Lake Merced Update -- July 2003

It’s been a couple of months since the last Lake Merced Update.  There is much to report, and much of that is good news.

I may have already reported, but this is worth a repeat.  The Public Utilities Commission recently added a hydrogeologist to their staff.  Greg Bartow comes to the PUC from the Regional Water Quality Control Board where he worked closely with Westside Basin and Lake Merced issues.  We’ve now had several meetings with Greg; it is a great pleasure to have someone technically qualified and willing to work with us so constructively.

Progress is being made on the development of a model of the Westside Basin.  The current effort is to improve the modeling of the relationship between Lake Merced and the supporting aquifer.  All have now agreed that we need to develop a single model that can be used to study policy issues as they affect the lake.

Thanks to water additions in October and April, and a strong late spring rain, the level of the lake is now about a foot and a half higher than a year ago.  Plans are being made to add as much as two feet of additional water later this summer.  That will further enhance the water quality in the lake as well as increase lake level.  Perhaps even more important will be the data collected that will provide information needed to better calibrate the planning model.

All the news is not entirely upbeat, however.  Consultants retained by the City Attorney’s office have suggested that restoring the aquifer will produce little if any benefit for Lake Merced over a period of many years.  While that conclusion has not been supported by any concrete scientific evidence, PUC staff seems to have adopted this as the single option to be pursued.  Their plan now is to raise the lake to some target level, then to maintain that with periodic water additions.  There are a number of potential problems with this approach:

--    Reaching the target level of 26 feet will require a long-term program of gradual increases in lake level in order to avoid damage to habitat.  Sources of this water have not been determined.

--    The amount of water needed to maintain a given lake level also remains a matter needing further study.  While the consultant has suggested that only small amounts of water will be needed, their report suggests that the ‘small amount’ may be as much as 1 million gallons per day.

--    While a number of potential sources for this water have been identified, no sustainable source of sufficient water of acceptable quality, available when needed, has been established.

We have encouraged the PUC to keep all of the options on the table until these issues have been resolved.

As many of you know, the bond issue passed in November included $103 million for a recycled water program.  In February Friends of Lake Merced joined with a number of community organizations, including the Coalition of San Francisco Neighborhoods, the Alliance for a Clean Waterfront, and the Neighborhood Parks Council, asking for periodic reviews of progress being made on this project.  Six months later that request has been ignored, by both the PUC’s Planning and Communications Departments.

There will, however, be a review of the recycled water program July 25, 9:00 A.M., at the East Bay MUD offices, 375 – 11th Street, 2nd floor.  It seems a bit ironic that we have to travel to Oakland to hear about the San Francisco recycled water program, but we’ll be there.  Hope you are too.

On the natural areas front, the Natural Areas Program Citizens’ Advisory Committee discussed Lake Merced at a recent meeting.  Their report suggests a number of actions that may not gain universal community support, including removing many of the Pine and Cypress trees from around North Lake, building a floating log barrier between North and East Lakes to keep fishermen out of the latter, removing all bullfrogs from the Impound Lake, and removing the Mesa from the Recreation and Park Department’s list of areas open for off-leash dogs.  We have written to the NAP-CAC suggesting that these and other recommendations receive full public review before they are implemented.

The Boathouse Restaurant has been closed; we’ll have to find a new meeting place if we ever have a new meeting.  We have written to the Recreation & Park Commission requesting full public discussion of the development of this site, and encouraged the Lake Merced Task Force to place a high priority on this issue.

Finally, the Board of Supervisors recently passed a Precautionary Principle Statement intended to contribute to environmental protection and improvement in San Francisco.  Included as one of the terms of this policy statement is the recognition of the need for a fully informed and participating public:

“Right to Know: The community has a right to know complete and accurate information on potential human health and environmental impacts associated with the selection of products, services, operations or plans. The burden to supply this information lies with the proponent, not with the general public.”

Implementing 50% of the intent of this policy will represent a sea change in the attitudes and approaches of most City agencies.  We are arranging a meeting with the Department of the Environment to discuss ways in which we can help bring this about.

There’s probably more, but for this report, That’s all Folks!

John