May 20, 2004
The meeting of the American River Watershed Group (ARWG) meeting was called to order by Rich Gresham, Placer County Resource Conservation District at 10:03 a.m. at Placer County Water Agency’s “American River Room” located at 144 Ferguson Road, Auburn.
Present: Rich Gresham, Stan MacDonald, Stewart Feldman, and Katie Maloney, Placer County Resource Conservation District (PCRCD); Kevin Roberts, Sierra Pacific Industries (SPI); Mal Toy and Marie Davis, Placer County Water Agency (PCWA); John Lane, Teichert Materials; Ellen Carlson, Florin RCD; Sue Lunsford, Foresthill High School Principal; Harry Hickman, American River Watershed Institute (ARWI) and Placer High School, and Tom Amesbury, Forester SFCI.
Subcommittee Reports:
Placer County Fire Safe Alliance (Alliance):
Rich Gresham reported the Alliance has been discussing its future and what that might look like. Discussion regarding the group’s structure will continue at the next meeting set for May 25th at 10:00 a.m. at PCWA.
Business:
ARWG Watershed Coordinator Candidate Review/Selection Update:
Rich Gresham reported the Request for Proposals garnered fifteen responses with nine proposals received from both in state and out of state candidates. Copies of the proposals have been delivered to the ARWG representatives, Rich Johnson and Marie Davis, and members of the RCD Board’s Ad Hoc Coordinator Selection Committee. He noted the committee is looking to establish a meeting date to continue with the review process. The committee will develop selection criteria and move forward with the selection process. RCD Board Chairman Tom Wehri is in charge of moving the process forward.
Mal Toy requested additional time for the selection process to allow for a thorough review of the candidates.
Rich reported the Dept. of Conservation (DOC)/RCD contract is in place and indicated that no further approval from DOC is necessary to move forward with the process and select a candidate. He stressed the selection process will be determined by the committee.
Mal reiterated the importance of having an opportunity to thoroughly interview the candidates in the selection process.
Water Quality Monitoring Discussion:
Rich noted this agenda item is a continuation of last month’s discussion regarding the subject of water quality monitoring and what that might look like.
John Lane noted he was stimulated by last month’s presentation regarding water quality monitoring efforts around the state and inquired as to what the group’s monitoring efforts in the past have entailed. He noted his background as a chemist and water quality monitoring experience that includes the development of Quality Assurance Project Plans (QAPPs) and development and implementation of monitoring efforts.
Rich Gresham noted the ARWG already has a QAPP in place with the regional water quality control board.
He indicated Harry Hickman has conducted some monitoring efforts in the upper watershed.
Harry Hickman noted the monitoring that has taken place has been for solely for educational purposes.
It was also noted that entities located within the watershed are conducting individual monitoring efforts suited to their particular purposes.
John Lane suggested identifying and approaching those entities about sharing their information and reviewing the results of those efforts as a starting place in a possible monitoring effort.
Tom Amesbury gave an overview of how others are conducting monitoring efforts including North Coast efforts and South Yuba River Citizens League (SYRCL) efforts.
Tom highly recommended that any monitoring efforts focus on developing good protocols, a third party review process, autonomous oversight of the data produced, and the development of qualified volunteers.
Rich noted it would be useful to acquire baseline data from wherever it can be found and John Lane concurred.
Tom noted good hydrology data is incorporated into some historical documents that should be reviewed for possible baseline data inclusion. He also suggested reviewing existing data to identify data gaps that need to be filled.
Group discussion regarding components of a monitoring plan brought forth the need to identify goals and objects as the first step.
Rich suggested the ARWG “Sediment Dynamics Study” (SDS) Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) might work to define how monitoring might move forward in the context of the SDS and requested they include John Lane in their discussions on the subject.
John Lane offered his expertise and support to the ARWG and TAC in a continuing conversation regarding a monitoring effort.
Inter-Agency I-80 Vegetation Management Discussion:
Rich Gresham reported the CEQA environmental process has slowed the proposed fuel load reduction project down and that CalTrans is currently working through the review process.
The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has the funding for the project in place and once the CEQA process is completed fuel load reduction efforts will take place along the I-80 corridor starting at Applegate and going eastward. He noted there may additional public education opportunities that could include getting adjacent private landowners involved in parallel fuel load reduction efforts.
Overview of EQIP Practices within the American River Watershed:
Rich reported Cliff Heitz was unable to make the meeting due to his work load. The overview will be re-scheduled.
Foresthill High School Curriculum Update:
Sue Lunsford re-introduced herself to the group and gave an overview of the progress of the new Foresthill High School in terms of construction and staffing.
The
environmental and natural resource curriculum based on environmental
sciences and applied technology will be in conjunction with the ROP
program. The first year’s program will offer biology, earth
science, and chemistry. She expressed the hope of acquiring
Geographic Positioning System (GPS) equipment and reviewed
potential projects that include the establishment of trails and a
native plant garden. Also being discussed is a program that will
include working with the US Forest Service on field research within
the watershed.
The second year’s program is expected to include production classes in marketing and coordination as well as applied technology.
Sue thanked Harry Hickman for his efforts that resulted in several teachers being trained in the Adopt-A-Watershed Program.
Stewart Feldman noted the “Burning Issues” curriculum is available through Luana Dowling with the Foresthill and Iowa Hill Fire Departments.
Group discussion revolved around different educational programs and various opportunities for partnering with local entities, programs, and colleges.
She reported the school will be using the GLOBE program next year and is pursuing funding support for their programs.
Rich suggested the Sacramento River Watershed Program may have assistance available to help fund the GLOBE program, reviewed by the group a couple of months ago.
Other potential funding sources including the Sierra Nevada Alliance were noted.
The group thanked Sue for her update and wished her luck with the educational effort.
Open Discussion:
Stewart Feldman reviewed the meetings taking place with PG&E noting they may be of interest to the group.
Rich clarified the Placer County RCD is working with PG&E in conjunction with the Nevada County RCD regarding a potential Bear Valley meadow restoration project that will build upon restoration efforts already implemented by the Granite Bay Flycasters. Nevada and Placer Counties, the RCDs, and CA Fish & Game are showing an interest in developing a restoration project.
Rich indicated PG&E would like to develop a comprehensive management plan for those PG&E watershed lands targeted for divestiture. A plan must be in place before any watershed lands can be divested.
Stewart suggested having Bob Fratini from PG&E come and address the group regarding their watershed lands divestiture.
The group displayed an interest in the subject.
Next Meeting and Adjournment:
The next meeting will take place on June 17th. The meeting was adjourned at 11:20 a.m.