Calaveras Dam draft EIR draws mixed response: environmental advocates press for migratory flows while labor and business stress water security and jobs

San Francisco Public Utilities Commission staff and planning department environmental reviewers presented the draft environmental impact report for the Calaveras Dam Replacement Project and heard hours of public testimony on fisheries, flows and construction impacts.

SFPUC General Manager Ed Harrington and Project Manager Dan Wade opened the session with a technical overview: Calaveras Reservoir is the system’s largest local storage and currently operates at roughly 35–40 percent of historic capacity because of seismic restrictions. The replacement dam would restore capacity to approximately 97,000 acre‑feet, improve seismic performance, allow continued reservoir operation during construction and, where feasible, provide managed releases to support resident trout and the long‑term restoration of migratory salmonids in Alameda Creek.

The public comment period produced two broad lines of testimony. Environmental and river‑restoration groups — including the Tuolumne River Trust, Alameda Creek Alliance, and allied organizations — urged the SFPUC and planning staff to model flow regimes for migratory fish and to align EIR mitigation and proposed operations with federal and state resource agencies (NOAA Fisheries, California Department of Fish and Game). Jesse Rader (Tuolumne River Trust) and others argued the draft EIR’s flows are designed for resident trout and do not supply the spring pulses and migration flows required to support successful steelhead and salmon runs; they requested the EIR analyze higher flow alternatives and stronger mitigation measures to avoid Endangered Species Act conflicts.

Labor and local business speakers supported the project as essential for regional water security and job creation; they urged the commission to keep the EIR process moving so construction can proceed once mitigation and regulatory requirements are satisfied. Operating Engineers and building trades representatives said the dam project could provide hundreds of construction jobs at a time of elevated unemployment in multiple Bay Area counties.

SFPUC staff acknowledged the EIR will need to reflect coordination with resource agencies and said a biological assessment and further consultation are under way. Dan Wade said the fish‑flow question is “the crux” of the EIR’s unresolved policy tradeoffs: how much water can be released for fish and still maintain adequate local storage for emergency service. The SFPUC said it expects to continue refinement of flows in coordination with the regulatory agencies and to respond in the comments‑and‑responses document before certification.

The planning commission did not certify or act on the EIR at the meeting; the public comment period for written comments runs through the planning department’s deadline (announced at hearing) and staff said comments would be responded to in the final document. SFPUC indicated construction would not begin until later approvals but estimated a design and permitting timeline that could begin construction in 2011 if approvals and financing proceed.

The hearing highlighted a core conflict common to dam projects: balancing regional infrastructure and public‑safety needs against ecological restoration and species‑protection requirements in downstream waters.