The Taxpayers Association of El Dorado County requests that an effort be made to resolve very important differences between the approved county general plan and the Sierra Draft Resources Management Plan-Environmental Impact Statement prior to adoption.Although only 2 percent of El Dorado County's 1,155,200 acres is under Bureau of Land Management control, the subject draft plan has proposals negatively impacting El Dorado County that are very important to the county's welfare and future. To its credit, BLM plans to manage its land in the south fork of the American River corridor in accordance with El Dorado County's River Management Plan, but does not similarly do so with respect to the county general plan.
The most objectionable issue to El Dorado County is the designation of any river or stream in the county as "wild and scenic rivers" stated in the draft plan.
Such a designation will further impact the county's already seriously restricted use of its own "county of origin water." The county general plan assumes that:
"An adequate supply of water will be available to serve the county's current population; additional water supplies will be developed to support the projected growth; lack of water availability may change the period of time over which this plan remains valid; and the designation of the American or Cosumnes rivers as 'wild and scenic' or their drainage basins as 'natural recreation areas' would be incompatible with the county's water storage objectives."
Designation of either the south fork (of the American) or the Cosumnes rivers or their tributaries would stymie the county's ability to adequately plan and manage the needed consumptive water for residents, businesses and agriculture during drought conditions and seriously curtail the county's economic growth.
The south fork of the American River watershed area has been under the control of the Sacramento Municipal Utility District for more than 50 years with consumptive water rights going primarily to the city of Sacramento and the income from power generation, in the order of $100,000, going totally to SMUD, which reaps profits of $80 million per year.
This lack of shared benefit from power generation, as is afforded other Sierra watershed counties, robs El Dorado of its rightful source for financing its needed present and future water facilities. Consequently, the benefits of El Dorado County using its own "areas of origin water" must not be further exacerbated with a "wild and scenic river" designation.
It appears that other related areas of the the Sierra Draft Resources Management Plan-Environmental Impact Statement such as "Lands and Realty," "Water Resources," "Forest and Woodlands," should be coordinated to be compatible with the county general plan. BLM's stated actions to "acquire oak woodlands ... for preservation and protection," for example, should be coordinated with the general plan for the protection of oak woodlands.
In attempting to justify a "wild and scenic" designation for the south fork, a discussion on Pages 4-143 states, "However, there appears to be no substantial demand for water and energy at this time. The current system appears to be equipped to handle Central California's water and energy needs for some time."
Considering the many years it now takes to process plans, approvals, financing and construction of dams and their related infrastructure, we disagree with this assumption.
California does not now have facilities to produce the energy it uses; it is an energy importer. California is short on water, particularly in Southern California, where water is imported from the Colorado River and where trouble is imminent. We believe that it is of vital importance to El Dorado County that the "wild and scenic" designation for any river or tributary be deleted from the the Sierra Draft Resources Management Plan-Environmental Impact Statement.
-- Ellen Day
President, Taxpayers Association of El Dorado County
