THIRTY-SIXTir lUKNNIAL REPORT 53 



ill a short space of lime by proieitting tlicse sea-niii fish. A few 

 screens have been placed by other agencies, such as the United States 

 Bureau of Rechimation, United States Indian Service, and several by 

 cities and utilities. There have been installed durin<^ this period 16(J 

 fish screens and they have functioned, in j^eneral, satisfactorily. 



The present fish screen law now in effect, aside from its equal 

 division of costs of installation, operation and maintenance of fish 

 screens between the ditch owner and the commissitni includes mnny 

 and complicated features so that it may be said without reservation 

 that the law is unworkable. The exception to the division of costs 

 in the fish screen law is that where water is used for the generation 

 of electric energy, then the owner pays the entire cost of installation. 



Several years ago the commission issued its order requiring the 

 Pacific Gas & Electric Co. to install a fish screen at its Fuller Lake 

 outlet in Nevada County. The company did not comply and a court 

 action resulted. The Sacramento County superior court upheld the 

 viewpoint of the company but on appeal to the appellate court, and 

 later sustained by the California Supreme Court, it w^as held that the 

 commission had the authority to require ditch owners, where water is 

 used for generation of electric enei'gy, to install a fish screen at the 

 owner's expense. Subsequently the company requested that they 

 be allowed 50 per cent of the operating costs, claiming the code so stated 

 and their viewpoint was confirmed by an opinion from the Attorney 

 General of the State so that now it is incumbent under the present 

 law for this commission, using sportsmen's money, to pay for one-half 

 of the operation and maintenance costs of the fish screens to such 

 concerns as use water for generation of electrical energy where such 

 screens were installed under the provisions of the law. 



There has been considerable discussion in the past regarding fish 

 screens and it is evident from the interest sliowm by sportsmen and 

 other agencies that this subject is considered of importance, the belief 

 being that without fish screens in the water diversions of the State, 

 where needed, that much of the natural as well as the artificially 

 propagated fish are lost. This is indicated by the fact that the Amer- 

 ican Legion, Department of California, leading sportsmen's clubs, and 

 other agencies, have endorsed a new fish screen bill which proposes 

 in brief that the commission will, at its own expense, install fish 

 screens on water diversions where the water is used initially, primar- 

 ily, and in the major portion thereof for agricultural purposes ; and 

 all other ditch owners, where water is used for other purposes, shall 

 install fish screens at their own expense. All screens, regardless of 

 how or when installed, shall be operated and maintained by the ditch 

 owner. The proposed bill is much simpler than the existing fisli 

 screen law and it is believed that it will be workable and its appli- 

 cation would tend to better relations between the ditch owners, water 

 users, and this commission. This bill will be introduced at the 1941 

 legislative session and it is hoped that those who are interested in the 

 protection of fish life in this State will assist and do what they can to 

 see that it is enacted and becomes the law. 



In the biennium over 1,500 surveys, inspections, and investiga- 

 tions of various kinds were made and several hundred maps, sketches, 

 and plans were prepared. 



