LOS ANGELES (CN) — Despite federal findings that a water diversion dam on the Santa Clara River harms several protected fish and bird species, the dam operator refuses to update its infrastructure, environmentalists say in a lawsuit against a conservation district.
Built in 1991, the 25-foot-high Vern Freeman Dam spans 1,200 feet across the Santa Clara River, about 10 miles from Ventura and the Pacific Ocean. The closest city to the dam is Saticoy.
The Wishtoyo Foundation and the Center for Biological Diversity sued the United Water Conservation District under the Endangered Species Act, in Federal Court. The June 2 lawsuit challenges "diversion of flows that deprives fish, especially steelhead, of the ability to migrate to spawning grounds, and deprives native birds of their habitat," Wishtoyo staff attorney Jason Weiner said in an interview.
The environmental groups say that proper operation of the dam will not only preserve steelhead and endangered bird species, but can send enough water downstream for agricultural and municipal uses in the Oxnard Plain.
"Restoring these species to the Santa Clara River is vital to providing nearby residents and the river's marginalized communities, especially Latinos and the Chumash people, with their right to enjoy and benefit from healthily functioning ecosystems," Weiner said.
United's general manager Mauricio Guardado defended the district's conservation efforts.
"We at United are very disappointed and very troubled because this lawsuit appears based on misinformation," Guardado said in an interview.
"We are good environmental stewards and take our duties under the Endangered Species Act very seriously."
Guardado said United in developing a modified fish ramp to help steelhead migrate upstream, and creating a multi-species habitat control plan that is 60 percent complete.
"What's so troubling about this lawsuit is that it will only delay these efforts," Guardado said. "We have already spent millions in general public funds, and a delay will only put the steelhead in a more vulnerable state and lead to more use of public money.
"We want to continue to perform and adhere to our role and responsibilities at the site, but the lawsuit will make that much more difficult."
Guardado said that environmental groups frequently accuse agencies such as his of making excuses for lack of environmental stewardship, but that United has made a point of making its monthly reports public and has a department of biologists, ecologists and engineers devoted to environmental protection.
"We're so disappointed because we've done a lot. We have a goal and a plan and are working side by side with regulatory agencies. We assembled a fish panel of world renowned experts for this purpose and put millions of dollars toward this effort, which hopefully won't go to waste," Guardado said.
"These are comprehensive and complex issues. We haven't ignored them and have taken full responsibility for them. We hope that Wishtoyo will respect that effort and the general public, who will ultimately be the ones paying for these incorrect assumptions."
In July 2008, the National Marine Fisheries Service issued a biological opinion finding that the dam's operation impeded steelhead migration to upstream spawning grounds. Though nearly eight years have passed, United has done nothing to stop unauthorized "take," or harm, of protected species, according to the 82-page lawsuit.