Upper Truckee River set to meander more naturally
By Kathryn Reed
In many ways, the segment of Upper Truckee River behind Lake Tahoe Airport looks anything but natural.
Guys are out there with what looks like a fire hose watering vegetation. Black berms filled with water are close by. Pumps are draining what will be the new channel.
Scott Carroll talks about the new river channel behind him. Photo/Kathryn Reed
It has the look and feel of a construction zone because it is one.
It was two years ago this month the California Tahoe Conservancy board took a field trip to this location for the ground breaking of the multi-million dollar project that will re-route the river to its more natural curves and bends. The board re-visited the site as part of this month’s meeting.
“By creating meanders, we create diversity. We will rebuild a whole food web,” explained Scott Carroll, the CTC staff member who led the tour.
Diversity comes in the depth of the channel, the plant species as well as wildlife.
A channel was dug closer to the airport, but not far from the current flow to mimic what the river would have looked like before it was straightened out years ago for ranchers’ needs.
In a matter of days officials are expected to make a decision as to whether the vegetation has taken root enough to start using the new channel.
“This vegetation is like rebar in a concrete building. It’s what will hold the bank,” Jennifer Taylor, assistant engineer with South Lake Tahoe, said.
Planning for the project cost $1.4 million, with construction coming in at $6.6 million.
Two concrete fish barriers farther upstream were removed.
Carroll said this type of project is designed to be sustainable so maintenance is not needed in the future.
Throw in a few beaver and the project will be complete.
No wonder this country is going broke. Great projects for those looking to create jobs but where is this money coming from – me? I hope not.
I didn’t think beavers were native to this area.
These are not lake clarity projects, yet Environmental Improvement money is being used. They may even degrade Lake Clarity being you have to move tens of thousands of tons of dirt, creating temporary impacts and forcing the river to re-stabilize, which could take decades. That section on the Truckee River is really stable and there appears to be little erosion, so what is the point. Ok, a couple streambanks have been stabilized, so what…, streambank erosion is only 4% of the loss of Lake clarity basin wide. The potential archeological, greenhouse gas, temporary soil disturbance, western pearlshell mussel, wildlife disturbance makes these projects cost prohibitive. They supply fluvial scientists work and become a means to use environmental money to support some scientist dream and keep them employed. Don’t get me wrong, some CTC projects were a great success, however to take something previously stable, destabilize it, and hope it finds equilibrium is not solving the problem. Upper Truckee River reach 5&6 simply should not happen as the habitat is amazing, fisheries thriving, wildlife incredible, meadow vegetation beautiful and function amazing. That meadow floods already… Leave the river alone….! By constructing projects like these we then force ourselves to have to manage it post construction. Blackwood Canyon is a supreme example of how a scientist’s pet project can go wrong. The previously stable area had some erosion (big whoop), so the USFS goes in, levels hundreds of acres of SEZ, places some logs and throws willows stakes in the ground and walks away. The erosion is insane out there.. I encourage all public interested to check it out. It will make you want to contact a federal and state representative. That project is going to produce more sediment than it will ever be able to reduce in even our kids lifetime, negating all benefits. I will give the CTC some major credit here; they do things meticulously and have revegetated the area, stabilized and thought this out pretty well. The CTC project is way more justified… The point here is that these projects have major temporary impacts with unknown benefits. So why invest a huge percentage of you environmental money in something that has such little known benefit. We know it will need to be maintained and nature (beavers or not) will make the adjustments necessary to correct it. These project are not sustainable… They are designed to be, but they are not. Trout Creek behind my house doesn’t appear sustainable. Agency folks are always out there doing something and its been a decade since construction. By the way, there is still some erosion and the creek appears to be getting wider and deeper. Also, the airport may have something to do with this meadows lack of function. One more thing, recreation projects (like the greenway) may funnel massive amounts of people into sensitive areas, areas where we are to be investing tens of millions of dollars in restoration. Do we want to introduce more people into these sensitive areas? Its only accessible to mountain bikers and hikers and not much erosion is even present, so why do this? Reach 5&6 has some of the most abundant fisheries and wildlife habitat in the entire area. Brook trout, Brown trout, pearshell mussel, water bugs, overhanging vegetation, great horned owl. Wont the lack in vegetation raise stream temperatures anyway. This could be a major problem from water oxygen levels and algae. It would be a crime to move that river… Focus the financial resources in the area that will have the most benefit to the lake. That is “Road System BMPs”…