for both the short and long term and once and for all provides a reliable water supply which has eluded us for decades to sustain our economic, environmental, and cultural resources.

A water exchange program with the Columbia River has proven successful in the Umatilla Basin and a similar program has been approved and funding is being requested for the Walla Walla Basin. It’s time the Yakima Basin embarks on a long term solution to our need for more water.

More Water for Fish: YBSA will continue to participate in the Integrated Water Resource Manage Plan (IWRMP) Work Group to find a solution for our water short years including consecutive drought years. Additional habitat, fish passage, and additional water in the lower Yakima River will provide an opportunity for up to 1 million returning salmon to the river provided water is available.

IWRMP: The current discussion by the Work Group to provide additional storage facilities are all located within the Yakima Basin.

1. Transferring water from Lake Keechelus to Lake Kachess and drawing down about 200,000 a/f of dead storage below the existing water level that is available now.

2. Wymer Dam and Reservoir would be filled by pumping water from the Yakima River near Thorp to Wymer about midway through the Yakima River Canyon. It would provide 160,000 a/f each year for fish and irrigation.

3. Bumping Lake Enlargement would be created by building a new dam down stream on the Bumping River. Approximately 190,000 a/f could be available with the large reservoir site being constructed. The existing lake shore activities would be inundated and habitat (Bull Trout) would be compromised. Historic figures show a probability that the enlarged lake might not fill every year.

The next step in developing the IWRMP is for the consulting team to refine the concepts and prepare cost estimates for each of the above projects. Additional results will be presented at the September Work Group meeting. Conceptual results for other actions Yakima/Columbia Water Availability and Hydrologic Modeling will be the focus of the August Work Group meeting.

Points of Interest:

 The Colorado River storage system has a 5 year supply of stored water and the Yakima system has less than a 1 year supply.

 The lower Yakima River needs to have all the floodplain made available for salmon recovery.

 More water is needed to develop the lower river for improved temperature and habitat.

 Fish biologists seem to be willing to discard the lower river for anything but passage for salmonoids to get to the upper Yakima Basin.

 Sockeye successes are large in the Columbia River and increasing the run in the Yakima River would require cooler water temperatures and more water.

See updated information at www.ybsa.org

YBSA Monthly Report
June, 2010

Work Group Committees: YBSA attended all the instream and out-of-stream committee meetings. The meetings identified the possible needs for instream flow in each reach of the river. The committee ruled out the need for water in the lower reaches of the river for spawning purposes. The out-of-stream committee reviewed water needs for types of agriculture practices and the amount of water needed to provide 70% to proratable districts during drought years.

Work Group Meeting: The Work Group meeting on July 28th will focus on conceptual engineering results for Yakima water supply projects. The two main storage projects identified are Wymer Reservoir off the Yakima River in the Yakima River Canyon and enlargement of Bumping Lake. Wymer would store approximately 162,000 A/F of water withdrawn from the Yakima River and Bumping would increase to 190,000 A/F. Bumping Lake enlargement which has been considered and rejected many times in the past 50 years due in large part to environmental concerns is opposed by the Seattle Audubon Society.

Karl Wirkus, Reclamation Pacific NW Regional Director, and Ted Sturdevant, Director of the Washington Department of Ecology, spoke to the Work Group at the June 23rd meeting. Karl said working toward a soluble tool box of solutions was necessary. Energy, power savings and production are important. Ted emphasized the process needed to meet the needs broadly. Not everyone will get everything they want. Climate change creates urgency in the Yakima Basin. Both gentlemen spoke highly of the process being used here in the basin to try to solve the water problems.

Water Needs: All the water in the Yakima Basin is already spoken for and our current supply system does not meet all of the needs for instream flow for fish and out-of-stream use. A letter sent to the Work Group of the Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Program from the Boards of Commissioners of Benton, Kittitas, and Yakima Counties requested that the program provides an adequate water supply. We in the basin don’t want to get a second best solution. The counties encouraged the Work Group to make sure we get the water needed immediately to continue to build a stronger economy and to provide environmental benefits. The commissioners requested that the availability, costs, and benefits of delivering main stem Columbia River water into the Yakima Basin needs to be considered along with the other projects. There is a need to provide enough water in the basin for future use particularly due to climate change.

Water Needed: The economy of the Yakima Basin is primarily agricultural. In other basins in the Northwest, where fish need more water, the water has come from out-of-stream use. With climate change in our future, not enough water will be available in the basin to meet everyone’s needs every year. A proposal to increase salmon recovery in the Yakima Basin could lead to a reduction of water for agriculture, as has happened in other basins in the Northwest, without a large supply of new water in the YRBWEP being developed.

See updated information at www.ybsa.org

YBSA Monthly Report
May, 2010

IWRMP Work Group: The May Work Group meeting was canceled. The consultants, staff (DOE & BOR) and the instream and out of stream committees will meet to continue developing information for the June 23rd Work Group meeting

Washington Water Research Center at WSU: A request for a peer review of methods for a water needs assessment for out of stream use. The analysis of water needs will distinguish between non-proratable who have 100% water rights and proratable who in past droughts received less than 50% of their needs. The highest priority of the IWRMP plan is to address existing supply deficiencies. Climate change will be incorporated using simple percentage adjustments.

Instream Flow Needs Assessment: The staff and the instream flow committee will validate stream flow needs and prioritize by river reach. For dry years the focus will be on improving winter and spring flow habitat conditions, and meet out of stream demands in a way that maximizes benefits for fish. Instream flow needs at critical reaches of the Yakima River system should be identified.

Fish Habitat: The objective will be to quantify fish habitats and population effects of the IWRMP plan on Steelhead, spring/summer Chinook, fall Chinook, Coho, Bull Trout, and Sockeye. The habitat committee will describe the addition and subtraction of habitat available and population abundance of the six local fish species from fish passage, reservoir improvements, and projects that alter flow in the basin.

Fish, Agriculture, and Municipal Needs: After 6+ years and $18 million, the Yakima River Basin Storage Feasibility Study, completed by the Bureau of Reclamation, identified freed water for the Yakima Basin. With Pumped Storage providing for the out of stream needs for the Roza and Sunnyside Irrigation Districts between 400,000 and 600,000 acre/feet would be available for fish passage, habitat improvements, and flood plain expansion.

With the additional freed water managed to maximize benefits for fish an additional 500,000 to 1,000,000 anadromous salmonids could return annually. It appears that the evaluation by the out of stream, instream, and habitat committees could prioritize the available freed water that would be available during consecutive drought years and climate change.

Water Available May 31, 2010: USBR and NRCS Reports:

Basin Snowpack Summary Reservoir Capacity
Upper Yakima Basin 71% average Cle Elum 78% full
Lower Yakima Basin 97% average Kachess 86% full
Rimrock 87% full
Bumping 88% full
Total Available Capacity of the 5 Reservoirs
1,065,400
873,194 content May 31, 2010
192,206 acre/feet = 82%
The 1,000,000 acre/feet available when all 5 reservoirs are filled to capacity only provides 1/3 of the water needs of the Yakima Basin; 2/3 is provided by snowpack when available.

See updated information at www.ybsa.org

YBSA Monthly Report
April, 2010

Work Group Participation: Yakima Basin Storage Alliance (YBSA) continues to participate with the Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project 2009 Work Group during 2010. The basin study effort will evaluate potential actions for addressing the water and aquatic resource needs of the Yakima River Basin. A goal of sufficient instream flows and out-of-stream needs during consecutive drought years is paramount to solving the water needs of the basin for future generations. Since all water in the Yakima Basin is already spoken for and potential climate change changing the amount of snow pack and the timing of runoff an inter-basin transfer of water using a pump/storage needs to be considered. A scorecard identifying the cost and benefit for more water and fish of each proposal is crucial when seeking funding for the plan..

Letter from Energy Secretary: Energy Secretary urges pump/storage investment to support an expanded electricity transmission grid. In a letter from Secretary of Energy Steven Chu in response to a letter from the four Pacific Northwest Governors stated pump/storage has unique potential in the Pacific Northwest. A percentage of wind generation has already been integrated into the region transmission system than anywhere else in the nation.

BPA: Stephen Wright, Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), speaking to the water and power committee on natural resources of the United State House of Representatives stated pump/storage is one way to facilitate wind integration. Elliot Mainzer (BPA) testimony stated BPA is working with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory on their study on various storage options including pumped storage.

Additional Benefits of Pump/Storage: In addition to water for fish, agriculture, and municipal growth pump/storage of Columbia River water for the Yakima Basin would provide an opportunity to support the region’s transmission system and could provide electricity for the Yakima Basin including the Yakama Nation electrical distribution system.

More Water: YBSA’s interest in creating more water for the Yakima Basin lies with a plan which would implement the three criteria listed in the legislation approved by Congress. The criteria included a more normal flow in the Yakima River for fish, not less than 70% of the water needed for proratable irrigation districts during droughts, and water for municipal growth for the next 50 years. The Yakima River Basin Storage Feasibility Study completed by the Bureau of Reclamation identifies a solution.

See updated information at www.ybsa.org

YBSA Monthly Report
March, 2010

Drought: The Yakima River Basin is facing another drought in 2010. YBSA will continue to seek a solution to drought conditions that affect salmon and the economy in the Basin every couple of years.

Work Group Direction: YBSA continues to participate in the Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Program but are concerned with the direction it is taking. The plan does not provide the answer needed to create a more normal river to enhance salmon recovery, provide a minimum of 70% of water necessary for junior water districts, and provide sufficient water for municipal and industrial growth. With 67% of average snow pack available as of April 2nd and the reservoirs only partially full (see the Teacup Diagram below) any additional storage created in the Basin may not produce necessary results.

Only Solution: The only possible solution for salmon recovery and the economy is an inter-basin transfer and storage of Columbia River water for the Yakima Basin. YBSA has asked the Work Group to develop a scorecard that shows the amount of water available from each project. The scorecard should consist of such items as cost, the number of fish, and the cost/benefit ratio for each project. The habitat and fish portion of the Work Group plan fits nicely with the large amount of water that would become available with Columbia River pump/storage. Our concern is that if we create a program that does not provide the results necessary to correct our water problem, in the future we will be faced with the same problem we have at the present time, and it will cost a lot more to accomplish what could be done today.

PROVISIONAL DATA – SUBJECT TO CHANGE!

Average daily streamflows indicated in cubic feet per second.
Reservoir levels current as of midnight on date indicated.

See updated information at www.ybsa.org

YBSA Monthly Report
February, 2010

Comprehensive Watershed Planning: YBSA continues to endorse the criteria that were given to the Bureau of Reclamation by Congress which would find a solution to the frequent droughts (like what may happen in 2010) that occur in the Yakima Basin. The December, 2008 Final Planning Report/Environmental Impact Statement on the Feasibility Study which would bring and store water for irrigation purposes from the Columbia River to the Yakima Basin would have accomplished that task but was discarded because of cost. We need a program that provides enough water for fish with a more normal flow in the Yakima River, water to provide a minimum of 70% of the water needed during droughts for the proratable Irrigation Districts and water for municipal and industrial growth for the next 100 years.

YBSA believes that the following questions need to be answered before we adopt a plan. The proposed plan would not come close to solving the water problems in the next 30 years. The following should be documented in the discussion about the Integrated Water Resource Management Plan.
1. Pumping costs – the rate presented does not compare with the rates quoted for the Odessa Project, the Umatilla Project, and the pump/storage of Columbia River water (Black Rock).
2. Are the proposed projects economically justified and what are the benefits of each project pertaining to fish, instream flow, and drought relief.
3. Does the proposed direct pump of Columbia River water to the Yakima Basin take into consideration the restrictions to removing water from the Columbia during July and August and other months when ther is not an adequate supply in the Columbia River?
4. Since one of the goals was to return the Yakima and Naches Rivers to a more normal flow, there needs to be a study to determine the biologically based target flows needed in the Yakima Basin. That could be done by SOAC which exists today or an outside biologist with working knowledge of the flows needed from the head waters to the confluence of the Yakima and Columbia Rivers.
5. The proposed water supply surface storage projects should be evaluated as to the probability of being built because of environmental concerns.

Work Group Process: YBSA will continue to participate in the DOE/BOR Work Group planning process. The Integrated Water Resource Management Plan needs to be completed but not without a large amount of stored water for instream flow and fish.

Possible Drought: On March 10th the Bureau of Reclamation will report on the snow pack and water available for 2010. This will be the first report on the total water supply available for instream (fish) and out of stream (agriculture) use this summer. The report will provide the farmers an estimate of how much water will be available. Decisions will be made on what should be planted and how to manage the existing crops that drive the economy of the Yakima Basin.

Final Report: The Final Report of the Preliminary Integrated Water Resource Management Plan (IWRMP) for the Yakima Basin developed by the Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project (YRBWEP) 2009 Work Group includes a surface storage proposal as part of the IWRMP. If Wymer is the only storage reservoir that could be completed we would be left with insufficient storage to provide the water necessary for our economy. See the following table from the IWRMP Preliminary Report for the Yakima Basin which lists the preliminary implementation cost estimates.

Compilation of Preliminary Implementation Cost Extimates
Phase/Project Costs ($M) Low High Source
Phase I
Fish Passage (Cle Elum, Bumping, Clear) 125 150 Estimate based on Reclamation’s 2008 Fish Passage Draft PR, indexed costs to October, 2009 (assume Clear Lake = $5M)
Conveyance Improvements at Wapatox 2 4 Estimate based on 2008 Yakima Steelhead Recovery Plan
Roza Power Subordination No capital cost; lost revenue would be incurred
Chandler Power Subordination No capital cost; lost revenue would be incurred
KRD Main Canal/South Branch Modification 8 12 Estimate based on CH2M Hill 1999 report, indexed costs to October, 2009
Cle Elum 3’ Pool Raise 20 40 Estimate based on 2000 Cle Elum Improvements Project Cost Estimate Summary Report, indexed costs to October, 2009
Keechelus-to-Kachess Pipeline 55 65 Doubled Reclamation estimate from 2006 to account for twice capacity, indexed costs to October, 2009
Wymer Reservoir (162kaf)
Wymer Mitigation 1,200 1,600
10 10 Estimate from Reclamation FEIS and Ecology FEIS
Preliminary Ecology Estimate
Bumping Reservoir Enlargement (160-190 kaf)
Bumping Reservoir Enlargement Mitigation 600 1,000
20 20 Estimate $3,000-5,000/AF new storage
Preliminary Ecology Estimate
Reservoir Inactive Storage (100 kaf) 25 50 Estimate, assumed pump station
Municipal Aquifer Storage 4 6 Estimate
Groundwater Infiltration 40 100 20-50 kaf x $2,000/AF (assumes implementation, not just pilot)
Mainstem Floodplain Restoration 90 110
Habitat Enhancement Projects 50 70 Habitat Enhancement Subcommittee Recommendations
Agricultural Conservation (YRBWEP+ Enhanced) 300 300 Estimate from Reclamation and Ecology FEIS
Municipal Conservation 1 3 Estimate from Anchor (2007)
Facilitate Market Transfers No capital cost; $4-10M annual cost during drought (20-50 kaf x $200/AF
Phase I & II Evaluations 25 50
Subtotal: Phase I 2,575 3,590

See updated information at www.ybsa.org