Guys like tony don't understand that. Short-sighted.
Not sure he's credible. But he may have an agenda.
Be careful who you listen to. Lots of disinformation out there.
Aces,
So, please explain why you think I am short-sighted. Read my post. I did not express an opinion one way or the other on whether drawing down Folsom was a good idea. My point was merely to note out that blaming the draw down on smelt is oversimplifying the operations of a very complex system, of which Folsom is only one, medium-sized part. And, the evidence at hand is that smelt have very little to do with the increased releases. My post was based on reviewing on reviewing the current water storage charts for the major northern CA reservoirs, review of inflow/outlfow data from the USBR, and combining that with published information on the subject. One key part of which was recent reports that, based on pressure from the CA congressional delegation, more water was being released for farmers in the SJ valley.
So, here's some more detailed facts: today there will be about 21,0000 cfs entering the delta (almost all of it from the Sacramento River, and just under 25% of that -- 5,000 cfs -- from Folsom Lake). Of that, slightly more than 1/3 (7,700 cfs) will be outflow from the delta to the bay. A larger portion (about 8,800 cfs) will be "exported" via pumping plants, and the remainder, about 4,500 cfs, will be "used" in the delta. "Used" means infiltrated into the ground, evaporated or (most of it) pulled out for irrigation and other consumptive uses within the delta. So, nearly two thirds of the water entering the delta is being used for farming or quenching the thirst of southern CA cities. Is that not enough? Should that num ber be 75%, 90%, 100% (that about where the SJ and Colorado rivers are). Should all of our rivers be dry when they reach the ocean? We're not that far from that. As it is, only one river on the western slope of the Sierras is free flowing the Cosumnes), and it is not one of the largest rivers by any stretch (that's probably why they didn't bother damning it).
Should we be concerned about the lowering of Folsom? Yes, but I wouldn't get that excited about it just yet, as the lake is still at 70% of average for the date, and has more than twice the storage as it did this time last year. I am not privy to the actual plan (Could not find it on line), but I assume that they will cut back on releases from Folsom soon, as it is approaching the time when the cold water from Shasta will be needed for the salmon run.
Am I an expert on water issues in CA? No, but I have done structural work on dozens of dams across the country, including a couple of projects at Folsom Dam (10 years ago, one of which was studying mechanization of the temperature shutters used to control the level at which water is taken out of the lake, and thus the downstream water temperature critical to salmon and steelhead), and in the process, learned a few things about everything from dam operations to the thermal sensitivity of salmon and steelhead (I also payed attention when visiting the hatchery with my kids ).
Not sure why anyone who disagrees with you must have an agenda? Mine: well, besides promoting active transportation and livable cities that are closely related to it. trying to keep discussions here based as much as possible on facts. In this particular case, one of those facts is that the salmon run on the Sacramento river has had two years of nearly complete die off. Given that they mostly return in three-year cycles, this is the critical year for the survival of Ca's largest(?) salmon run. So, at this point, given the amount of water available in northern CA, I'm more concerned about the survival of the species than some risk to Folsom's water supply (after all, they already spent the money to be able to pump from a depleted pool to cover Folsom in an emergency, so the insurance policy is already in affect).
No, I don't know about the muddy water, but I do know they have been dredging at the entrance to the new spillway, so that is a perfectly reasonable explanation.