Site search
sponsored by
Home
News
RENO, Nev. (AP) -- Lawyers for scores of residents flooded when an irrigation canal failed in January said Thursday they are seeking a federal court order to restrict water flows in the canal to prevent another flood.
They also said in an amended motion filed in U.S. District Court in Reno on Wednesday that the canal break was caused by poor maintenance and greedy water managers trying to maximize water storage for farmers, not burrowing rodents, as the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation concluded.
"Rodents had nothing to do with the flood," said Robert Hager, one of the Reno lawyers representing about 175 flood victims in Fernley, about 30 miles east of Reno.
"It's an easy excuse to blame it on animals that are unable to say `It is not our fault,' and it appears to minimize their culpability," he said at a news conference.
Hager and Lee Hotchkin filed the motion seeking an emergency injunction that would limit flows in the 32-mile canal to one-third of the maximum legal operating level, 250 cubic feet per second.
"Our concern right now is to make sure the canal is operating in a safe fashion and doesn't cause another flood in Fernley," Hager said.
The Truckee Canal, which diverts water from the Truckee River to the Lahontan Reservoir southeast of Fallon, was operating at or near the maximum legal level of 750 cfs when the earthen berm broke Jan. 5, flooding nearly 600 homes. Fernley was declared a federal and state disaster area.
The Bureau of Reclamation allowed the Truckee Carson Irrigation District to resume flows at 150 cfs last month and outlined steps the district must take to raise the flows to 250 cfs and additional requirements to increase flows to about half the maximum. Bureau officials have said the level will not exceed 350 cfs unless repairs ranging from $28 million to $390 million are made.
Hager said the original canal dug in 1903 was properly lined with riprap and other impermeable materials that make the below-ground portion of the canal safe.
"There are no rodent holes in that part. They would have to be atomic rodents with drill bits to dig into the canal," he said.
But over the years, Hager said, the irrigation district removed silt from the canal and placed it on the banks, building the berms up 4 to 6 feet higher. He said that sandy silt never was intended to handle water flows.
Flows up to 250 cfs will keep the water below the canal's original rim, but boosting flows to 350 cfs would raise water levels to the sandy berms and again jeopardize the integrity of the canal, Hager said.
"The sand is not compacted and not designed to hold water," he said.
Jeffrey McCracken, spokesman for the Bureau of Reclamation's Mid-Pacific Region based in Sacramento, said the bureau stood behind the findings of a team of experts who investigated the cause of the canal break.
"We certainly are looking out for the safety of the community but we are going to allow our engineers to make those decisions," he said.
Dave Overvold, the irrigation district's project manager for the canal, said district officials had no comment based on advice from their lawyer.
The flood victims have filed a lawsuit against the district and others accusing them of negligence in maintaining the canal. Hager said damages will reach into hundreds of millions of dollars.
The motion filed this week claims district officials "knowingly and intentionally decided to cause an amount of water greatly in excess of the safe water carrying capacity of the canal to flow through the canal at the time of the breach."
"Repairs to the levee were made by the Bureau of Reclamation and are inadequate to protect the levee from further breaches if TCID is allowed to increase the water flowing through the canal.
They also said in an amended motion filed in U.S. District Court in Reno on Wednesday that the canal break was caused by poor maintenance and greedy water managers trying to maximize water storage for farmers, not burrowing rodents, as the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation concluded.
"Rodents had nothing to do with the flood," said Robert Hager, one of the Reno lawyers representing about 175 flood victims in Fernley, about 30 miles east of Reno.
"It's an easy excuse to blame it on animals that are unable to say `It is not our fault,' and it appears to minimize their culpability," he said at a news conference.
Hager and Lee Hotchkin filed the motion seeking an emergency injunction that would limit flows in the 32-mile canal to one-third of the maximum legal operating level, 250 cubic feet per second.
"Our concern right now is to make sure the canal is operating in a safe fashion and doesn't cause another flood in Fernley," Hager said.
The Truckee Canal, which diverts water from the Truckee River to the Lahontan Reservoir southeast of Fallon, was operating at or near the maximum legal level of 750 cfs when the earthen berm broke Jan. 5, flooding nearly 600 homes. Fernley was declared a federal and state disaster area.
The Bureau of Reclamation allowed the Truckee Carson Irrigation District to resume flows at 150 cfs last month and outlined steps the district must take to raise the flows to 250 cfs and additional requirements to increase flows to about half the maximum. Bureau officials have said the level will not exceed 350 cfs unless repairs ranging from $28 million to $390 million are made.
Hager said the original canal dug in 1903 was properly lined with riprap and other impermeable materials that make the below-ground portion of the canal safe.
"There are no rodent holes in that part. They would have to be atomic rodents with drill bits to dig into the canal," he said.
But over the years, Hager said, the irrigation district removed silt from the canal and placed it on the banks, building the berms up 4 to 6 feet higher. He said that sandy silt never was intended to handle water flows.
Flows up to 250 cfs will keep the water below the canal's original rim, but boosting flows to 350 cfs would raise water levels to the sandy berms and again jeopardize the integrity of the canal, Hager said.
"The sand is not compacted and not designed to hold water," he said.
Jeffrey McCracken, spokesman for the Bureau of Reclamation's Mid-Pacific Region based in Sacramento, said the bureau stood behind the findings of a team of experts who investigated the cause of the canal break.
"We certainly are looking out for the safety of the community but we are going to allow our engineers to make those decisions," he said.
Dave Overvold, the irrigation district's project manager for the canal, said district officials had no comment based on advice from their lawyer.
The flood victims have filed a lawsuit against the district and others accusing them of negligence in maintaining the canal. Hager said damages will reach into hundreds of millions of dollars.
The motion filed this week claims district officials "knowingly and intentionally decided to cause an amount of water greatly in excess of the safe water carrying capacity of the canal to flow through the canal at the time of the breach."
"Repairs to the levee were made by the Bureau of Reclamation and are inadequate to protect the levee from further breaches if TCID is allowed to increase the water flowing through the canal.
