TRUTH OR CONSEQUENCES ON DONNER SUMMIT

At the Friday, December 14 Sierra Lakes County Water District (SLCWD) meeting, Mike Livak, project director for Royal Gorge LLC (RG), demonstrated an amazing dexterity with words, all aimed at dodging a simple question: Why, after Mr. Livak assured the SLCWD board at the October water board meeting that the "Water Supply Alternatives" document would be submitted to SLCWD and the public at the same time it was presented to Placer County, did RG then transmit it to Placer County, but fail to give it to SLCWD and the public, as they had promised? (As a side note, the RG document provided to the county was marked with a disclaimer stating that SLCWD had not seen or approved it, and notation that it was to be transmitted to SLCWD board and public at the same time county received it.)

Word play time.  In response to SLCWD board questions concerning RG's failure to give them  "Water Supply Alternatives" as promised , Mr. Livak adroitly juggled "promised" with "intended"- don't ever ask him what "is" means, or you'll be in for a long, confusing journey.  In real life, we all know that if you tell someone you'll do something, you're expected to follow through and do it or people will feel that you're neither reliable nor trustworthy.  In RG Developer Land (next door to Alice in Wonder Land, and Through the Looking Glass Land), words apparently mean what the speaker intends them to mean- neither more nor less. 

One wonders what compelling consideration could have gotten in the way of RG making good on their "intent" to give the document to SLCWD? Moreover, why is RG, and their spokesman/word artiste playing "fractured definitions", leaving whatever credibility they had in a bank of exhaust-stained snow? My conjecture is that these documents submitted to the county, and especially their "Water Supply Alternatives" booklet, which should have by rights been presented to SLCWD before submission to the county, as SLCWD is the proper agency to rule on water issues, are such shocking doozies that RG knows the public is going to raise an outcry once they see them.

These documents were given to the Placer County on the Wednesday before Thanksgiving, while at the same time RG posted on their updates page that they anticipated a submission, "after the first of the year". Why would anyone play this sort of game, except perhaps to buy time- time to keep the locals quiescent while investors were courted for a much needed infusion of cash perhaps?  The fact that RG has placed the lakeside property that was to have been their Ski Camp beach access to Serene Lakes  on the market for $1.5 million does cause one to wonder whether serious retrenchment might not be the order of the day for developers on Donner Summit.

What could be so awful in these documents and plans that RG, with the apparent complicity of Placer County, shirks exposing them to the light of day? Here's some guesses:

In order to fill the two (or perhaps more) artificial lakes RG intends to blast in the Royal Gorge Cross Country Ski Resort area, RG must procure water.  Now, they're apparently cobbling together bits of ground water from here and there, possibly including water from SLCWD's two emergency wells- the ones laden with arsenic and manganese.  It would be no surprise if other ground water sources are similarly contaminated- but, hey, who cares about a few more minerals in your drinking water? And maybe they'll even propose piping up that water from Rainbow Lodge, the water they've been shipping away in trucks since 1988 without a Placer County Conditional Use Permit.

That ground (and maybe spring) water will provide but a drop in the bucket- RG needs more, and it's going to come from one, or two places- Serene Lakes, and possibly a drowned Van Norden Meadow.  

Now, for Serene Lakes, they are most likely proposing some species of "dynamic lake level management".  That means they'll attempt to convince us that our lake won't be harmed, and that Serena Creek (class one trout stream) really doesn't need water- fish are just so overrated.  Here's the scheme- raise the dam a little bit, and during melt, capture all the water that now feeds Serena Creek, and the headwaters of the North Fork of the American River, and pump it up to the "Ponds at Lake Camp".  Drain the "Ponds at Lake Camp" up until mid- summer, and then start drawing water from Serene Lakes, reasoning that nobody will care later in the season that the Serene Lakes have become pestilential puddles and algae incubators. 

 As for raising dam levels on Serene Lakes, RG had a study conducted wherein they put little measurement sticks on various lakefront properties showing where the water level would be with the Dulzura dam raised 6 inches, 12 inches, and 18 inches.  It appears some properties could have up to 50 feet of greenbelt, and private property inundated by dam raising.  Some properties, particularly on Island Way, could find a new definition of "waterside living", as in water lapping at their porches. So RG has to develop some mighty good PR, where they say to homeowners, who by now might be getting a litigious look in their eyes, "Folks, your property is a tad under water anyway during melt,  so just look aside while we keep it a just a little bit more under water for a short while longer"  Homeowners might not be quick to fall for this one, because of concerns about death of trees in the greenbelt, damaged landscaping, and problems with hardscape and foundations due to a raised water table- plus, by now, many are learning that more than a grain of salt is to be taken with any assurances made by RG- maybe a whole salt mine is required after RG's latest demonstration , at the December SLCWD meeting, of  exactly how good they "intend" their word to be.

This "Secret-draft-hush-hush" water alternative document could also contain information about RG's proposals to dredge Lakes Serena and possibly Dulzura. What it probably doesn't reveal is that dredging will only increase water storage capacity in the lakes a minimal amount, an amount  not worth the environmental and nuisance costs of tinkering with natural alpine lakes.

Also, this memo could have more definite details on what Mr. Livak told a Reno Journal Gazette reporter was RG's"least preferred alternative", the damming of Van Norden Meadow.  As Van Norden Meadow is the lynchpin of the headwaters of the South Yuba River, and as the South Yuba River has a large constituency of concerned citizens,  the South Yuba River Citizens League, the longer RG keeps that particular rabbit under the hat, the longer they have to reel in support for their project before, well, before all dickens breaks loose.

Of possibly greater significance than the uglies RG's Water Supply Alternatives undoubtedly contains, are what uglies are omitted--and the longer they keep the report, and its glaring omissions under wraps, the less likely people are to start noticing exactly what new clothes the emperor isn't wearing.

For starters, RG's proposed Ski Camp sits astride a major component of the Serene Lakes's watershed.  Their construction on that parcel will involve massive clear cutting and removal of vegetation.  The trees and plants that currently grow on the Ski Camp parcel help mediate snow melt, lessening the risk of flood during periods of rapid melt. The removal of trees and plants will increase the risk of flooding; the subsequent covering of the area with ski runs and lifts, over 600 units, the parking lots needed for the units, and the tangle of driveways and roadways necessary to service those units, will essentially be "paving paradise to put up a parking lot"--in this case a parking lot whose barrenness and impermeable surfaces will both increase the risk of flooding, and accelerate the melt, so that time available to pump water off to fill the "ponds at Lake Camp" may very short indeed, putting further pressure on to drain water off from the Serene Lakes very early in the season. (an aside here- RG's proposals that all walking paths will be natural or permeable is risible--those paths would be difficult to maintain in a safe manner in winter, and mucky much of the rest of the year--throw in ADA requirements for accessibility, and you'll see they're just pulling assurances out of thin air)

At present time, measurable impact to the volume of the Serene Lakes from water draw for consumption begins in June, in an average snow fall year; before that time there is enough melt water, including water that flows over into Serena Creek, to the benefit of the trout, and the North Fork of the American River, to produce a sort of equilibrium.  However, drought years cause measurable impact earlier, for obvious reasons.  Build- out of all the lots in the currently platted Serene Lakes subdivisions will undoubtedly cause earlier measurable draw downs, so the question is how early?  Perhaps April.  Add in global warming to the mix, along with the stripping of the bulk of the trees and naturally occurring vegetation on ski camp, and we'll be looking at less snow, less ground absorption of water, with a faster run off, and the very real specter of wells drying up, and massive tree die off.  I'm almost positive an analysis of that isn't included in RG's Water Supply Alternatives document.

The list of things RG should be telling us, and isn't, or things they really don't want us to know, could be quite a long, strange list indeed. It seems to me they're unwilling to present us with the truth, in an open and transparent manner, because they fear the consequences.  What they don't seem to grasp is that the longer they shield the truth from the public, the greater will be the consequences to their reputation as a company anyone would trust with Donner Summit's environment.