Nooksack Falls Hydroelectric Project Could Harm Ecosystem

Bob Kelly is director of Nooksack Natural Resources.

The North Fork of the Nooksack River contains habitat for all salmon and trout native to the Pacific Northwest, including threatened chinook and bull trout. Unfortunately, a recently re-started hydroelectric facility could cause serious consequences for the fish, which are listed as “threatened” under the federal Endangered Species Act. In an attempt to prevent this, the Nooksack Tribe is taking steps to help ensure that the operators of this dam abide by federal and state laws requiring protection for fish.

In operation without a license since May, this new incarnation of the Nooksack Falls Hydroelectric Project diverts water from the upper reach of the North Fork, which is very important habitat for chinook, bull trout and other species. Nooksack Natural Resources (NNR) believes the project deserves close scrutiny. NNR is also extremely concerned about the way this hydropower facility is being managed, with few precautions being taken to protect fish populations. Through monitoring and through participation in the licensing process, NNR is working hard to make certain this dam is not allowed to harm our vital natural resources.

Until 1997, when a major fire damaged the facility, Puget Sound Power and Light Company (the company now known as Puget Sound Energy) operated the dam. After the fire, it was effectively abandoned and it fell into disrepair for the next several years.

It remained that way until early this year, when a corporation called Puget Sound Hydro acquired the facility. They began producing power—and dewatering the North Fork of the Nooksack River—in May. Especially during a hot summer like this one, any new water uses should be viewed with skepticism. If this dam gets even close to withdrawing as much as they claim they will, the impact to fish could be devastating.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) recommended minimum flows immediately upstream from the powerhouse ranging from 150-570 cubic feet per second (cfs) to protect fish. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) took a more lenient approach, instead recommending flows between 60 and 100 cfs. Unfortunately, during a March 2003 meeting with U.S. Forest Service, WDFW, and the Washington Department of Ecology, Puget Sound Hydro indicated that they would leave only 30 cfs to spill over Nooksack Falls. Every regulatory agency would agree that this is inadequate.

Besides using precious and increasingly rare water, though, the facility is simply old and outdated. It needs to be upgraded to adequately protect fish. One main concern includes the project’s inability to adequately respond to changes in flow that could strand and kill juvenile fish downstream.

Worse, the dam’s operators are refusing to install simple, common sense fish protection measures. Two prominent examples:

• There are no screens on the water uptakes. Currently, state law requires those screens. Without screens, resident trout can be drawn into the dam’s turbines and killed.

• The dam’s “tail race” has no protective barrier. Fish attracted to the facility’s discharge plume can get inside the tail race, becoming trapped, injured or killed.

Not only are the dam’s operators ignoring state law, they are claiming to be exempt from federal law. The current owner is asserting that site is not subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the governing body responsible for regulating all hydropower projects.

In a strange twist, a second company—Welcome Springs, a company that does not own the facility—acknowledges that FERC does have jurisdiction over the project, and has applied for a license from the federal energy agency. If they are granted a license, presumably the current operators would have to sell the facility to Welcome Springs.

Puget Sound Hydro is trying to get around federal jurisdiction, though, in order to maximize their profits while minimizing fish protection. The company claims that, since the dam has been in continuous use since 1906 (the federal government did not begin regulating dams until 1920), it should be exempt from FERC regulations under a grandfather clause.

There are numerous reasons this argument does not hold up. To name just a few:

• The hydropower facility was abandoned in 1997 and only re-started this year. The six-year gap shows that the dam has not been in continuous operation, and thus does not qualify for the exemption.

• The project impacts federal lands. That means federal jurisdiction applies. The power lines transmitting energy from the dam travel seven miles over U.S. Forest Service property.

• Withdrawing water from the Nooksack River affects the river’s navigability—it could affect passage for kayakers and other recreational users as well as fish passage—which is one of the criteria for FERC jurisdiction.

Puget Sound Hydro is disputing all of these facts, knowing that if even one of them is found to be true, FERC jurisdiction will kick in.

Because of our concerns for threatened chinook, bull trout and other fish species, the Nooksack Tribe has filed a “motion to intervene” with FERC. Intervener status allows us to participate in FERC hearings as a voice for responsible policies; to file briefs advocating for fish in the Nooksack River; and to file for a new hearing if FERC’s ultimate licensing decision is unacceptable.

We are not alone in our concern. Others who are concerned about this project’s impacts on the environment and have also filed for intervener status include: the Washington Department of Ecology; WDFW; the U.S. Department of Agriculture; Northwest Ecosystem Alliance; and American Whitewater.

If the Nooksack Falls Hydroelectric Project were to leave adequate instream flows for all the species that use the river; if the facility underwent upgrades necessary to protect fish, including measures required by state and federal law; and if the operators of the hydropower facility seemed willing to implement common-sense solutions for federally protected species, we would be much less concerned. We are certainly not opposed to all energy projects: we just want to see these projects done right. We are very concerned about hydroelectric projects located in waters that threatened fish call home.

If this dam cannot be operated in a way that protects threatened fish, then it should not be allowed to operate at all. Safeguarding the species of the Nooksack River is an important mission for NNR: we will always keep fighting for the future of all our natural resources. §