Chehalis Basin Partnership Agenda and Minuts September 2000

Directions:

From I-5 - Take Exit 88. Go West on Route 12 toward Rochester. Drive through Rochester and continue 8 miles West until you see the signs for the Chehalis Tribal Center/Lucky Eagle Casino (Anderson Road). Turn left onto Anderson Road and go straight until you reach the stop sign at the intersection of 188th Ave. SW. Turn left on 188th Ave SW to the Chehalis Casino.

____________

From Route 8 - Take Route 12 exit. Drive through Oakville and continue East 5 miles until you see the signs for the Chehalis Tribal Center/Lucky Eagle Casino (Anderson Road). Turn right onto Anderson Road and go straight until you reach the stop sign at the intersection of 188th Ave. SW. Turn left on 188th Ave SW to the Chehalis Casino.

M e e t i n g S u m m a r y - August 25, 2000

Introduction

Chairman Bob Spahr opened the meeting and asked if there were any visitors. The following people introduced themselves: Lester Soule, Chief, Civil Projects Branch, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Dennis Fischer, Project Manager for the Centralia Flood Control Project, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Chris Runner, Project Manager for the Chehalis River Basin Study, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; George McNiel, Citizen from Chehalis.

Attendance: Thirteen designated representatives or their alternates signed the attendance record for this meeting. There were seven additional citizens, alternates, or visitors that signed the attendance record.

Flood Damage and Ecosystem Restoration Studies (Agenda item #1)

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) provided an update on the two flood control projects occurring in the Basin. Lester Soule, Chief of the Civil Projects Branch, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers introduced Dennis Fischer, Project Manager for the Centralia Flood Control Project and Chris Runner, Project Manager for the Chehalis River Basin Study. Dennis and Chris then each presented an overview of the projects they are involved in.

Centralia Flood Control Project (Dennis Fischer)

With the departure of Forrest Brooks to a new assignment Dennis Fischer has been named as the interim project manager. The Centralia Flood Control project is looking at both structural and non-structural alternatives with the intent of maximizing the benefits of any flood reduction strategies that are eventually selected. Its purpose is to analyze proposed alternatives and focus in on the ones that are most likely to be successful. No decision has been made on the preferred alternative. The intent is to be prepared with good mitigation plans for the alternative that is eventually selected. A fishery study by Lewis County and their consultant is underway, an archeological/cultural study is planned, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is preparing an inventory of wetlands.

Surveys necessary to prepare new flood contour maps with a 2-foot contour interval have been completed. Existing Thurston County topographical maps still need to be matched to the new 2-foot contour maps before actual maps can be produced. In addition, some additional river cross-sections that are needed to prepare computer models of river flood events need to be measured.

Initial design work for the "levee" alternative is underway. This involves identifying areas that are particularly important to protect and areas (such as hazardous waste sites) that are important to avoid. Evaluation of other alternatives is continuing. Design alternatives to the "rubber weir" on the Skookumchuck dam that would provide protection against the Probable Maximum Flood on the Skookumchuck River are being examined. They are also looking at the potential for soil liquefaction around the dam site, and trying to obtain permission for access to sites that need additional study.

The projected schedule for the Centralia Flood Control project is:

Draft of the General Evaluation Report should be ready in September 2001

Final General Evaluation Report should be completed in early 2002

Environmental impact statement should be done around April 2002

Recommended alternatives should be identified by around October 2002.

Chehalis River Basin Study Project (Chris Runner)

This is a basin-wide review of potential projects to determine if there is a federal interest in any of the projects. Over 70 projects have been identified and many of them appear to have some federal interests such as flood damage reduction or navigation. The timeline for this project is much shorter then the one for the project described above. A reconnaissance report should be completed around November of this year. The next step is to develop a scope of work for a feasibility study for specific projects. That step should be completed around July 2001.

Questions, comments and suggestions from the audience

The USACOE need to get more information into the hands of the general public. There is a lot of local opinion about what is being done, a lot of questions about the money being spend compared to the benefits received, and a lot of suspicion. Regular communication through the news media would be a real positive step. The USACOE representatives agree this would be a good thing and said they would look at the feasibility of doing regular monthly news releases and a regular summary of project status that could be included in the Chehalis Basin Partnership mailings.

Informing the public is important. There are many different projects being done in the Chehalis Basin by a variety of different organizations. There should be a list of these different projects with a contact person for each one.

There is currently a growing interest in water storage in the State of Washington. The governor has publicly stated that Washington doesn't have a water supply problem, it has a water management problem. Is the USACOE looking at storage options that could control floods and provide water during the summer low-flow conditions? USACOE: yes, if that is what locals want to have considered we will look at it. Check dams to control peak flows are possible. A water supply dam is more difficult because of fish passage and other issues.

During the presentation it was mentioned that data is being collected. Will that data be available to groups like the Chehalis Basin Partnership? USACOE: yes, it will definitely be available. The ability to transfer the data can be an issue, but any data collected by the USACOE is public information and we need to be able to figure out how to transfer it to those who want it.

Some members of the audience expressed suspicion about what is being done under these flood control projects. Everyone involved - the USACOE, Lewis County, and Washington State Department of Transportation - are all doing a good job of hiding whom is actually in charge. We don't know what is on that list of 70 projects, adding ecosystem restoration confuses the flood reduction issue, and from the news reports the costs of the study alone are $8 to $10 million. Actual implementation of the final recommendations could cost $100 to $200 million. And what about the Tribes in the basin, have they bought off on these things? USACOE: we do not have any agreement with the tribes yet, it is not needed for this reconnaissance phase. We will coordinate with the tribes on cultural resources. We are not sure that all 70 projects are feasible, or that there is a federal interest in them. The current project will identify those with environmental enhancement or flood damage reduction benefits to the basin. The USACOE can also do projects that benefit fish restoration.

How were the 70 projects identified and when the time comes to make recommendations how will prioritization be done? Will it involve resource groups and will their be public participation? Are these projects the result of a coordinated restoration plan? USACOE: the 70 projects were identified with the help of Grays Harbor County. A letter was sent out asking groups to identify possible projects. A team at USACOE is looking at the list of projects. That team will ask for input from a variety of people and will coordinate with the point of contact for each project. The final decision will be made based on federal interest in the project and the local sponsor's willingness to share in the cost. This is not the result of a coordinated restoration plan, but the results should support the overall restoration plan when one is developed.

The USACOE was complemented on its support for updating flood maps with the 2-foot contours. Is this information being shared with FEMA so that they can improve their own flood frequency maps? USACOE: it is available to them, but we can't make them use it. A lot of it probably depends on FEMA's budget and whether they have the funds to revise their maps. The 2-foot contour maps can be used to support an appeal of decisions made based on the existing FEMA maps and obtain localized modifications.

When will something that will have an affect on flooding actually be done? Will it be before the next flood? USACOE: actual implementation of flood control projects will not occur before 2002 and the project could take a couple of years to complete.

Is the USACOE coordinating with the Washington State Depart of Transportation and that agency's timelines for protecting I-5? USACOE: yes, we meet with DOT to discuss what can be done about I-5. In fact, there probably won't be a flood control project without the funding from DOT .

What are the criteria for determining "federal interest" in a project? USACOE: federal interest includes things like improving habitat for fish, improving water quality, and flood control. There is no federal interest in a project that only protects private property. There must be a "public interest" in the project due to environmental benefits.

Lead Agency Report (Agenda item #2)

Results of June 28th Planning Workshop

The purpose of the workshop was to look at all the responsibilities and many different tasks that have been handed to the Chehalis Basin Partnership over the last couple of years, evaluate these responsibilities, identify underlying obstacles and propose actions. The meeting was facilitated and resulted in both an implementation strategy and quarterly action items. Some of those action items need to be agreed upon by the Partnership before anything can be done.

One of the strategic directions identified was "Influencing Change at the State Level." The two actions identified for the first quarter were "Request that the state agency caucus be activated to support the work of the Partnership" and "Request that state legislators form a Chehalis Basin Caucus" similar to the Coastal Caucus. Kahle Jennings, the Department of Ecology representative to the Partnership has made a commitment to organize the state agency caucus for the Chehalis Basin. The first meeting of state agency caucus members will occur in early October. Today Grays Harbor County, acting as lead agency for the Partnership, is requesting that the Partnership authorize its Technical Advisory Committee and Grays Harbor County to develop a process for approaching state legislators about the formation of a legislative caucus for the Chehalis Basin.

During the ensuing discussion there was support for this proposal without any spoken dissent. Several Partnership members present agreed that this was one of the major reasons that they decided to become involved in the Partnership. The TAC and Grays Harbor County were directed to develop an approach to the legislature that would inform them about the purpose of the Partnership and ask them to formalize their relationship with the Partnership through a Chehalis Basin Legislative Caucus.

A second strategic direction identified at the workshop was "Engaging the Public and Leaders" in the work we are doing. The two actions identified for the first quarter were "Develop a Communication Plan" and "Activate the state agency caucus to help with the communication plan." Activation of the state agency caucus is discussed above, and one of the first items discussed will be a communication plan. Today the request to the Partnership is to establish a sub-committee to oversee development of a communication plan.

There was a discussion of whether existing committees could take on the responsibility. The Citizen's Advisory Committee has been recommending the development of a communication plan for quite a while and it was suggested that this group might be the most appropriate to lead this effort. Members of the Citizen's Advisory Committee expressed interest in providing suggestions, review and comment, but they also expressed the opinion that the sub-committee heading up the development of a communication plan should be chaired by a Partnership member. The chair of the Citizen's Advisory Committee is an appointed member of the committee, but they are not the designated county citizen representative to the Partnership from their County. Another group that can support the work -- but not do it for the Partnership -- is the state agency caucus.

Aberdeen was nominated to serve as the chair of a sub-committee to oversee development of a communication plan. Aberdeen accepted and indicated that the person involved would be either Brain Shea or Lisa Allan.

Planning and Organizing Our Work

Project Tracking - Further development of both our 2514 workplan and our strategic directions is critical to our success. This is especially true given how soon we will need to begin the process of soliciting for a Level 2 Assessment to acquire new information/data critical to our planning effort. Grays Harbor County has Microsoft Project software that can be used very effectively to track the status of projects. GIS could be a very effective tool for project tracking. Perhaps the state agency caucus and the Chehalis Basin Legislative Caucus could help coordinate and support an effort to get a basin-wide GIS system up and running.

The Partnership has received Level 3 funding from Ecology that is to be used for actual planning. These funds could be used to further develop both our 2514 workplan and our strategic directions. These two things represent the first steps towards developing a plan that will answer the question "how should we provide adequate water for people while ensuring there is adequate water for fish?

There was a general discussion about staffing needs to continue our water planning effort, local resources, and additional sources of support that may be coming from state agencies, other state level organizations such as the Salmon Recovery Funding Board, or the legislature. For the September Partnership meeting staff will begin to gather information on what types of project planning and strategic planning support is available through companies that provide this type of service for a fee.

Salmon Recovery Funding

On August 22 a number of Partnership members met with the Salmon Recovery Funding Board Scientific Review Panel. The purpose of the meeting was to provide an opportunity for the Panel to learn about the issues and needs we have in the Chehalis Basin, and the process we will use to identify and prioritize salmon recovery projects. Grays Harbor County, acting as Lead Entity, is developing a manual that explains and documents our approach.

The panel was generally impressed with the work we have done to date. We have made substantial progress and the panel found we are much farther along than they had anticipated. Panel members provided much positive and constructive feedback.

Most Lead Entities don't have a published salmon recovery strategy. They do have an idea of what needs to be done and how to accomplish that. The most important thing is to know where you are, where you are going, and to have a plan to move forward.

Grays Harbor County was complimented on the work they have done on behalf of the Partnership to prepare for this meeting - that is why the Science Review Panel was impressed. The SRF Board is trying to improve their process by seeking out more information before the project proposals are actually submitted to them for approval. A recommendation was made that the Partnership send a letter to the SRF Board thanking them for setting up the Scientific Review Panel and taking this approach. The representative from the Chehalis Basin Fisheries Task Force stated that they disagreed with sending a letter complimenting the SRF Board at this time, but that they would go along with it. The Partnership agreed that the Lead Entity (Grays Harbor County) should prepare a letter to the SRF Board.

The schedule for activities necessary to complete the SRF Board application process is as follows:

Project proponents prepare a detailed application by September 15,

Review and rank projects September 26/27,

Present the final list to the Partnership on September 29.

In order to have the time to make this work it will be necessary to change the September meeting date of the Partnership from September 22 to September 29. The Partnership agreed to change the meeting date of its September meeting from the fourth Friday of the month (when it would normally be held) to the last Friday of the month (September 29) so that Grays Harbor County has enough time to complete the evaluation and ranking of salmon recovery projects from the Chehalis Basin.

A short discussion was held concerning the state of our knowledge about salmon resources in the Chehalis Basin and how we can recognize all the work that has been done up until now. Copies of the 1993 U.S. Fish and Wildlife publication titled "Chehalis River Basin Fishery Resources: Status, Trends, and Restoration Goals" were handed out. This document is a good foundation for a comprehensive salmon recovery strategy for the basin. Although an update to incorporate new information should be examined, a lot of basins would love to have the amount of information contained in the report. Formal recognition of this report by the Partnership would help strengthen its acceptance by the SRF Board as part of the Basin Salmon Recovery Strategy. This will make it easier for the Lead Entity to justify the projects that are submitted to the SRF Board for funding.

Water Conservancy Board of Thurston County

The Partnership received another application for a change in water use. Comments are due by 9/22. At this time, the Partnership is not set up to perform a detailed review and provide comments on these applications. We support making this information available so that people can comment. Decisions by the water conservancy board might possibly be influenced so that some water from each change application is set aside to provide water for the river. A suggestion was made that copies of Water Conservancy Board application for changes in water use be sent to Partnership members so they can review and comment. Getting information into the hands of individual Partnership members so they can review it in time is a challenge. Another suggestion was made that the Partnership explore the possibility of sponsoring a web site which could announce opportunities to comment and contain links to sources of information. The Partnership members present agreed that a letter should be sent to the Water Conservancy Board of Thurston County thanking them for keeping us informed, and stating that we are not organized to comment on individual applications for a change in water use at this time. Grays Harbor County also said they would begin looking into the process and costs of establishing a web site for the Partnership.

Citizen's Advisory Committee Report (Agenda Item #3)

The Committee did not formally meet during August but instead sponsored a canoe trip on the river between Oakville and Porter. Five boats with seven people enjoyed great weather and spent an enjoyable four hours floating approximately 10 miles of the river. These events are a good way to really see what the river is doing. The September meeting of the CAC will be on Wednesday the 13th at the Lewis County Courthouse Annex.

Open Comments (Agenda item #4)

None recorded

Wrap-up/Adjourn (Agenda Item #5)

The next Chehalis Basin Partnership meeting will be held on Friday September 29, 2000 in the Bingo Hall of the Chehalis Tribe's "Lucky Eagle" Casino from 9:00 to 11:30 a.m.

This is one week later than normal.

This page created and maintained by Chehalis River Council
Send comments or questions to the: Chehalis River Council