12

The alternatives were analyzed to determine the potential

for adverse and beneficial impacts associated with implementation of the various CVPIA programs. Impacts under the

alternatives, as compared to the No-Action Alternative, are

the result of changes in water facilities operations and deliveries, and structural improvements which, in turn, directly or

indirectly affect surface and groundwater, power resources,

fish and wildlife, vegetation, agricultural land use, recreational opportunities, the regional and local economy, social

conditions, and cultural resources. Changes to other resource

areas could not be defined at the programmatic level.

Changes in Water Facilities 

Operations and Deliveries

Changes to CVP operations are similar in all alternatives

and were primarily related to 1) assumed reduced diversions from the Trinity River Basin to the Sacramento River;

2) increased releases from Shasta Lake in fall, spring, and

summer to meet target flows and to meet requirements in

the Sacramento River that had been partially met by water

from the Trinity River Basin; 3) increased flows on Clear

Creek in non-critically dry years; 4) reduction in summer

releases from Folsom Lake to increase storage in September

and to stabilize flows from October through February in

the American River; and 5) increased instream flows in the

Stanislaus River during non-critically dry years. 

Primarily as a result of assumed decreased Trinity River

Basin diversions to the Sacramento River and (b)(2) Water

Management, average annual CVP exports in the Delta

decrease. CVP operations in the Delta under the Preferred

Alternative include a combination of instream releases and

water acquisitions to increase Delta outflows during some

periods and export limitations. The CVP operations in the

Delta are similar in Alternatives 1 and 2 and Supplemental

Analyses 1b through 1i and 2a through 2c. Under

Alternative 3 and Supplemental Analysis 3a, acquired water

could be exported and, therefore, the annual exports by

both the CVP and SWP increase as compared to other alternatives. Under Alternative 4 and Supplemental Analyses 1a

and 4a, Delta exports are reduced as compared to the other

alternatives due to the implementation of (b)(2) Water

Management in the Delta in addition to the Bay-Delta Plan

and use of acquired water in the streams and in the Delta.

The alternatives have varying effects on CVP water deliveries. Water deliveries to CVP water service contractors are

less in each of the alternatives as compared to the No-Action

Alternative. Water deliveries to the water rights contractors

and exchange contractors do not change between the NoAction Alternative and the other alternatives. CVP water

operations could vary significantly under Supplemental

Analyses 1c and 2d as compared to the other alternatives.

Under these alternatives, CVP water service contract demands

are reduced by 570,000 acre-feet/year due to the high price

of CVP water under the alternatives. The water could be reallocated to other CVP contractors, used to meet other fish and

wildlife needs, or transferred by the CVP contractors with

reduced demands. If this water is used by other CVP contractors or transferred, CVP operations may not change noticeably. If the water is used for fish and wildlife needs, reservoir

storage and stream flows may change significantly.

Several alternatives call for water acquisitions to

increase instream flows in the river where the water is

acquired and also in downstream rivers and in the Delta.

For the water acquisition actions under the Preferred

Alternative, water generally would either be released in the

spring or stored for release in the fall. Similar operations

are assumed for Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 and Supplemental

Analyses 2a through 2d, 3a, and 4a.

Changes in Groundwater Resources

Impacts on groundwater result from changes in surface

and groundwater use, crop mix and irrigation techniques,

and stream flows.

Summary of Impact

Assessment
13

Groundwater depth increases in the Sacramento

Region, San Joaquin Region and the Tulare region under

the Preferred Alternative. In Alternatives 1, 2, and 3, the

groundwater depth would increase in Sacramento, San

Joaquin, and the northern Tulare Lake regions. Depth

would decrease in the southern Tulare Lake region. All

regions would have a depth increase in Alternative 4.

Changes in Power Resources

Changes in CVP operations, especially increased flows in

the Trinity River Basin, shift patterns of CVP power generation. Under all alternatives, generation shifts from summer months to the spring and fall months when the

demand for hydropower is less. Overall, generation is

reduced. The cost of replacement power to meet summer

month loads may increase the overall cost of power supplies to CVP preference power customers. Under the

Preferred Alternative, CVP loads are reduced. CVP loads

were reduced in all other PEIS Alternatives. 

Changes in Fishery Resources 

Conditions for fish in CVP-controlled rivers and the Delta

generally improve under all alternatives and supplemental

analyses as a result of increased flows and non-flow

actions such as fish screen and fish passage improvements,

habitat restoration, improved water quality, and predator

control. 

Under the Preferred Alternative, flows and habitat for

fish are increased on the Sacramento, American,

Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and Merced rivers, Clear Creek and

tributaries to the Sacramento River as compared to the

No-Action Alternative. Fishery conditions in the Delta

would improve due to increased Delta inflows and outflows, reduced pumping and additional fish protections.

Under Alternative 1 and Supplemental Analyses 1a

through 1i, flows for fish are increased on CVP-controlled

rivers, and reservoirs are reoperated to reduce short-term

flow fluctuations. These actions generally improve environmental conditions although adverse effects occur on

some streams for some species. Supplemental Analyses 1a

and 1b improve fishery conditions in the Delta as compared to Alternative 1 due to increased Delta inflows,

reduced pumping, and additional fish protection.

Alternative 2, and Supplemental Analyses 2a through

2d include all the benefits of Alternative 1 and improve

conditions in the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Merced, and the

lower San Joaquin rivers and in the Delta with respect to

temperatures, improved habitat, reduced losses to diversions, improved fish movement, and improved food web

support. Additional fish protection under Supplemental

Analysis 2a would further improve fishery conditions in

the Delta.

Alternative 3 and Supplemental Analysis 3a include all

benefits of Alternative 2 and further improve conditions

on the Yuba, Mokelumne, Calaveras, Stanislaus, Tuolumne,

and Merced rivers and in the Delta.

Alternative 4 and Supplemental Analysis 4a include all

the benefits of Alternative 3 and add improvements to

passage, diversions, and flow in the Delta.

Changes in Vegetation and Wildlife

Under the Preferred Alternative, land fallowing and retirement would benefit special-status and other wildlife

species in the San Joaquin River and Tulare Lake regions.

Riparian restoration on rivers in the Sacramento River and

San Joaquin River regions has locally beneficial effects on

the extent and condition of riparian habitat. Level 2 refuge

water supplies increase wetland habitat available to

waterfowl and shorebirds. Flooding of up to 80,000 acres

of agricultural habitat during winter offers major benefits

to migratory waterfowl, shorebirds, and wading birds,

including special-status species. Implementation of the

(b)(1) "other" program would benefit species not specifically identified in the CVPIA through habitat restoration,

maintenance, enhancement, and protection.

The impacts associated with implementing Alternative

1 and Supplemental Analyses 1a through 1i are similar to

the Preferred Alternative.

Impacts of Alternative 2 and Supplemental Analyses 2a

through 2d are similar to those of Alternative 1; in addition, higher spring flows on the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and

Merced rivers increase water levels in the San Joaquin

River at Vernalis, and benefit riparian habitat. Level 4

refuge water supplies allow optimal management of

refuges.
Impacts of Alternatives 3 and 4 and Supplemental

Analyses 3a and 4a are similar to those of Alternative 2,

plus additional agricultural land is fallowed and conservation easements may be acquired on a portion of the land.

Further, increased flows in the Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and

Merced rivers lead to greater improvements in riparian

vegetation on the San Joaquin River near Vernalis.

Changes in Agricultural Land Use and

Economics

Throughout the Central Valley, a reduction of irrigated

acreage and gross revenue reduction would be expected

under all alternatives, with the highest reductions occurring under Alternative 4.

In all alternatives, the total percentage change in irrigated acreage would be greatest in the San Joaquin River

region which includes the land retirement program. Land

retirement actions would also reduce irrigated acreage in

the Tulare Lake region. 

14
15

The provisions that would potentially affect agricultural

land use and economics include (b)(2) water management for

fish and wildlife, water acquired for stream flows and refuges,

water pricing, restoration payments, water conservation and

measurement, land retirement, and water transfers.

Changes in Recreational Opportunities 

Recreational opportunities under the No-Action

Alternative are about $145 million per year in recreationrelated expenditures at major reservoirs and refuges in the

Sacramento River region and about $85 million per year in

the San Joaquin River and Tulare Lake regions combined.

Under the Preferred Alternative, recreational use at

major reservoirs changed less than 1 percent although

recreational use of refuges increased significantly. This

impact also occurred under all PEIS alternatives.

Recreational use of refuges increased over 60% with implementation of the Preferred Alternative as compared to the

No-Action Alternative. Recreation use at refuges increased

over 25% under Alternative 1 and Supplemental Analyses

1a through 1i and over 60% in all other alternatives, as

compared with the No-Action Alternative. 

Changes to Regional Economics 

and Social Conditions

By increasing water related benefits provided by the

Central Valley Project, the provisions of CVPIA would contribute to the overall economic and environmental sustainability of California. Implementation of CVPIA results

from a variety of impacts to the regional economy and

social conditions. 

The Preferred Alternative would result in the lowest

total estimated impact on jobs, approximately 0.04% loss

in the Central Valley, compared to the other PEIS alternatives. Impacts under all alternatives would be partially offset by increases in economic activity during the period of

construction of restoration actions. The loss of jobs also

would be partially offset by a slight increase in economic

activity due to increased revenues from water sales and

increased recreation expenditures. The job losses would not

be significant if distributed uniformly over an entire

region, such as in the Sacramento River region. However,

farm communities in the San Joaquin River and Tulare Lake

regions on the Westside may be more severely affected.
16

Cultural Resources

Under some alternatives, including the Preferred

Alternative, cultural resources may be affected; however,

those impacts could not be quantified at the programmatic level. As project-specific documentation is undertaken,

those impacts can be properly assessed and mitigation

measures developed, as appropriate. 

Before implementing individual actions, Interior will

comply with Section 106 of the National Historic

Preservation Act to account for the effects on historic

properties. Interior will develop mitigation measures pursuant to Section 106 and will consult with the Advisory

Council and State Historic Preservation Office.

Environmental Justice and 

Indian Trust Assets

Executive Order 12898 requires that federal agencies analyze the impacts of alternatives to identify and evaluate

disproportionate impacts to minorities and low income

populations. The impacts of the Preferred Alternative and

other Alternatives occur throughout the Central Valley;

therefore, it is difficult to conclude that one social group

would be adversely affected to a greater extent by any of

the alternatives. The impacts reflect the type of labor

requirements required for agricultural production and skill

and education level. 

Reclamation policy is to protect American Indian Trust

Assets and to determine if alternatives would affect the use

and enjoyment of trust assets. None of the alternatives

would adversely affect reserved water rights, water quality

of the water rights, hunting and fishing rights, or noise

near a land asset. Increased stream flows associated with

the alternatives could positively affect Indian Trust Assets

located adjacent to rivers and the associated hunting and

fishing rights.