Auburn Dam: Difference between revisions

| name = Auburn Dam

| image = AuburndamsiteAuburn Dam render.jpg

| caption image_caption = TheA proposedconcept sitedrawing of the Auburn Dam;, from the originalU.S. concreteArmy dam footing is visible to the rightCorps of the riverEngineers

| official_namename_official =

| crosses dam_crosses = North Fork [[American River]]

| localelocation = Near [[Auburn, California]]

| type dam_type = Concrete gravity-arch

| length dam_length = {{convert|4100|ft|m}}<ref name="PARC">{{cite web|url=http://www.parc-auburn.org/torrent.pdf|title=Tempting fate: A torrent of doubts|publisher=Protect American River Canyons|work=Sacramento Bee|date=2006-02-19 <!-- Sunday!! -->|accessdateaccess-date=2010-06-22|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101224220543/http://www.parc-auburn.org/torrent.pdf|archive-date=2010-12-24|url-status=dead}}</ref>

| height dam_height = {{convert|700680|ft|m}}<ref name="ADCfeatures">{{cite web|url=http://www.auburndamcouncil.org/pages/features.html|title=Auburn Dam Project Features|publisher=Auburn Dam Council|accessdateaccess-date=2010-06-22}}</ref>

| hydraulic_headdam_width_base =

| width spillway_type =

| spillway_type spillway_capacity =

| beganopening = Nevernever completed

| opencost = Never$431 million

| closedowner = Never[[U.S. Bureau of Reclamation]]

| costres_name = Auburn =Reservoir

| maint res_catchment =

| reservoirres_surface = Auburn{{convert|10000|acre}}<ref Reservoirname="ADCfeatures"/>

| depthplant_capacity = 200–750 = MW

| plant_owner plant_annual_gen =

| plant_operatorplant_commission =

| turbines plant_decommission =

| pumped_storagewebsite =

| comextra =

'''Auburn Dam''' was a proposed concrete [[arch dam]] on the [[North Fork American River|North Fork]] of the [[American River]] east of the town of [[Auburn, California]], in the [[United States]], on the border of [[Placer County, California|Placer]] and [[El Dorado County, California|El Dorado]] Counties. Slated to be builtcompleted in the 1970s by the [[U.S. Bureau of Reclamation]], it would have been the tallest concrete arch-gravity dam wouldin haveCalifornia beenand overone of the tallest in the United States, at a height of {{convert|700680|ft|m}} high,and storing {{convert|2300000|acre feet|km3}} of water. straddlingStraddling a gorge downstream of the confluence of the North and Middle Forks of the American River and upstream of [[Folsom Lake]]., Itit would have regulated water flow and provided [[flood control]] in the American River basin as part of Reclamation's immense [[Central Valley Project]].

ProposalsThe anddam studieswas forfirst the dam emergedproposed in the late 1960s, and1950s; construction work commenced in 1968, involving the diversion of the North Fork American River through a tunnel and the construction of a massive earthen [[cofferdam]]. Following a nearby earthquake and the discovery of aan unrelated [[seismic fault]] that underlay the dam site, work on the project was halted for fears that the dam's design would not beallow ableit to survive a major quake on the same fault zone. Although the dam was redesigned and a new proposal submitted by 1980, spiraling costs and limited watereconomic storage offered by either designjustification put an end to the project until heavysevere floodsflooding destroyedin the1986 cofferdam, sparking briefbriefly renewed interest in theAuburn's flood control dampotential. AlthoughThe newCalifornia proposalsState surfacedWater fromResources timeControl toBoard timedenied afterwater therights 1980s,for the dam wasproject neverin built2008 fordue ato varietylack of reasonsconstruction progress.

LimitedAlthough flood-controlnew capability,proposals geologicsurfaced instabilityfrom time to time after the 1980s, andthe potentialdam harmwas onnever recreationalbuilt andfor ecologicala valuesnumber finallyof putreasons, anincluding endlimited water storage capacity, geologic hazards, and potential harm to recreation and the Auburnlocal Dam projectenvironment. ManyMuch of the original groundworks and preliminary constructionsgroundwork at the Auburn Dam site still existexists, and up to 20082007, the North Fork American River still flowed through the diversion tunnel that had been constructed in preparation for the dam. Reclamation begunand Placer County Water Agency completed a projectpump laterstation project that year which blocked the tunnel, and restoredreturned the river to its original channel, officiallyand puttingdiverted ana endsmall amount of water through another tunnel under Auburn to themeet long-debatedlocal damneeds. However, some groups continue to support construction of the dam, even today, mainlywhich becausethey itstate would provide much-neededimportant water regulation and flood protection.

==Early historyBackground==

InStarting in the 1950s1850s during the [[California Gold Rush]], the city of [[Sacramento, California|Sacramento]] was rapidly growinggrew around the confluence of the [[Sacramento River]] and its tributary the [[American River]], near the middle of the [[Central Valley (California)|Central Valley]] of California. The city's increasing population necessitated the construction of an extensive system of [[levee]]s on the two rivers to prevent flooding, especially on. theThese American. Theearly flood control works were not enough to keep the rivers within their beds, howeverinsufficient; in 1862, the city was [[Great Flood of 1862|inundated so totallycompletely]] that the state government was temporarily moved to [[San Francisco]].<ref name="USBRhistory">{{cite web

|dateyear=1994

|workwebsite=

|access-date=2010-06-22

As the proposals for the Auburn Dam proposal evolved, the project saw a transformationtransformed from a purelyprimary flood-control structure to a multipurpose high dam that would serve various other purposes including long-term water storage, hydroelectricity generation, and recreational activitiesrecreation. One of the first ideas, publicized in the late 1950s, called for a {{convert|515|ft|m|adj=on}} embankment dam impounding {{convert|1000000|acre feet.ft|m3dam3|lk=on}} of water. In 1963, a {{convert|690|ft|m|adj=on}} earthfill dam holding back {{convert|2500000|acre feet.ft|m3dam3|lk=on}} of water was proposed.<ref name="USBRhistory"/> The pre-construction design was finalized in 1967, for a concrete thin-arch gravity structure over {{convert|680|ft|m}} high.<ref name="PARC"/> This dam would be {{convert|4200|ft|m}} long, {{convert|196|ft|m}} thick at the base, and equipped with five 150MW150 [[megawatt]] generators at its base for a total generating capacity of 700 MWmegawatts. Two concrete-lined flip bucket [[spillway]]s would abut both sides of the dam. ConstructionWith the initial plans set and the project authorized, construction work for the dam started in late 1968.<ref name="PARC"/>

[[ImageFile:Foresthill Bridge @ American River Confluence April 27 2008.jpg|thumb|right|Foresthill Bridge, built in anticipation of the rising waters of Auburn Reservoir]]

Official [[groundbreaking]] of the Auburn Dam started on October 19, 1968, with preparatory excavations and test shafts drilled into the mountainsidessides of the North Fork American River gorge. The contract for the diversion tunnel through the mountainside on river left, {{convert|33|ft|m}} in diameter, {{convert|2400|ft|m}} long, and equipped to handle a flow of {{convert|74000|cuft/s|m3/s}} (a roughly 35-year flood) was givenlet to Walsh Western for about $5.1 million in 1968. The actual construction of the tunnel itself did not begin until mid-1971, and the tunnelit was completed in late November 1972.<ref name="AFSU">{{cite web

Upstream of the dam site, Auburn-Foresthill Road, – one of the only all-weather thoroughfares of the region, – would have beenbe inundated by the proposed reservoir. In preparation for the reservoir's filling, the roadit was raisedrerouted high above the canyon onover a three-spannedspan, {{convert|2428|ft|m|adj=on}}-long truss bridge rising {{convert|730|ft|m}} above the river.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.placercountyhistoricalsociety.org/Histories/Bridge.htm |title=Foresthill Bridge |publisher=Placer County Historical Society |work=Histories |access-date=2010-06-23 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090505052928/http://www.placercountyhistoricalsociety.org/Histories/Bridge.htm |archive-date=May 5, 2009 }}</ref> Even though Auburn Dam would never be completed, the bridge was still required because the pool behind the cofferdam would flood the original river crossing.<ref>Smith, pp. 29–30</ref> It also improved safety and reduced travel time by eliminating a steep, narrow and winding grade into the canyon on either side of the river, as comparisons to maps showing the old road alignment will attest. The contracts for various projects pertaining to the relocation of the roadway were given to O.K. Mittry and Sons, Hensel Phelps Construction Company, and Willamette-Western Corporation, the latter for the construction of the actual bridge. The [[Foresthill Bridge]], the [[List of bridges in the United States by height|fourth highest bridge in the United States]], was completed in 1973.<ref name="USBRhistory"/>

AIn 1975, a magnitude 5.7 earthquake shook the Sierra Nevada near [[Oroville Dam]] in 1975, about {{convert|50|mi|km}} north of the Auburn Dam construction site.<ref name="quakes">{{cite web

Over the next few years, while all construction was haltedstayed, Reclamation conducted evaluations of the seismic potential of the dam site, even though these delays caused the cost of the project to rise with every passing year.<ref name="waterworld">{{cite web

|accessdateaccess-date=2010-06-23}}</ref> StudiesThe studies concluded that a major fault system underlay the vicinity of the Auburn Dam site, with many folds of metamorphic rock formed by the contact of the foothillsfoothill rocks and the granite [[batholith]] of the Sierra Nevada.<ref>{{cite web

Through the rest of the 1970s, other possible designs were looked at but never implemented, while preliminary work on the construction site was resumed. On April 29, 1979, the foundations for the Auburn Dam were completed.<ref name="PARC"/> However, debates continued over whether to build aan arched or straight-axis gravity dam,. Some favored the latter of which was proposeddesign because it mightwould requirehave lessgreater concretemass, allowing it to buildbetter withstand earthquakes.<ref name="UCB"/>

OnIn early February 18, 1986 aten hugeinches flood(254&nbsp;mm) beganof pouringrain downfell fromon the [[SierraSacramento Nevadaregion in 11 days, melting the (U.S.)|Sierra Nevada]] mountains.snowpack Inand whatcausing woulda laterhuge beflood consideredto onepour ofdown the largestAmerican regionalRiver. The 1986 floods inwere some of the most severe recorded history,in the 20th century; Placer County was quickly designated a Federal Disaster Area. Rampaging streams and rivers incurred some $7.5 million in damages within the county. TenThe inchesrating (254for mm)Sacramento's oflevees, rainsupposedly felldesigned onto theprevent Sacramentoa region125-year inflood, 11was days.dropped Floodingto wasa so78-year catastrophic,flood thatin thestudies originalconducted prediction thatafter the city's1986 systemsevent, couldwhich preventsuggested anthat up-to-125-yearsuch floodweather wasoccurred droppedmore tofrequently athan 78-yearpreviously floodbelieved.<ref name="ARA">{{cite web

|access-date=2010-06-23

|title=Flood Control Accomplishments 1986-20071986–2007

|workwebsite=

|date=February 2007-02

|accessdateaccess-date=2010-06-23}}</ref>

The flood rapidly filled the pool behind the Auburn cofferdam to capacity, as the diversion tunnel could not handle theall extrathe water pouring into the reservoir. At about 96:00 A.M. on February 18, the rising water overtopped the cofferdam near the right abutment, creating a waterfall that quickly eroded into the structure. Although the cofferdam was designed with a soft earthen plug to fail in a controlled manner if any such event were to occur,<ref>{{cite web

|date=January 2005-01

|work= <!--?-->

|access-date=2010-06-23

InFollowing the yearsfloods followingof the massive 1980-era floods1980s, some public opinion turnedbegan to turn against the Auburn Dam because of itsthe relativelymassive smallestimated reservoir capacity relatedcost to its size, and the massive cost offinish the project, which was then already rising into the billions of dollars, and the fairly small amount of water it would capture relative to that cost. The best dam sites require a relatively small dam that can store massive amounts of water, and most of those sites in the U.S. hadhave already been takenutilized. A comparison with [[Hoover Dam]], for example, reveals that the Auburn would store very little water compared to its structural size. [[Lake Mead]], the reservoir behind Hoover, stores overabout {{convert|2800000028500000|acre feet.ft|m3dam3|lk=on}}. ofThe water.proposed Auburn Reservoir, with a mere {{convert|2300000|acre8% feet|m3}}of that capacity, would require the construction of a dam not only as tall as Hoover butand over three times as wide.<ref name="PARC"/>

As early as 1980, the cost of building the Auburn Dam was estimated at $1 billion. As of 2007, the cost to build the dam would be about $10 billion.<ref>{{cite webnews

|accessdate=2010-06-23}}</ref> Other flood-control worksprojects to raiseimprove thesafety heightmargins and improve the spillway capacity of Folsom Dam, and to increase the capacity of levees in the Sacramento area, wouldwere projected to cost significantly less while also providing protectionsimilar againstlevels theof sameflood floodsprotection. Also, the [[United States National Research Council]] believes that existing floodstream-flow records, which haveonly beendate in place lessback thanabout 200150 years, are insuffient to justify the construction of a dam as large as Auburn.<ref>{{cite web

|workwebsite=

|accessdateaccess-date=2010-06-23}}</ref>

[[ImageFile:Auburnfailflood.jpeg|thumb|left|Map of the area around the confluence of the Sacramento and American Rivers that would be inundated if Auburn Dam were to fail]]

Due to the seismically active nature of the area, theThe Auburn Dam would also be at risk for failure from an earthquake, evendue one thatto the weightrisk of itsthe reservoir mightinducing inducea quake on one of the many fault lines that crosses the area, known as the Bear Mountain fault zone.<ref name="irresponsible">{{cite web

|accessdateaccess-date=2010-06-23}}</ref> Surface displacement of the ground might range from a few inches/centimeters to {{convert|3|ft|m}} in each direction, depending on the magnitude of the earthquake. Although a new concrete-gravity design by Reclamation was testedmodeled to survive a magnitude 6.5 earthquake, it performed poorly under the 7.0 that the USGS had originally estimated.<ref name="irresponsible"/>

A Bureau of Reclamation study released in 1980 provedprojected that a failure of Auburn Dam would result in a giant wave reaching Folsom Lake within five minutes,; anddepending moston likelyreservoir levels, it would cause a [[cascading failure]] of Folsom and [[Nimbus Dam]]s downstream as well within an hour, unleashing millions of acre-feet of water which would cause far greater damage downstream than any possiblenatural flood. FolsomMost wouldof collapsethe orgreater atSacramento leastarea getwould severelybe overtoppedinundated; Nimbus Dam would be overtopped by {{convert|70|ft|m}} of water; and the [[California State Capitol]] would be under {{convert|40|ft|m}} of water,. asAn wouldearlier bestudy much of the rest of the Sacramento metropolitan area. Inin 1975, a study predicted that a failure of Folsom Dam alone would result in over 250,000 fatalitiesdeaths.<ref name="quakes"/> WithIf Auburn Dam'swere capacityto addedfail inat full capacity, the resulting flood would be over three times larger, and cause even greater damage, inundating land for miles on either side of the American and Sacramento rivers.<ref>{{cite web

|accessdateaccess-date=2010-06-23}}</ref>

===FateImpact on recreation===

Filling of the Auburn Reservoir would result in a two-pronged, {{convert|40|mi|km|adj=on}} lake winchwhich would inundate countlessnumerous canyons and rapids of the North Fork and Middle ForkForks of the American River. In 1981, the American River was acknowledged as the most popular recreational river in California.<ref name="ARA"/> Over one million people visit the canyons of the North and Middle Forks of the American River each year to engage in various recreational activities, not least of which includeincluding kayaking, rafting, hiking, hunting, biking, horseback riding, gold mining, off-roading, and rock climbing. About 900,000 of these visitors go to the [[Auburn State Recreation Area]], which surroundsincludes the former dam site.<ref>{{cite web

|accessdateaccess-date=2010-06-23}}</ref>

|accessdateaccess-date=2010-06-23}}</ref> and "with more lives than an alley cat",<ref>{{cite news

|accessdate=2010-06-23}}</ref> was defeated by the intervention of environmentalists, conservationists, and cost-conscious economists. Although four bills to revive the dam project were introduced in Congress over the next twenty years, all were turned down.<ref name="wouldntdie"/> Representative Norman D. Shumway introduced the Auburn Dam Revival Act of 1987, which was rejected because of the phenomenally high costs. A flood control bill in 1988 involving the Auburn Dam was also defeated.<ref>Smith. p. 152</ref> In 1992 and 1996, plans for restarting the Auburn project appeared in various water projects bills. However, even though the project was now leaning towards purely flood- control instead of the original expensive multipurpose that environmental groups had opposed, both were denied.<ref>Smith, p. 153</ref> As the years dragged on, the cost of the project grew, and it officially ended with the revoking of USBR water rights to the site by the state on November 11, 2008.<ref name="loomis"/>

|workwebsite=

|accessdateaccess-date=2010-06-23}}</ref>}}

|access-date=2010-06-23

Area Congressman [[John Doolittle]] iswas one of the largest proponents of the Auburn Dam, and has alreadyhe appropriated several million dollars for funds to conduct feasibility studies for the dam. About $3 million would gowent into the main feasibility report, and the remaining $1 million would bewas used for a study concerning the relocation of [[California State Route 49]], which runs through the site.<ref>{{cite news

|accessdate=2010-06-13}}</ref> In 2004, he usedAfter the [[Hurricane Katrina]] disaster toin spark2005, Doolittle drew public attention to the flood vulnerability of the Sacramento region. He also used the flood-protection "incompetence" of the Folsom Dam to his advantage, saying that "without an Auburn Dam we soon could soon be in the unenviable position of suffering from both severe drought and severe flooding in the very same year."<ref name="CPDR"/> He led all 18 Republican members of the [[CaliforniaUnited States House of Representatives]] from California in a protest in 2008, trying to convince Governor [[Arnold Schwarzenegger]] to revoke the water-rights decision that California had made against Reclamation.<ref>{{cite news

|accessdateaccess-date=2010-06-23}}</ref>

In response to public outcry, most pro-Auburn Dam groups now recommend the construction of a "[[dry dam"]], or one that purely supports the purpose of flood control. Such a dam would stand empty most of the year, but during a flood the excess flow would pool temporarily behind the dam instead of flowing straight through, and therefore the dam could still provide flood control while leaving the American River canyons dry for most of the year (hence "dry"). Water would be impounded for only a few days or weeks each year instead of all year long, minimizing damage on the local environment. The dam would be built to withstandprotect against a 500-year flood.<ref>{{cite web

|access-date=2010-06-23

|access-date=2010-06-23

[[ImageFile:CalifSR49AmerMFMountain Quarries Bridge 2012-09-16 16-32-17.JPGjpg|thumb|right|Part of the North Fork American River valley, which would have been submerged if the Auburn Dam had been constructed<!-- . -->]]

Since its inception, hundreds of millions of dollars have been poured into the Auburn Dam project,<ref name="PARC"/> but no further work has been done since the 1980s.<ref name="USBRhistory"/> However, the Bureau of Reclamation continues to list the Auburn as ana "unfinishedconsidered component"alternative for the future of its Auburn-Folsom South Unit project.<ref name="AFSU"/> As of now, massive evidence of the dam's construction still remain in the North Fork American River canyon, specifically the excavations for the abutments and spillway, with the consequences of increased erosion.<ref>{{citeAuburn-Cool webTrail [http://act.netwiz.net/TUNNEL.HTML "The Tunnel and River Restoration: A river runs through it"]</ref>

In recent decades, California has been struck with a severe series of severe droughts. In order to facilitate continued deliveries of water to the thirsty southern half of the state, the Central Valley and [[State Water Project]]s have been forced to cut water supplies for agriculture in much of the [[San Joaquin Valley]].<ref>{{cite news

|accessdate=2010-06-26}}</ref> Annual deficits of water in the state haveare risenprojected to rise from {{convert|1600000|acre feet.ft|m3dam3|lk=on}} in 1998 to an estimated {{convert|2900000|acre feet.ft|m3dam3|lk=on}} by 2025. The state has proposed three or four solutions to the shortfall. One, the Peripheral Canal, would facilitate water flow from the water-rich north to the dry south, but has never been built due to environmental concerns. The raising of [[Shasta Dam]] on the Sacramento or [[New Melones Dam]] on the [[Stanislaus River|Stanislaus]], or the building of [[Sites Reservoir]],<ref>{{cite web

|url=http://www.norcalwater.org/watermgmt/sitesreservoir.shtml

|title=Sites Reservoir

|publisher=Northern California Water Association

|work=Water Management

|access-date=2010-06-26

|accessdateaccess-date=2010-06-26}}</ref>

|accessdateaccess-date=2010-06-23}}</ref>

{{reflist|3}}

|ISBNisbn=0-61871618-19571195-3}}

*[http://www.auburndamcouncil.org/ Auburn Dam Council] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100421143858/http://www.auburndamcouncil.org/ |date=2010-04-21 }}

*[http://www.auburndam.org/ Sacramento County Taxpayers League – Auburn Dam] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141216200742/http://www.auburndam.org/ |date=2014-12-16 }}

[[Category:PlacerDams County,on Californiathe American River]]