Skagit County: Seattle City Light ‘getting away with’ investing little in salmon recovery
Compared to other regional hydropower operators, City Light is at the bottom of the list when it comes to spending on fishing. The utility calls the comparison “unfair”.
From the operators of hydropower plants in the Pacific Northwest so far Seattle City Light has contributed the smallest amount of money to the salmon production Federal data.
The City works Three dams on the Skagit River: Gorge, Diablo and Ross, which together generate about 20% of the electricity used by Seattle residents and businesses. Hydropower is called “green electricity” because no fossil fuels are burned and no direct emissions are released into the atmosphere.
However, the energy generated by dams and power plants is at the expense of the environment. Scientists have long known that dams injured fish by closing off the spawning habitat. They also trap gravel, fine sediment, and wood, which are needed to keep the habitat from disappearing downstream.
That is why Congress changed that 35 years ago Federal Power Act to address these effects. Since 1986 the Law states In order to obtain a license to operate a hydropower project, a utility company must “adequately and fairly protect, mitigate and improve fish and wildlife that are affected by the development, operation and management of the project”.
Seattle’s dams on the Skagit got its last license for the project from the Federal Energy Regulation Commission (FERC) 1995, nine years after the mandate to mitigate and protect fish and wildlife. Under that license, Seattle agreed to issue $ 6.3 million to fish. The public utility later voluntarily invested an additional $ 5.5 million to support targeted recovery efforts for species that were placed on the Endangered Species List.
Seattle City Light has spent the combined $ 12 million on the purchase of more than 13,400 acres of wildlife sanctuary in the Skagit watershed. They have developed and restored salmon habitat and partnered with government and tribal scientists on multi-million dollar research projects.
However, this investment does not match what other dam operators have contributed since the federal law on electricity supply was changed.
Five years after the last Seattle license Tacoma Powerinvested $ 40 million in his in 2000 Cowlitz River Project. The money was used to build an infrastructure that allows fish such as Coho salmon, chinook and steelhead to safely get around the Mossyrock and Mayfield dams.
Six years after Seattle City Light was re-approved Eugene water and electrics $ 64 million spent on that McKenzie River protect the fish with upgrades, including fish strainers.
In 2002, Chelan County borough invested $ 510 million to install fish passages around the Rocky Reach Dam on the Columbia River.
Skagit County’s natural resources attorney Will Honea calculated the investments made by utilities in the northwest for the megawatt capacity of each project. His department concluded that Seattle City Light has invested 37 times less than the regional average to aid salmon healing.
“It’s outrageous,” said Honea. “It’s not environmental justice. We have to do this together. And Seattle just isn’t making an adequate contribution, and that seems pretty inconsistent with the moral authority they pretty often claim on environmental issues.”
“Unfair” and “misleading” comparison
Seattle City Light executives said comparing their project to others in the area was “unfair” and “misleading”. Representatives said their license was the oldest in the region and shouldn’t stand up to newer licenses as environmental laws are now stricter and of course would require more investment.
“Some have compared Seattle City Light’s ‘fish investment cost’ to other hydropower projects in terms of dollars spent per megawatt generation. This is an inaccurate and misleading comparison as these projects run in different environments and therefore cannot be easily compared with a simple dollar to megawatt metric. The aim is to responsibly mitigate the impact of the hydropower project on the surrounding ecosystem. In this regard, each project is unique, ”wrote Julie Moore, City Light’s communications director, in an email to KING 5.
Seattle is applying to FERC for a new license to operate its project for decades to come. The current license expires in 2025, but fierce negotiations have been going on between the utility and those involved for more than two years over the terms of a new contract.
“I think a better comparison will be to see how much our investment level compares to others after being re-licensed,” said Debra Smith, general manager and CEO of Seattle City Light. “I don’t think it’s fair to compare a recently re-licensed project with something that was re-licensed or last licensed so many years ago.”
Stakeholders said it was wise to look into and compare what other projects have been done in the area to support salmon production. Native American ways of life and contract rights. On the Skagit, chinook salmon, steelhead and bull trout are on the list of endangered species that are critically endangered.
“I think it’s perfectly fair to compare City Light to other projects,” said Upper Skagit Indian Tribe senior biologist Jon-Paul Shannahan. Seattle City Light has not proposed anything (in the ongoing negotiations) other than ways to make more money. “
“Seattle does not want to be compared to the significant salmon investment that other dam operators have made in the Pacific Northwest,” said Skagit County’s Honea required to develop adequate environmental policies. Seattle’s motivation is clear: they don’t want to spend a lot of money to save salmon on the Skagit. “
While Seattle’s habitat containment efforts have focused on habitat acquisition, restoration and exploration, the utility did not invest in the big dollar project to install fish passages. This explains why the city’s salmon investment numbers are lower than others.
For decades, Seattle City Light has said the fish passage would be a waste of money because of its dams Do not affect salmon. in the public data and public newsThe utility company claimed their dams were built accidentally over natural fish barriers including rugged canyons and massive boulders. But now scientists from tribes of the Skagit Basin and every state and federal natural resource agency do not believe in the natural fish barrier theory.
Work of the National Park Service and the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe has been around for the past six years Evidence provided allowing salmon and other species to navigate the areas, says Seattle City Light, would keep fish out.
“[The National Park Service] questioned [the areas in question] and found no evidence of a fish passage barrier between the Gorge Powerhouse and Gorge Dam using the best available science and best practices from the Washington Department for Fish and Wildlife, ”Park Service scientists wrote in a public document submitted to the FERC in October was submitted for the new registration.
“[Recent work] support the Puget Sound [Salmon] The restoration plan concludes that there is no insurmountable barrier downstream of the Gorge Dam and that the dam is the ultimate barrier to passage upstream and access to a potentially suitable habitat for anadromous species. ” wrote scientists by NOAA Fisheries in filings filed with FERC in October.
Although all of the stakeholder agencies involved concluded that through some sort of fish passage system, salmon could benefit from access to the additional 37% of the river blocked by the dams, representatives from Seattle City Light would not agree to investigate the idea of fish passage until December .
The utility agreed to study the possibility of fish crossing under the new license across all three dams on the day after the broadcast of KING 5 first story in this series in February.
“[Seattle City Light] was only interested in their status quo, the status quo of their lower dollar, ”Shannahan said. “There was no signal or offer from them to do what was right for fish.”
Seattle City Light said it was “factually inaccurate” to say the utility spent $ 12 million on reducing and improving fishing on the Skagit. They estimate the contribution at $ 30 million when they factor in potential lost revenue as they adjust the rivers to protect post-project spawning grounds, incubation and rearing.
“By prioritizing salmon over power generation, FERC estimated that City Light would lose $ 23.7 million in 1990 ($ 51.4 million in 2020),” wrote Moore of City Light. “Comparing just two categories of spending overlooks the fact that ecosystems are much more complex and interdependent. The work we are doing to diversify wildlife and improve forest health is also critical to restoring fish. “
Smith, general manager of Seattle City Light, said the public utility was ready to spend what it would take to protect the salmon under the new license.
“[We have] no interest in being cheap here. We want to do the right thing. We want to follow science, ”said Smith. “And we will be able to negotiate the specific terms of the license in a way that makes sense and addresses the concerns of all people who rely on the river and the watershed to make a living and a lifestyle.”
In April Seattle City Light Committed Spend $ 20 million on 33 studies to determine the terms under a new license. But 17 stakeholder organizations, including three Native American tribes, NOAA Fisheries, the National Park Service, the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the Skagit County government filed public documents this month criticizing the utility’s continued approach .
“Without basic scientific data, state and federal agencies cannot fulfill their legal responsibilities to protect the Skagit River, recover salmon and orca, and ensure that the tribe’s contractual rights are meaningful and respected,” wrote Steve Edwards, chairman the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community. “We don’t understand why City Light has declined requests for basic scientific data to inform the dam re-approval process.”
“If the people of Seattle understood how little they are doing to restore salmon, they would be amazed. They would press for this inequality to be corrected, ”he said Skagit County Commissioner Lisa Janicki. “It’s not too late. Seattle City Light can change their approach. They can choose their approach, but they need to take on more responsibility. And this is the time.”