By Dan Bacher

The Sites Reservoir Project in Northern California, a controversial water project promoted by Governor Gavin Newson and opposed by a coalition of environmental groups, fishing organizations and indigenous tribes because it will divert more water out of the Sacramento River, recently received $134 million in federal funding from the Trump Administration. 

Critics assert that the money was issued as Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom develops an increasingly cozy relationship with President Donald Trump — and has been interviewing conservative media stars such as Charlie Kirk, Michael Savage and Steve Bannon by featuring them as guests on his new podcast.

The $134 million brings the total federal investment in the project to $780.15 million. The money comes from the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act (WIIN Act) that provides funding to  “improve water infrastructure throughout the United States,” according to an announcement from the Sites Authority.   

The Sites Project Authority claimed it will “continue to work with the Bureau of Reclamation” on achieving their 16% participation goal as space in the reservoir becomes available and sufficient funds are appropriated to the Project. The Bureau of Reclamation, or BOR, recently signed off on its basis of negotiations for a Partnership Agreement where this participation will be formalized. 

“The continued bipartisan support for Sites Reservoir shows we all agree—we desperately need more water storage in California to prepare for the future,” said Fritz Durst, Chair of the Sites Project Authority Board of Directors.  

The Authority also claimed the project will provide an additional 1.5 million acre-feet of storage capacity, “substantially improving the state’s water flexibility, reliability, and resiliency in drier years.” 

In contrast with the Authority’s glowing praise for the project, opponents of Sites argue the reservoir would cause enormous damage to already collapsing populations of Sacramento River Chinook salmon and San Francisco Bay-Delta fish populations — and the fishing and tribal communities that depend on them for their livelihoods.

Critics of the project also note that the $134 million is not a grant, but a low-interest loan. At the February  California Water Commission meeting there was discussion of the Sites “financial cliff” and running out of planning money.

“Planned for Glenn and Colusa counties near the town of Sites, the reservoir would hold about one-third the volume of Shasta Lake and would be filled by diverting large amounts of water from the Sacramento River,” said Scott Artis, Executive Director of the Golden State Salmon Association. “This would degrade water quality for local communities and threaten already struggling salmon populations.”

Artis went on, “While Newsom promotes the project as a way to create jobs in California, his water policies have already destroyed countless jobs in the salmon fishing industry: Taking more water from an over-allocated Sacramento River is not the solution to restoring salmon or the communities that rely on them.”

Sierra Club California Water Campaign Manager Caty Wagner agreed with Artis on his assessment of the project. Wagner pointed out that it will be enormously expensive.

“Receiving funding from the WIIN Act isn’t a ‘win’ for the environment,” Wagner noted.  “It will still cost at least $8 billion dollars, which will be paid for by water rates and property taxes in participating areas. $134 million is not much of a discount by comparison, especially since it is the sister project to the $20 billion- plus Delta Conveyance Project. This is a lot of money to spend on imported water when Californians want local, sustainable supply projects that keep jobs local.”  

Gia Moreno, a Chicana and Native American artist and educator who’s part of Save Hood, said massive long-term storage and conveyance projects like the Sites Reservoir and the Delta Conveyance Project Tunnel, or Delta Tunnel, are “not the solutions California needs for its water issues.”

“These projects are too expensive and take too long to build. Climate change is happening and the weather becomes less predictable every year,” Moreno stressed. “With the construction of these projects taking well over a decade to complete once they get approved, there are no guarantees that these projects will be of any help by the time they are finished. California needs to spend more money on local water storage, conservation, and recycling instead of pushing these wasteful and destructive projects. We can’t keep depending on archaic ideologies to carry us into the future.”  

Keiko Mertz of Friends of the River outlined the impact that Sites would have on people and the ecosystem.

“Evidence presented in the Sites water rights proceedings confirms what we knew all along: the proposed Sites project will have devastating impacts on people, rivers, and the Bay-Delta ecosystem,” Mertz observed. “Throwing more taxpayer money at this boondoggle won’t change that.”

Faye Wilson Kennedy of the Red, Black and Green Environmental Justice Coalition and Sacramento Poor People’s Campaign focused on the environmental justice impacts of the project.

“Access to water and specifically clean drinking water is critical to all Californians, but especially the unhoused,” Kennedy offered. “The Sites Reservoir being allocated another $134 million in federal funding could be viewed as good news considering the current administration seems to be defunding and/or gutting funding to most governmental programs.”    

Kennedy added, “My thoughts are:  how will communities of color and poor communities’ benefit for the funding opportunity and access to the water? Remember: water is an environmental justice issue.”

Michael McKaskle pointed out that the $134 million could be more effectively spent increasing groundwater infiltration, both on farms and rehabbing damaged forests and floodplains, or fixing leaks in water distribution networks.

“How about floating solar panels on the canals to reduce evaporation?” McKaskle asked. “It may not be the lowest hanging fruit, but if you are spending $100s of millions of dollars it makes more sense than more investments in outdated thinking.”

The release of the $134 million for Sites Reservoir follows Governor Gavin Newsom’s top water official informing an audience of growers and water managers at the Kern County Water Summit on March 6 that the state is willing to work with the Trump Administration to weaken environmental rules that restrict the pumping of water, allowing them over-pump the imperiled Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.

News of the willingness of the Newsom administration to collaborate with the Trump White House on weakening environmental protections for the Delta couldn’t come at a worse time. Zero Delta smelt, an indicator species that has been villainized by Donald Trump and his corporate agribusiness allies, have been caught in the CDFW’s Fall Midwater Trawl Survey in the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta for the seventh year in a row.

Meanwhile, salmon fishing on California’s ocean and river waters has been closed for the past two years and is likely to be closed again this year, due to the collapse of Sacramento River and Klamath River fall-run Chinook salmon populations. Likewise, Sacramento River winter-run and spring-run Chinook salmon are moving closer and closer to extinction, due to massive water exports from the Delta and other factors, including invasive species, toxics and water pollution.

The Governor is now moving full speed ahead with his plans to build the Sites Reservoir and Delta Tunnel. Scientists and fish advocates say these projects, by diverting more water from the Sacramento River before it flows through the Delta, will only further exacerbate the critical situation that Delta fish species and Central Valley salmon populations are now in.