Ledger-Dispatch

By Jerry Budrick (jbudrick@ledger-dispatch.com= )=20

Amador Water Agency officials continue = discussing=20 a plan to raise the level of the dam at the Lower Bear River = Reservoir to=20 boost storage.

Photo by: Jerry=20 Budrick
Raising the level of the dam at = Lower Bear=20 River Reservoir has been on the agenda of the Amador Water Agency for = many=20 years. The agency's four new directors had their first taste of the = complex=20 issues involved in contemplation of such an action Thursday = morning.

In=20 planning for the future, four of the entities that qualify as = stakeholders in=20 Mokelumne River water have been working together to sort things out. In = July=20 2007, the East Bay Municipal Utilities District, AWA, Calaveras County = Water=20 District and Mokelumne River Water and Power Authority agreed to share = the cost=20 of a study of the feasibility on the project.

The concept is to = increase=20 water storage in the reservoir by some 26,000 acre feet by raising the = dam as=20 much as 32 feet above its present level. The initial suggestion of such = a=20 project came from PG&E in 1982 and variations on the theme have = popped up=20 many times since then.

There are more interested parties than = just the=20 four signators to this agreement. Environmental groups like the Foothill = Conservancy, outdoor enthusiasts and PG&E are expected to be = included in=20 future discussions.

The other three entities had already = committed to the=20 funding of the study, in the amount of $30,000 each. AWA's commitment = was=20 expected to be a mere formality, but approval of the agreement as an = agenda item=20 opened Pandora's box to both directors and the public.

Upcountry = activist=20 Wendell Peart availed himself of the opportunity to express his concern = for=20 possible droughts, as well as to question the sense of making current = water=20 users pay for projects that will benefit future users. AWA Director Bill = Condrashoff voiced a similar sentiment, saying, "If we're doing this for = future=20 customers, they should pay for it."

"This project is to address = future=20 needs," said AWA attorney Steve Kronick, who explained that the expenses = of this=20 project should be logged in as costs to participation fees paid by = future=20 customers.

The lengthy discussion about committing to pay = one-fourth of=20 the cost for the feasibility study was brought to an end by Pete Bell of = the=20 Foothill Conservancy. "There's a lot to the Bear River Reservoir = situation," he=20 said. "I've been involved for more than 20 years. My advice is to sign = the=20 agreement or owe 100 percent."

Jerry = Budrick