GARRAPATA CREEK WATERSHED COUNCIL MEETING Minutes

Date: - July 23, 2000 - 2:00 pm.

Location: Bill and Bette Nelson's, 5910 Garrapatos Road

Attendance: 38 people

AGENDA:

1. Introduction / Welcome - Why are we here? (Ken Ekelund)

2. Brief on the Watershed Assessment. (Pacific Watershed Associates

3. Input from the Community

Why are you here?

What are your concerns

4. Organizational issues

5. Consent

6. Let's Eat!

The meeting was chaired by Ken Ekelund. Interim officers were

introduced:

President - Ken Ekelund

Vice President - Richard Taylor

Secretary - Alex Kane

Treasurer - Sally Taylor

Invited Specialists:

-Marty Gingras, Department of Fish and Game Biologist

-Danny Hagans of Pacific Watershed Associates (PWA)

-Roy Torres, Special Agent, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA

-Molly Nance from the Coast Weekly reporting on the meeting.

Ken gave the Mission statement:

The goal of the Garrapata Creek Watershed Council is to improve the

health of the Garrapata Creek Watershed through community involvement,

teamwork and education.

Ken gave an explanation of the watershed. A watershed is the area from which water flows into Garrapata Creek or one of its tributary streams: Joshua or Wildcat Creeks. It is approximately 10 sq. mile in area (map was displayed at the meeting).

Ken gave an explanation about what a watershed council is. Watershed councils are a non-governmental, non-enforcement group made up of all interested stakeholders (landowners, land managers and residents) who are willing to work for common goals of resource preservation. The approach is not new; a form of it has been used for almost 50 years. In recent years, watershed council have been organized throughout the west to bring people together to improve the water quality and health of the

watershed. They are recognized by government as a party that can represent the local voice and concerns; they can also get grant money that can not be given to individuals. It is important to have a council that invites all property owners and residents to join; we will be an open group and we need to involve as many people as possible.

Ken recommended that we concentrate on things we can agree upon; put the divisive issues aside or take them to another venue. It was also stated by someone that we should not become distracted by too many issues. We should concentrate on the biggest issues such as sediment in the creeks.

Ken talked about the origins of the group. It started as an effort by resident living along Garrapatos Road to establish a dialogue with Monterey County over how the county graded the road. For several years the residents noticed after grading a considerable amount of sand and debris went into the creek after the first rain. The road was often barely passable, required frequent work and was apparently damaging the creek with large amounts of sand. Letters about damage and ways to cause less damage have been written to the county but the issue has not been resolved. The group of residents discovered "the Green Book"

"Handbook for Forest and Ranch Roads" has been used as a guideline in

5 Northern California counties with great success; they requested that the county use these procedures. After a meeting with as many residents as possible was organized, the concept of organizing into a watershed council was first brought up.

There was discussion about the road; how could there be a way to identify problems while still maintaining property rights. Ken responded that this is what a water assessment does.

Ken reiterated that the watershed council is not a government enforcement agency, but we are hoping that watershed council will be able to more effectively as a united group.

Thanks to Scott Bogen and Ken Ekelund, we have a website:

www.garrapatacreek.org

Ken relayed a proposal from the Planning Group that the Council have quarterly meetings and possibly a community workday. We have a mailing list (and e-mail list) to contact participants. If you know anyone who has not been contacted (and should be) please give their name to Sally Taylor.

Ken talked about the recommendation by the Planning Group to proceed with a watershed assessment. Before anything can be fixed on a large scale, there has to be a large-scale or watershed inventory of problems. This is called a watershed assessment. Most active watershed councils conduct one as a first step to developing as plan and actually fixing problems.

Ken then introduced Danny Hagans of Pacific Watershed Associates.

Danny Hagans, co-founder of Pacific Watershed Associates, gave us some of his background. He formed PWA with Bill Weaver and co-authored the "Green Book", a book on forest and ranch road maintenance. The practices in this book are increasingly used by groups all over the west. It was stated that Fish and Game considers it the best guide available on this subject. He and Bill Weaver have an extensive background in assessing erosion problems and restoration, they worked with the National Park Service, and founded PWA as an educational outreach for people who live in watersheds. Danny spoke about our eligibility (as a Council) for grants from Dept. of Fish & Game, to do a watershed assessment - which would give an overview of the issues and give us an inventory of possible problems. The assessment does give a priority to problems it uncovers; however, the decision to move ahead to actually fix the problems uncovered would only come after stakeholders were involved and a consensus was reached to move forward. In other words, our watershed council will meet to decide on any recommendations before there was any action. No details of possible violation would be included in the report that was forwarded to Fish and Game. Confidentiality is critical part of the watershed repair process. If violations were passed to authorities this type of effort would have failed years ago.

Danny stated that he probably agreed with the residents that sediment in the creek seems to be the biggest threat to the fish, much of which comes from roads, although a lot is also natural; other issues are invasive species, will be looked at but the concentration will be on roads.

It was pointed out that Garrapata Creek is a steelhead creek - the fish are classified as ‘threatened' several years ago. That is the step before ‘endangered’. Endangered means that the species is in danger of becoming extinct! There are new 4(d)rules that go in effect on September 8, 2000) which state that you cannot harm steelhead or their habitat. The watershed council knows that we need to spend a lot of effort educating ourselves on what we can and can't do. The goal of the group is to help the fish and help ourselves by making sure we are involved in any efforts to help the fish. Someone pointed out that the fish are on the ropes; the fish are the 'canaries in the mines', when we see them disappear we know that our environment is in big trouble.

Danny talked about the grant some more. The deadline for the current grant cycle is August 11. Letters of agreement to the watershed assessment were available at the meeting for property owners to sign,if they wished to participate in the assessment. If you need a form to sign, please contact Ken Ekelund at 625-9621 for a copy. If you were not able to meet this deadline the letters can still be sent. We are seeking as many participants as possible.

Because of the steelhead, we are entering an era of more government, which may lead to closer scrutiny of landowners’ activities because the fish are 'on the ropes.'

There was discussion about the condition of the creeks in our watershed. Although our watershed is not in as bad condition as many, we still have problems that need to be addressed. Even though the recent El Nino's caused a lot of damage there is clearly a human reason why the steelhead are in decline. But man accelerated erosion into the creeks; the roads should be "hydrologically as invisible as possible". The goal is to try not to alter the natural drainage.'

Question: What if I have a problem on my property that is identified by the assessment, will I be fined? Is there any help available?

Answer: The people conducting the assessment are not enforcement officers. The results of the specifics of the assessment are confidential. If there are conditions that are clearly not in compliance with the law, PWA will go to the property owner about it - it won't be in the report.

Once we have conducted an assessment, there are large amounts of "Federal and State" money that we, as a watershed council, may be able to get to correct erosion problems. Most would be funded by a grant with a small percentage of the repair work funded by the owners. There are few strings attached to $ for the assessment process; however, there may some expense involved with the actual clean up. Since we will ask for approval on each step in the process, giving support to the assessment does not mean that you would be asked to pay for it later. On the other hand, when the fixes are outlined in the assessment, it is typical to have landowners pay around 5% of the total bill.

There was a question if the county was starting to use these procedures yet. As far as anyone at the meeting knew, the County is not doing anything different yet; however, five Northern California counties are using PWA methods to maintain over 6,000 miles of rural, dirt roads. Monterey county will eventually employ these procedures.

Danny Hagans talked in some detail about the kinds of work that might be needed to make a road as fish friendly as possible. He stated with more creative ditching and grading, out-slope, etc., more frequent culverts, rolling dips, upgrading and storm proofing roads. The road will last longer, so it will cheaper to maintain and better for the fish. He also stated that it is up to the owner to choose which steps they were going to implement. Generally roads are not decommissioned without their owner’s concurrence.

The Watershed Assessment would give a cost proposal for implementation,

including heavy equipment. It would also be a one time thing - not an

‘invasion’ or on-going process.

The question was asked by someone in the audience:" What if we did nothing? What would happen? The response was that nothing may happen to you if you are in violation. On the other hand the new rules make it easier for people to turn in their neighbor. Unlike the people who are charged with helping the watershed councils, if the enforcement agency gets involved in the complaint process, they have no choice but to move ahead. Even if the complaint is shown to be without merit, it puts you on their radar. This is probably the best reason for a watershed council. Since we are actively trying to fix the problem, there is less reason for enforcement agencies to ‘come after us’. We can get ahead of the curve with assessment and implementation."

With a pro-active approach we would be getting ahead of the situation and dealing with biologists, instead of wardens.

Marty Gingras (F&G) and Roy Torres (Marine Fisheries) confirmed that

there will be a definite impact on any group, government or private landowner because of the 4(d) rules. The new rules apply to companies, private owners, citizens and government…everyone.

The new 4(d) rules require that counties make their programs fish friendly. If they are not, they will be stopped. Private landowners were cautioned that past practices such as road grading their own roads, may open them up to legal action, if it is found that they have damaged habitat. If you will need a county permit, you will probably need Fish and Game approval before you go forward.

(The Taylors' experience in this area is that the definition of grading that requires a permit is anything moving over 100 cubic yards or dirt or greater than a 30% slope.)

The types of work that definitely need a permit, are any stream crossings or culverts that drain close to a creek.

The most important quote of the day, which we believe, was stated by Marty Gingras: "We are entering a different era with the fish decline."

Other concerns/comments discussed towards the end of the meeting:

- How to enlist more people in the council and fixing the watershed

- What is available to Eradicate cape ivy, hemlock, and other invasive species.

- The need to focus on one problem at a time.

Q. What about septic problems?

A- there are some $ available for fixing. Septic problems cause problems for fish. It is not the same source of money be sought for the assessment grant.

Consensus:

This group should move forward as a watershed council. There was also consensus that there should be a watershed assessment. Those people who signed up will be in the assessment of the watershed, those who don't will have no direct involvement(no one come on their property).

Deborah Streeter from the Mid-Coast Fire Brigade Auxiliary announced a benefit to be held at the new site to break ground on the new Fire House - September 3^rd from 1 until 4 pm.

Proposed that the next general meeting be held on December 16th

(Saturday) at Carol Fisch's at the Stone House, at Garrapata Beach.

The meeting was adjourned to a delicious potluck buffet, with special

thanks to Bill and Bette Nelson and Greg Rutherig for such a wonderful

feast and venue!

Compiled by Alex Kane and Sally Taylor. Edited by Ken Ekelund.