Despite Clean Bill of Health, Public Still Fears Lake

First the good news: A year and a half after state wildlife officials poisoned Lake Davis to rid the alpine waterway of a voracious, predatory fish, property and business owners are finally being reimbursed for losses caused by the eradication effort.

Now the bad news: The Portola City Council recently voted unanimously not to resume drawing its water supply from the lake, even though health officials have declared that the Eastern Sierra lake is safe for drinking.

“The issue is always the same: We acknowledge that, scientifically, the water is showing that it’s clean, clear and healthy,” said Portola City Administrator James Murphy. “But the perception by the public--the mistrust that has developed since the Department of Fish and Game first came in--seems to prevail. Our public is still afraid of consuming the water.”

Normally, this town of about 2,200 people 50 miles northwest of Reno relies on nearby Willow Springs for its winter water needs and then adds Lake Davis supplies when vacationers swell water use in the summer.

For the foreseeable future, how-

ever, the town will rely on two wells drilled since the lake was chemically treated. Although Portola does plan to eventually use Lake Davis water again--several development projects depend on it--city officials believe that the wells will be sufficient to serve the summer demand. Tourism has increased since the lake was declared safe, but it has yet to return to normal.

The Lake Davis saga began nearly five years ago, when nonnative northern pike were found in the waters of the formerly pristine trout fishery.

State wildlife officials wanted to poison the lake to make sure that the pike did not escape, travel 130 miles to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and imperil the already threatened native salmon and steelhead trout populations.

But residents, government officials and business owners objected, arguing that the lake was also a major drinking water source for the city. They worried about the piscicide rotenone’s possible health impacts. They also voiced concern that poisoning the pike--which would kill all animal life in Lake Davis--would hurt the area’s struggling tourism industry.

Fish and game agents went ahead in October 1997 and poisoned the lake anyway, promising that the chemicals would dissipate within 30 days. But trace elements of one chemical byproduct were still found nine months later.

The lake was not restocked with trout until July 1998, and was not cleared for drinking until a month later. In the interim, tiny, rural Plumas County filed misdemeanor charges against the state wildlife agency and several employees, alleging that officials broke the law when they poisoned Lake Davis.

Those charges were the last thing to stand between the county, Portola, residents and the $9.1 million the state offered to settle all damage claims arising from the chemical treatment.

When the settlement was finally approved by the Legislature, it specified that no money could be disbursed until the charges against the Department of Fish and Game were resolved.

The settlement provided $2.9 million to the city, $2.1 million to the county and $4 million to residents, property owners and business owners who claimed that they incurred injuries or financial damage from the poisoning.

Three weeks ago, at the urging of a special prosecutor, Plumas County Superior Court Judge Alan H. Thieler dismissed the criminal charges.

William Krabbenhoft, the deputy attorney general overseeing the claims process, said that the city and county will receive their settlement checks--covering the cost of well drilling, attorneys’ fees and other expenses--in the next several weeks.

So far, about 200 people and businesses have filed to receive reimbursement, and the state has disbursed about $1 million. The smallest claim was for a $462 veterinarian’s bill incurred because “someone’s dog got sick from eating the new trout” planted in Lake Davis by the state, Krabbenhoft said. “We just said OK, we weren’t going to fight it.”

So far, the largest claim paid was $95,000 to Leonard’s grocery store for business lost when tourists stayed away. Most of the claims averaged $1,000 to $1,500, Krabbenhoft said.

But a small group of those claiming the greatest injury have yet to file for reimbursement, in part because severe weather has kept appraisers from the remote area, said John Gullixson, the attorney representing them.

Nine claims totaling about $2 million have yet to be filed, said Gullixson, who is the mayor of Yorba Linda and owns a retirement home overlooking the lake.

While local officials contend that the area is economically on the mend, Gullixson argues that store owners, developers and other businesses will continue feeling financial impacts for years to come.

Both he and City Administrator Murphy tell about fishermen who are coming out to the restocked lake but refusing to eat what they catch because of fears of contamination.

“The water could be just as pristine as it ever was,” Gullixson said. “It’s really what’s in the minds of the people. For an area to be stigmatized doesn’t have to do with what’s actually true. It’s what’s in the minds of the folks.”