searsville-theosprey_may2011

Matt Stoecker grew up next to CorteMadera Creek, upstream of SearsvilleDam, and is director of the non-profitcoalition Beyond Searsville Dam. Tofind out more and join the coalitionvisit their website at:BeyondSearsvilleDam.org

Behind the locked gates andtall, barbed wire fencing ofStanford University’sJasper Ridge BiologicalPreserve hides the institu-

tion’s dirtiest and most misunderstoodsecret: Searsville Dam. For 120 yearsthis antiquated dam and artificialreservoir have devastated the SanFrancisquito Creek watershed and SanFrancisco Bay ecosystems.

The obsolete dam

Built between 1888 and 1892 by theSpring Valley Water Company, the 65-foot tall concrete block dam wasintended to divert the captured watersof Corte Madera Creek through apipeline to the Crystal SpringsReservoir, being built to the north, andsupply drinking water to the SanFrancisco Peninsula. When the stag-nant reservoir filled up, the unpleasantsmelling water derailed the originalpurpose and the pipeline was neverbuilt. Searsville Dam never served itsintended purpose as a potable watersource and was taken over by Stanfordin the early 1900s. Today, the reservoiris over 90% filled in with almost 1.5million cubic yards of trapped sedi-ment and may fill in completely in oneor several years, depending on flowsand erosion upstream that awaits inputfrom winter rains, landslides, potentialfires, and movement on the SanAndreas Fault. One thing that mostpeople agree on is that if nothing isdone, the remnant reservoir will com-pletely fill in with sediment in the verynear future. This is not an acceptable

option for most parties involved andfor a variety of safety, biological, andoperational standpoints. The dam pro-vides no flood control function, pro-duces no hydro power, produces nodrinking water, and supplies a smallamount of Stanford’s total “lake” irri-gation water supply. Stanford divertswater from three San FrancisquitoCreek watershed locations and intothis lake system to feed the thirsty golfcourse, playing fields, and landscaping.Searsville Dam is one of the diver-sions. The relatively small amount of

Searsville water could be capturedwith a damless diversion and stored inexpanded and existing off-streamreservoirs.

Salmon and steelhead be dammed

Stanford Historical Society book“The History of Jasper Ridge” recallsthat after construction of SearsvilleDam, the dam caretaker harvestedsalmon at the base of the dam wherethey were blocked. “When the dam was“wasting” (i.e. overflowing) in the win-ter, salmon would swim upstream asfar as the dam. Using a pitchfork, thecaretaker could spear them to supple-ment the family’s diet”. Additionaloral, written, and archeological lines ofevidence support the historic presenceof coho salmon in the redwood-forest-

ed watershed, but none have returnedfor the last half-century. The once siz-able, and still persistent, annual adultsteelhead run has been well document-ed for over a century, with consistentobservations to the present. In the1990s, I watched in amazement as 30-inch steelhead launched against theface of the concrete dam only to fallback in defeat.

The impassable Searsville Dam hasbeen identified as the most limitingfactor to the persistence and recoveryof steelhead in the San FrancisquitoCreek; one of the last, sizable, wildpopulations left in streams of the SanFrancisco Bay. The Center forEcosystem Management andRestoration identified the watershed asa key “anchor watershed” for wildsteelhead recovery in the SanFrancisco Bay. Interestingly, politicsplayed a role in preserving the creek.The lower mainstem of SanFrancisquito Creek was designated theboundary between San Mateo andSanta Clara counties long ago.Fortunately, the two counties couldn’tagree upon how to put the creek in aconcrete channel, like other Baystreams, or on who would pay for it.The result is that the creek is one ofthe few urban streams left that drainsinto the Bay without concrete channelsand in a relatively natural state. Theheadwater streams of the watersheddrain extensively protected openspace lands along the spine of theSanta Cruz Mountains above the townsof Woodside and Portola Valley. Forthese reasons, steelhead continue tohold on below Searsville Dam and inthe other two tributaries downstream.

Native rainbow trout, the descen-dents of sea-run steelhead, also persistin Corte Madera Creek and tributariesupstream of the dam. These upstreamtrout are also at risk of extinction dueto the upstream migration barrier of

6 MAY 2011 THE OSPREY • ISSUE NO. 69

Continued on next page

Stanford University’s Dirty Secret:Searsville Dam

By Matt Stoecker

— Beyond Searsville Dam —

The impassableSearsville Dam is themost limiting factor in recovering the steelhead of San

Francisquito Creek.

Searsville Dam, which has fragmentedand genetically isolated the population,causing inbreeding and susceptibilityto climate change impacts. The ecolog-ical significance of the loss of steel-head and salmon to the upper water-shed cannot be overstated. Historicannual runs of these amazing fishtransported tons of ocean-derivednutrients back to the Bay, up SanFrancisquito Creek, and throughoutthe many headwater streams to thebenefit of dozens of other species ofanimals and even creekside vegetationand the redwood forest. Juvenile steel-head and salmon migrating from SanFrancisquito Creek to the sea, as wellas outmigrating adult steelhead, alsofed marine fishes, birds, seals, dol-phins and even orca whales thousandsof miles away. Like so many others,Searsville Dam has severed that criti-cal flow of nutrients between our conti-nental and oceanic ecosystems.

Over a century of damage continues

The dam and reservoir buried andsubmerged a unique valley where oversix streams flowing from all directionscame together among natural wetlandsbefore squeezing through a smallgorge where the dam was built. Thisintersection of riparian forests,streams, and natural ponds was a criti-cal wildlife corridor for aquatic andterrestrial species and a unique wet-land habitat. The dam’s concrete walland artificial swamp submerged thisnatural wetland ecosystem and is nowfilling it with sediment that is so des-perately needed for wetland survivaland restoration efforts downstream inthe San Francisco Bay.

The warmwater habitat of the rapid-ly disappearing reservoir supportsnon-native and predatory fish, bull-frogs and crawfish. These predatorsdisperse downstream to compete withand prey upon endangered and nativesteelhead, red-legged frogs, SanFrancisco garter snakes, juvenilewestern pond turtles, and other aquat-ic and terrestrial species. Stanford’sown Philippe Cohen and DavidFreyberg report that SearsvilleReservoir is the “primary source” ofnon-native fish in the watershed andthat non-native “fish species, both

crawfish, and bullfrogs are known tobe detrimental to steelhead and red-legged frogs.” Surprisingly Stanford’srecently proposed HabitatConservation Plan (HCP) states thatthe Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve“is not operated as a refuge for nativeplants and animals” and the HCPincludes no proposal to rectify thisdestructive condition. This situationmakes one wonder exactly what isbeing “preserved” at Jasper Ridge andif the Preserve’s stated mission is con-sistent with Stanford’s stated goals ofprotecting endangered species andnative habitat. There are evidentlymultiple issues of consistency.

The draft HCP also states that “about3 to 5 miles of suitable spawning habi-tat” for steelhead occurs upstream ofSearsville Dam. Our analysis identifiedalmost 2.5 miles of steelhead habitatburied and submerged by the reser-voir and trapped sediment alone.National Marine Fisheries Service(NMFS) recently completed a separateanalysis and estimated that 20 or moremiles of upstream steelhead habitatmay be blocked by the dam. This isjust one of the dozens of significantinaccuracies we identified in

Stanford’s plan and included in BeyondSearsville Dam’s public comment let-ters for the draft HCP and draftEnvironmental Impact Statement(DEIS).

The administrative director at JasperRidge, Philippe Cohen, often describesthe artificial reservoir as somehowbeing integrated into the environment,after more than a century, and valu-able as wetland habitat that supportshigh densities of birds and bats. Thisportrayal fails to recognize that theartificial reservoir destroyed exten-sive natural wetland habitat thatnative species evolved with, andSearsville operations continue todegrade the environment far beyondthe No Trespassing signs surroundingJasper Ridge. The U.S. GeologicalSurvey (USGS) recently reported that“major causes of wetlands loss anddegradation” include “damming,changing nutrient levels, introducingnon-native species to the ecosystem.”Searsville scores three for three there.A Heinz Center report, “Dam Removal:Science and Decision Making,” statesthat “more than half of all the animalsand plants on the endangered species

THE OSPREY • ISSUE NO. 69 MAY 2011 7


Steve Rothert, with American Rivers, ponders the future of Searsville Dam as thelack of bypass flows dewater and degrade the creek below. Photo by Matt Stoecker

Continued from previous page

list owed their precarious positions towater control structures” such asdams.

A vision for the future?

The dam’s supporters often speculatethat removing the dam and reservoirmay have an overall negative impact tothe Jasper Ridge ecosystem despite nostudies to support this notion and evi-dence to the contrary. A recent studyand report by the National Oceanic andAtmospheric Administration (NOAA)and the University of Idaho found thatthis year’s removal of two large dams,and their artificial reservoir habitats,from the Elwha River in Washingtonwould benefit native birds, fish, frogs,salamanders, and other species. “Onthe whole, the negative wildlifeimpacts caused by the dam removalwill be negated by the positive effectson the wildlife of the Elwha.” In addi-tion to the above, Searsville Damremoval could be accomplished whilestabilizing much of the riparian foresthabitat that has grown up on the edgeof the reservoir sediments and retain-ing significant open water habitat athistoric wetland ponds and enhancednatural flood protection features.

As the summer sun heats up theexposed Searsville Reservoir, theaquatic conditions degrade as algaebloom, dissolved oxygen levels drop,and water temperatures and turbidityincrease. The combined impacts ofwater evaporation from the reservoir,water diversions, and no downstreambypass flow agreement at the damcauses the downstream creek to dry upfor a longer period in the summer andfall and water quality to decline. Thesedegraded habitat conditions extenddownstream of the dam the full lengthof San Francisquito Creek to the Bay.The fact that a leading institutionpreaching “water sustainability” andendangered species protection has nooperational bypass flows at a dam, reg-ularly dewaters listed Critical Habitatfor steelhead and other federally listedspecies, and that the resource agenciesare letting them do it, is a sad reportcard on the current state of Stanfordeducation, leadership and publicagency protection of our imperilednatural heritage. The antiquated dam

and its 19th century operations appearto be in violation of over a dozen stateand federal laws.

A flawed Habitat ConservationPlan...again!

Amazingly, Stanford’s current HCPproposal to NMFS and the U.S. Fishand Wildlife Service (USFWS) for theirover 8000 acre campus has requestedthat Searsville Dam and its activitiesbe excluded from the HCP. This is ablatant acknowledgement that the dam

and operations are so far out of envi-ronmental compliance that the HCPwould never be permitted with them init. For at least four of the species theyseek coverage for in the HCP (steel-head, red-legged frog, San Franciscogarter snake, and western pond turtle),Searsville Dam and its operations areone of, if not the, most limiting factorto their persistence and recovery onStanford lands and beyond. On May 1,2011, along with our partner AmericanRivers, Beyond Searsville Dam has




A late 1800’s survey map that shows the proposed Searsville Dam site (upper right)and the unique confluence of meandering streams, wetlands, and small gorge nowburied by the dam and reservoir. A vision for the future?

submitted a letter to NMFS andUSFWS stating that Stanford cannotlegally separate Searsville Dam and itsdiversion activities from the lakewater diversion system for which theyseek coverage and of which Searsvilleactivities are an integral component. IfStanford is unwilling to address themany state and federal non-compli-ance issues related to Searsville in thisHCP, then the federal agencies mustensure that they cannot obtain cover-age for their intergraded and improp-erly operated lake water system either.Stanford’s own documents state thatSearsville is an integral part of thelake water system.

Damming the Bay

Recent studies are showing that trap-ping sediment behind dams is alsoputting coastal wetlands at risk of col-lapse due to climate-change-inducedsea level rise. The State of Delawareand University of Maryland recentlyreported that, “diminished river sedi-ment is a significant problem, andwhen coupled with continued sea levelrise, the Delaware and ChesapeakeBay estuaries may see the potentialcollapse of hundreds of thousands ofhectares of coastal marsh in the com-ing decades.” Along the Texas coastUSGS found that “…upstream reser-voirs have reduced wetland sedimen-tation rates, which are now about one-half the local rates of relative sea-levelrise” and that coastal wetlands “willcontinue to be lost as a result of sub-mergence and erosion.” On the Gulfcoast, another team of USGS scientistsfound that, “There are many causes ofwetland loss, but chief among them arethe dams, levees, navigation projectsand channels erected along the main-stem and major tributaries of theMississippi River. They have resultedin a 67 percent decrease in sedimentdelivered to the Louisiana coast, a nec-essary process to keep marshlandsreplenished.” And right here in the SanFrancisco Bay, near the mouth of SanFrancisquito Creek, teams from USGSare finding that there may not beenough suspended sediment fromrivers and streams draining into theBay to prevent coastal wetland col-lapse in the face of sea level rise, let

alone meet the objec-tives of one of thenation’s largest restora-tion efforts to convertthousands of acres offormer salt evaporationponds back to naturalwetlands. Billions ofrestoration dollars areat risk of disappearingunderwater. One of theonly cited long-termsolutions to restoringsediment transport tocoastal wetlands sothey can survive pro-jected sea level rise isthe removal of damsthat are trapping thiscritical building block.

Hypocrisy at the high-est level

The disconnect between whatStanford faculty is teaching about eco-logical preservation, water conserva-tion, and climate change, and how theuniversity is addressing SearsvilleDam, an embarrassing HCP proposal,operations of their own water supply,and their stewardship of the SanFrancisquito Creek watershed and SFBay region begs the question: ‘Who’s atthe helm of this ship and are they lis-tening to what their own scientists andexperts are teaching and promotingelsewhere?’ While many scientists andleaders at Stanford are teaching anddoing exactly the right things, thereare others involved with Searsville andthe HCP process that are promotinginaccurate information that is discon-nected from accepted scientific fact,environmental laws, and informeddecision making. The single biggestchallenge for the leadership atStanford in addressing the complexSearsville Dam situation may verywell be the ability to distinguishbetween the bright minds available tolead on this issue and the misguidedones that continue to hold it back.

Opportunity amid the muck

Beyond Searsville Dam is a non-profitcoalition of over three dozen groupsand businesses and over 3000 mem-bers and supporters that share a com-mon interest in supporting actions to

evaluate and consider removingSearsville Dam in a manner that isbeneficial to protecting creekside com-munities, watershed health, and theSan Francisco Bay.

For over a decade, stakeholders havebeen trying to collaborate withStanford on studying dam removal asan option to consider for Searsville. Anoffer by the Department of WaterResources to conduct a dam removalfeasibility study for free was turneddown. Stanford has resisted involve-ment from stakeholders and flood pro-tection agencies downstream who aresignificantly impacted by any decisionat the dam. To this day, a dam removalfeasibility study has never been con-ducted. The science is clear thatrestoring free-flowing streams byremoving antiquated dams is not onlyfeasible, but is accelerating at a rapidpace and provides enormous environ-mental, economic, and social benefits.The Aspen Institute report, DamRemoval: A New Option for a NewCentury, states: “Dam removal mayresult in environmental improvementsby restoring natural flows to a river,removing blockages to fish movement,reestablishing healthy river habitatfor fish and wildlife and improvingwater quality. Dam removal may pro-vide social benefits by eliminatingsafety hazards... and economic benefitsby avoiding costs associated with damsafety improvements and environmen-tal impact mitigation.” According to

THE OSPREY • ISSUE NO. 69 MAY 2011 9



The LEED certified “green” field station at Jasper Ridgenext to the destructive, non-compliant, Searsville Damand disappearing reservoir. Photo courtesy BeyondSearsville Dam


THE OSPREY NOW OFFERS ELECTRONIC MAILING

Subscribers may now, at their option, receive The Osprey as a PDF fileattached to an e-mail.

The Osprey staff wants to emphasize that this is subscribers’ choice basedon how you prefer to receive mailings and what fits your lifestyle. Some pre-fer the speed and ease of forwarding, copying, and manipulating that elec-tronic documents provide. For others, there is no substitute for a printed doc-ument that can be read anywhere. To open PDF files, e-mail subscribers willrequire the Adobe Acrobat Reader, which can be downloaded free of chargeat: www.adobe.com/products/reader/

If you are an existing subscriber who would like to switch to e-mail deliv-ery or a new subscriber for either printed or e-mail delivery, please completethe redesigned coupon on Page 19 and send it to the Federation of Fly Fisherswith your contribution to support The Osprey and the cause of recoveringwild steelhead and salmon.

Effective immediately you also have the option of making a secure creditcard donation to support The Osprey and wild steelhead and salmon by goingto the following link: http://www.fedflyfishers.org/Default.aspx?tabid=4329.

By either means, the steelhead and salmon will thank you for supportingThe Osprey.

The Osprey on the WebThe Osprey now has its own website, http://www.ospreysteelhead.org/.Learn about our history, check on the status of wild steelhead and salmonpopulations and download past copies of The Osprey.To donate to The Osprey, go to: www.fedflyfishers.org and click on the“Support Us” tab under the “Home” tab. Be sure to specify your donation isfor The Osprey.Also,check out our blog at: http://ospreysteelheadnews.blogspot.com/

American Rivers, more than 600 damsin the U.S. have been removed over thepast 50 years. Owners of antiquateddams are lining up to take advantage ofthe funding and regulatory benefitsafforded with dam removal projects.

Stanford University has an amazingopportunity to work collaborativelywith the surrounding communities toshow leadership in community plan-ning, land stewardship, sustainablewater use, and the science of water-shed-scale ecosystem restoration at arevived Jasper Ridge BiologicalPreserve. With over a century of scien-tific investigations at Jasper Ridge,surrounding Searsville Dam andReservoir, the potential to remove thedam and study the restoration is aresearch opportunity of internationalsignificance and would establishStanford as a leader in environmental-ly beneficial science and responsibleland and water stewardship.Alternatively, if the university contin-ues sailing on the same misguidedcourse, there appears to be an icebergahead.

Take action!

Demand that our federal agencies notconsider finalizing their draft EIS forStanford’s flawed Habitat ConservationPlan, that Stanford acknowledge andadequately address Searsville Dam asan integral part of their “lake” Watersystem in their HCP, and that a revisedand corrected HCP and supplementaldraft EIS be released to the public forreview and comment. Thanks.

Please send an email to:

Gary Stern, National Marine FisheriesService: [email protected]

Sheila Larson, U.S. Fish and WildlifeService: [email protected]

Catherine Palter, StanfordEnvironmental Planning:[email protected]

John Hennessy, Stanford President:[email protected]

Please copy Beyond Searsville Damat: [email protected]

A 31-inch San Francisquito Creek steelhead is rescued from a drying reach below adiversion dam and transferred to a deep pool. Photo by Matt Stoecker


searsville-theosprey_may2011

Documents