Our 'preferred alternative' to the Shasta Dam Raise is "don't."
Comments on the Draft Supplemental EIS (DS-Environmental Impact Statement) are due on September 21. 2020 by 5 pm to David Brick (email@example.com). Write a short comment about the project now!
The Trump Administration has a problem; they’ve promised their supporters in California that they will raise Shasta Dam and flood part of the protected McCloud River. But under the California Wild & Scenic Rivers Act, the state can’t issue them Clean Water Act permits and the Obama-era final environmental impact statement (FEIS) for the project concedes that the reservoir expansion is in conflict with state law.
What are they trying to do?
- Prepare a supplemental EIS that they hope will erase the need for Clean Water Act permits from the state.
- Erase the honest FEIS language about conflict with state law and try to reinterpret the state Wild & Scenic Rivers Act so that it doesn’t protect the McCloud River.
What can you do?
Ask Bureau of Reclamation to prepare an honest supplemental EIS that concedes that the project is in conflict with state, that they can’t get state permits and approvals for the dam raise, and that the project is in conflict with federal water law which requires the Administration to comply with state law.
From there, they need to prepare a Record of Decision for the project conceding the obvious and selecting a “no action” alternative and close out the project.