useful thing. that would get us a chunk of that supply. i figured we should finish the dam first before we talk about the next step, but that would be a way so that in really wet years, the tuolomne trust is talked about we had 3 million acre feet available in 2017. some of that water could have been diverted through the pipelines and put into calaveras for storage in dry times. that s one storage option. can we develop a larger groundwater storage option? one of the challenges there is everybody is obligated through the sustainable groundwater management act to better manage their basins, so people are looking hard at themselves first, and the welcome mat isn t out necessarily for someone else to come in and be a party in the basin. even though they might be able to bring some extra water to it that might help the basin overall. that will take a few years to shake out before it becomes clear if that s a good idea or not, but i think there s some possibility there, but it s
calaveras dam was constructed so we could make it bigger, so, you know, making that bigger so we had additional storage capacity there would be a useful thing. that would get us a chunk of that supply. i figured we should finish the dam first before we talk about the next step, but that would be a way so that in really wet years, the tuolomne trust is talked about we had 3 million acre feet available in 2017. some of that water could have been diverted through the pipelines and put into calaveras for storage in dry times. that s one storage option. can we develop a larger groundwater storage option? one of the challenges there is everybody is obligated through the sustainable groundwater management act to better manage their basins, so people are looking hard at themselves first, and the welcome mat isn t out necessarily for someone else to come in and be a party in the basin. even though they might be able to bring some extra water to it that might help the basin overall.
riparian improvements, recreational improvements or other projects, and san francisco also agreed to fund the california department fish and wildlife department of fishery position for five to ten years. a side note, in the folks that p.u.c. was working with at that time, they were convinced that at least the staff we were working with, was convinced that a hatchery was what was needed. so they had a bias that direction, and i think that that clouded the conversations and the work that preceded. it would identify ten priority nonflow projects, with a minimum of two special run pool projects. special run pool projects where you take one of those big gravel pits that have been created by gravel mining and try to modify the habitat so it could be a useful part of the river again. other projects were to include gravel positions, flood plain restoration and riparian planting. and districts in san francisco were required to provide another $500,000, and one of the expects at that t
trout or steel head. so actually, we did have some successes out of that effort at that time. and then, we started move inexorablely into the licensing process. it s been going on for the last nine years, since 2009. that took a few years to play out, and that took a few years to ramp up, and that s where we are now, which is where the tuolomne river management plan was developed. so basically, in conclusion, three of these are the same conclusions that we had before. the first one is we need to continue water supply planning regardless of what the state does. that s the nature of our business. we think the state s proposal has significant impacts on our water supply. we think benefits can be achieved with tuolomne rivers, and we still continue to think that negotiated settlements are superior to a regulatory solution potentially avoiding litigation on the matter. the one other comment i ll make is last night, about 10:00, we received a letter from a nongovernmental organizat
created by gravel mining and try to modify the habitat so it could be a useful part of the river again. other projects were to include gravel positions, flood plain restoration and riparian planting. and districts in san francisco were required to provide another $500,000, and one of the expects at that time because it was the end of the cal fed area is other funds coming from state and federal sources would be available, and a lot of that funding never materialized, which is part of the issue we were dealing with then. the settlement agreement also required the districts to undertake a host of studies to understand the scientific information available to further improve decision making. as i ve emphasized before, we and the districts have spent $25 million on studies to actually understand the tuolomne river. one of the things the settlement agreement recognized was that out of basin factors would affect naturally reproducing chinook, delta exports, san joaquin delta bay res