Yreka, Calif. — The Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors voted Tuesday to invite the Karuk tribal leadership to meet and discuss the tribe’s Scott Valley groundwater study.
In a letter dated Nov. 28, the Scott Valley Groundwater Advisory Committee (SVGWAC) formally requested that the board extend the invitation.

“The SVGWAC feels an open discussion with the board and tribe is imperative for understanding the direction and intent of the Karuk tribe’s modeling efforts,” the letter stated. “This will provide the advisory committee with knowledge needed to supply proper advisements in relation to this topic.”

Loran Berck, SVGWAC member and Fort Jones city council member, appeared before the board Tuesday to support the request.

“We are concerned about this duplicate groundwater modeling program because it appears that it’s being done for the purposes of litigation,” Berck told the board.

In 2007, the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (NCRWQCB) added the Scott River to its list of impaired watersheds under its Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) regulatory process. The TMDLs set pollutant limits for bodies of water listed as “impaired” under the Clean Water Act. The Scott River is currently listed as impaired due to what the NCRWQCB says is excessive sediment loads and excessive water temperature.

“As part of the Scott TMDL, the county was encouraged to develop a Groundwater Study Plan,” Siskiyou County Natural Resource Policy Specialist Ric Costales said. “The county worked with the Siskiyou RCD, UC Davis and local residents to craft a plan to study the groundwater. Implementation of the study itself has been conceptually supported by the county.”

Meanwhile, the Karuk Tribe has engaged in its own study to model the Scott River groundwater system.

Some parties involved in the study being sponsored by the NCRWQCB are not happy about the Karuk study now in progress.

“If you want to perpetuate controversy, dueling studies is a perfect way to do it,” Costales said.

Craig Tucker, Klamath coordinator for the tribe, maintains that the Karuk model is prudent and necessary.

“Bottom line, the county model is the minimal effort required to comply with TMDLs,” Tucker said. “We basically need a tool to help us all better understand what restoration options give us the most fish for our dollar. For instance, would flood irrigation help maintain stream flow into the summer? Would several hundred acres of beaver ponds help? What about off-channel storage?”

He said the tribe is focused on developing a model that will provide answers to those kinds of scenarios, adding that the tribe would be willing to share its findings with the county.

Berck, who clarified that he was not speaking for committee chairman Preston Harris, said, “The information that we have is going to be rather broad and scientifically based and factual, which we don’t believe the Karuks are even interested in putting in their model.”

Berck added, “We really are concerned that there may, in fact, be inaccurate data produced by this so-called modeling program.”

“This isn’t politics, this is science,” Tucker told the Daily News.

He explained that he and the hydrology team building the tribe’s model have great respect for UC Davis hydrologist Thomas Harter, Ph.D, who is leading the county-supported study and modeling effort.

Tucker said the tribe’s team is in close contact with Harter and will continue to consult with him throughout the development of their model.

“We’re trying to find solutions that will be good for agriculture, good for fish and cost efficient,” Tucker added.

District 1 Supervisor Jim Cook said he believes communication is key.

“I strongly agree that communication is necessary here because we have two studies going on and we don’t control either of them,” he said, “but we need to make sure people are doing the right thing.

Cook said he thinks a meeting would be “entirely appropriate.”

“The smartest thing to do would be to talk about what’s going on with both of these groups,” he added.

District 5 Supervisor Marcia Armstrong said she was concerned about the timing of the two studies. She said the completion of the tribe’s model would be within the deadline for certain government “decision points” but the NCRWQCB’s model would not.

She was unable to quote the exact decision or deadline at the time.

Armstrong, who made the motion, and Cook, who offered a second, both agreed to represent the board with assistance from Costales, who will draft the letter inviting the Karuk leadership to a preliminary meeting at a location of the tribes choice.

The motion passed by a unanimous vote.