State Offers $9.1 Million for Lake Damage

Ten months after wildlife officials poisoned Lake Davis to eradicate the voracious northern pike, the state has agreed to a $9.1-million settlement with local government and business owners to redress economic damage from the chemical assault.

Portola City Manager James Murphy stopped short of declaring that the settlement has made the beleaguered area whole again. But, he said Tuesday, “it’s a huge step heading in that direction.”

The plan, which must be approved by the Legislature and Gov. Pete Wilson, “provides us with the opportunity to put the Lake Davis issue behind us and start using this agreement as a tool to rebuild from what’s happened,” Murphy said.

Over the protests of the tiny Eastern Sierra town--which uses Lake Davis as its primary drinking water supply and depends on the tourism dollars it generates--the state Department of Fish and Game poisoned the lake in October, killing all fish and insects in it.

The idea was to get rid of the pike before they could escape to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta 130 miles away and threaten California’s aquatic industry. Wildlife officials believe that the razor-toothed predators, which are not native west of the Mississippi River, were introduced into Lake Davis in 1994 by a rogue angler.

At the time of the poisoning, the agency promised that all chemicals would dissipate within a month and that the once-pristine trout habitat would be rapidly restocked and certified safe to drink soon thereafter.

But the last chemical lingered in trace amounts until four weeks ago.

David Spath, chief of the drinking water and environmental management division of the state Department of Health Services, said that his agency will probably send a letter this week telling officials in Portola and Plumas County that “the lake shows no detectable levels of chemicals and that it’s safe as a drinking water source.”

Although some state officials argued last month that Lake Davis water was safe to drink, “we made a commitment to the county and local officials that we would not approve the lake as a drinking water supply until the chemicals were at a non-detectable level,” Spath said. “We stuck to that.”

Three consecutive chemical-free water samples were taken in late July and early August by Spath’s laboratory, the Department of Fish and Game and an independent lab chosen by Plumas County.

Spath said that state officials will hold a town meeting in Portola in September to answer questions and discuss the ongoing chemical monitoring of the lake.

But Murphy and Plumas County Supervisor Fran Roudebush said that the region will wait until April before bringing the lake back as a drinking water source for the city of 2,000.

Inhabitants now rely on two new wells and a nearby creek for their water. Several weeks’ worth of water rationing ended when the second well came into use about a month ago.

Waiting until April “buys us more time,” Murphy said. “You’ve got to remember that a series of mistakes led to this lasting so long. We mentally have to get through some of those issues.”

Nearly a million rainbow trout have been reintroduced into Lake Davis in the past six weeks, and more are scheduled for restocking in September and October.

Combined with the proposed settlement and the expected clean bill of health for the lake as a water source, that should “get us beyond a lot of this,” said Jim Youngson, a spokesman for the state Resources Agency, which oversees the Department of Fish and Game.

“In five years, Lake Davis is going to be a thriving, healthy place for both fish and tourism,” Youngson said. “But there’s no doubt that we’re sympathetic that business and individuals have suffered in the last year.”

Four months ago, local officials filed a claim with the State Board of Control to recoup economic losses, the first step toward suing the state. The settlement announced Tuesday prevents a lawsuit from going forward.

Anglers and tourists have returned to the area in healthy numbers since the restocking, but business owners are still reeling from more than a year in which tourists stayed away. Although local officials have no complete estimates for economic losses, Roudebush figures that more than 100 claims have been filed with the state.

Of the proposed $9.1-million settlement from the state’s general fund, $4 million would go into a pool to reimburse business and property owners.

Tammy Milby, who owns Gold Rush Sporting Goods with her husband, Gary, said they plan to file a claim for reimbursement of their losses. “Every little bit helps,” Milby said.

In an average June, the store usually sells $9,000 to $10,000 in sporting goods, camping supplies, bait, tackle and snacks. This year, she said, “we may have brought in $3,000 to $4,000, less than half of what it should be.”

In the last month, business has “picked up a little bit,” Milby said. “You still get your people who are very skeptical. . . . You’re still getting your negative publicity about it. It’s going to get a little better, but it’s still going to be a difficult year.”

The city of Portola would receive about $2.9 million under the settlement and Plumas County would get nearly $2.1 million to reimburse it for costs connected with the water crisis--including testing water and drilling wells.

Details have yet to be worked out on how the money would be divided among business and property owners.

On Monday, the governor’s staff signed off on the settlement, which was brokered by state Sen. Tim Leslie (R-Carnelian Bay). City and officials in the Lake Davis area gave tentative approval Tuesday.

The agreement was submitted to the state Assembly on Tuesday and will probably be considered in the next several days.

Plumas County Supervisor Fran Roudebush, who has been involved in the fight over Lake Davis for the past two years, said that she was “encouraged” by the settlement and hopes that it will sail through the Legislature.