Meeting Summary February 2, 2001
Chairman Spahr welcomed everyone and opened the meeting.
Introductions: Lee Hansmann introduced Eric Johnson, a newly elected County Commissioner from Lewis County, Marc Duboiski, former Lewis County staff to the Partnership who now works for the Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation, and Brian Abbot the IAC staff person who will be managing salmon recovery grants in the Chehalis Basin.
Eighteen of the thirty-two member organizations had a representative or alternate at the meeting. Thirty-one additional citizens, alternates, or visitor attended.
The committee evaluating the by-laws met for the second time on January 11 to review and discuss a draft. The next meeting is scheduled for the afternoon of February 15th in Napavine.
There is discussion of re-naming the "by-laws" something less formal. Other basins have used the term "operating procedures" which is more descriptive. The operating procedures would be much more detailed than the current by-laws. Currently the chapters of the draft operating procedures are:
During its discussions, members of the by-law review committee also raised concerns about the amount of time that the U.S. FWS is taking to fill the fish restoration position that has been vacant since Mike Kelly left. Mike was very active in the Partnership as well as coordinating the USFWS habitat restoration program (and grants). No USFWS funds have been allocated to local restoration projects since Mike left. One of the committee members prepared a letter to the USFWS raising these concerns for the Chair of the Partnership to sign. The letter was read to the Partnership and everyone agreed that the Chair should sign the letter.
The January meeting was held in Chehalis with a focus on municipal water and wastewater issues. The CAC toured the water treatment plant where Chehalis treats water taken from the Newaukum River for its municipal supply and the wastewater treatment facility where the City treats the wastewater from its businesses and homes. This meeting helped the CAC members and others who attended appreciate the "water" issues the City faces.
In addition to the tour, the CAC came up with a list of suggested action items for the Partnership. The one specifically mentioned today was to have a large basin map at each Partnership meeting so people who are not familiar with the entire basin can use the map for reference when areas they are unfamiliar with are mentioned.
The next meeting of the Citizen's Advisory Committee will be on February 14, 2001 at the CRC offices in Oakville. The purpose of the meeting will be to assist the Lead Agency for watershed planning effort (Grays Harbor County) with initial work on a Public Outreach Plan.
The only purpose of today's discussion was to draw attention to the draft Annual Plan of Work that was included in the package mailed out for this meeting. There are many demands competing for the attention of the Partnership and over the last couple of years these demands have more or less controlled the actions of the Partnership. The Annual Plan of Work will help the Partnership manage its workload by identifying priority activities that need to be accomplished during the year, assigning target dates and responsible parties, and allowing the Partnership to track progress.
Once the Annual Plan of Work nears its final draft form it will be brought to the Partnership for review, modification and adoption. There was general support among the Partnership members present for this effort, along with recognition of the need for such a document.
A table of proposed Annual Plan of Work elements is included with this summary. Partnership members are encouraged to comment on the elements, suggest target dates for individual elements and volunteer to take responsibility for individual elements.
Fecal Coliform Bacteria: More than 80% of the total fecal coliform bacteria load to Grays Harbor comes from the rivers entering into the harbor. Approximately 50% of this loading is from the upper Chehalis River drainage. A 65% reduction in fecal coliform bacteria loading from the rivers must be achieved for the system to meet state water quality standards. The advisory group has developed a vision statement. The last advisory group meeting included a panel presentation by conservation districts from the four counties (Grays Harbor, Lewis, Mason, and Thurston) on agricultural issues. The next meeting is February 13th at the Oakville office of the Chehalis River Council. The agenda includes a panel presentation by County Health Department staff on septic system management programs and a discussion of how the fecal coliform TMDL could help address interests of the Health Departments.
Temperature: Working together, EPA and Ecology have revised the 1999 Temperature TMDL for the Upper Chehalis Basin. The revisions change the temperature wasteload allocations for point source discharges to the river where temperature is warmer than the water quality standard, and clarify how forestland activities will be handled. A public review and comment period on the revised TMDL package opened January 30 and continues through March 16. A brief overview of the Temperature TMDL will be scheduled for the February 23 Partnership meeting.
The application period for water quality grants and loans administered by the Department of Ecology is open through March 2, 2001. Ecology has kept the option for local prioritization of grant/loan applications in the rule that guides its administration of the grant/loan program. The local prioritization process continues to be similar to the one used for the last two years. This means that the Partnership has the opportunity to prioritize local grant/loan applications from the Chehalis Basin. If the Partnership does choose to carry out the local prioritization, the projects benefit by receiving additional points that help them compete for funding against projects from the rest of the state. If the Partnership (or some other group made up of many of the same members) does not carry out the prioritization, local projects have to compete on a statewide basis without the benefit of the extra points.
During the general discussion that followed individual Partnership members expressed both support for, and reservations about, the local prioritization process. It was agreed that the way the funding rule is written, not doing the local prioritization would penalize local projects. Agreement was reached that the Partnership should move forward to carry out the local prioritization with the understanding that the process used for the last two years needs to be reviewed, and possibly modified.
J. Roach informed the Partnership that a bill has been introduced into the Senate (SB5532) that would establish a standardized data framework for the state.
The Governor has retained Jim Waldo as his special assistant on water issues for this legislative session. There were questions about who Jim Waldo is and what he will be doing for the Governor. It was suggested that an effort be made to see if he can come and talk to the Partnership about water issues and what the Governor has in mind. (See attachment on the Governor's legislative agenda for water)
Grays Harbor County (the Partnerships lead agency for watershed planning) reviewed the Watershed Planning Refresher Course that was held on February 1st. Comments from Partnership members who attended the workshop were favorable. People who have been involved with the Partnership for a while generally seemed to get more out of the workshop then some of the new members did. This points out that the Partnership may need to establish some sort of orientation for new members. The orientation would explain why the Partnership was formed, what is its purpose and what has been accomplished.
There have been requests for another workshop session on the same topic for people who were unable to attend. Salmon Recovery RCW 77.85
Grays Harbor County, acting in its role as Lead Entity for Salmon Recovery in the Chehalis Basin, has been real busy with salmon recovery work for the last week. This included three days of meetings with the Salmon Recovery Funding (SRF) Board and the Lead Entity Advisory Group (LEAG).
The County announced the results of the Salmon Recovery Funding Board's decisions on what projects would be funded this year. Chehalis Basin salmon recovery projects received just over $1.2 million out of the almost $32 million awarded statewide. A press release from the SRF Board and tables showing who received the funds is attached.
The process this year went much smoother than the first year. The SRF Board provided more direct support for Lead Entities and we were able to build on our experiences the first year. Next steps:
There will be a workshop in March for successful project applicants,
The application period for the next funding cycle should open up sometime around July,
Once the Limiting Factors Analysis (LFA) for the Chehalis Basin is completed this year there is no requirement that the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) set up under the law to help with the LFA continue. The TAG has also had a role in technical review of individual project proposals as part of the local prioritization process. The Lead Entity Advisory Group (LEAG) established by the Department of Fish and Wildlife has discussed this, and there is general agreement that strong technical reviews of each project at the local level continue to be a part of the local project ranking process. In the Chehalis Basin, the Lead Entity (Grays Harbor County) has assumed that we would continue using a process that combines review by a technical panel with a review by citizens to balance habitat and social needs.
Approximately 80% of the local projects are expected to be completed by the end of this summer. A summary of the individual projects will be made available. This summary is currently available on the SRF Board web site: www.wa.gov/iac/SRFBwhatsnew.html.
It was suggested that a letter be sent to the Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation (IAC) and the SRF Board thanking them for listening to local salmon recovery project proponents after the first round of applications. It was particularly helpful to have the SRF Board Technical Review Panel visit each basin and meet with local groups before the application process to provide guidance. The Lead Entity was directed to prepare and send a letter.
It was also suggested that the Partnership see of there is any way it can help coordinate resources for project applications being prepared by individuals. Often they don't have all the resources or connections that organized groups do. Dr. Sodhi indicated that the Chehalis Basin Fisheries Task Force could take that role.
The Limiting Factors Analysis is in draft form. The individual draft reports have been posted on the web at http://members.home.net/bioforsalmon/home.htm. Carol Smith needs to get the reports wrapped up by the end of the fiscal year in June. If anyone wants to comment on the draft reports they can do so before the end of March.
The Technical Advisory Group helping with the LFA will be developing criteria to prioritize habitat needs identified in the Limiting Factors Analysis. Meetings of the TAG are scheduled for February 8 and February 22 to accomplish this. The prioritization will be one of the basic building blocks of a detailed salmon recovery strategy for the basin. The Lead Entity promised the SRF Board that we would have a salmon recover strategy "well under way" before the next round of funding for salmon recovery projects.
There was no report on the Centralia Flood Damage Reduction Project.
Individual Partnership members raised concerns about what is driving flood control work under the Centralia Flood Damage Reduction project. Some feel it is just being done to promote growth at the expense of the taxpayer. There were also questions about how the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the jurisdiction of the ACOE might affect this project. No one responded to these questions at the meeting.
The Department of Fish and Wildlife representative reminded the group that a Flood Control Alternatives sub-committee has been set up to consider different alternatives being proposed under the Centralia Flood Damage Reduction project. This group is looking at the effect of the different flood damage reduction proposals and how they might be mitigated.
Grays Harbor County is the local lead on this project. Lori Morris is the project contact for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). In 1999 that ACOE agreed to do a reconnaissance study to investigate whether or not there are federal interests that could be met by an ecosystem restoration project in the Chehalis Basin. The ACOE has determined that, yes they do have an interest here that would justify a basin wide ecosystem restoration project.
This is a distinct project from the Centralia Flood Damage Reduction project. This project is based on the recognition that there are basin-wide needs for flood control, mitigation and restoring the health of the basin. The two projects are related however, and eventually both projects will work together.
J. Roach introduced Lynn Singleton, Salmon and Watershed Information Management Coordinator for the Governor's Salmon Recovery Office. Lynn explained what the state is currently doing in its effort to manage information/data, and what types of approaches are being evaluated that would make that information/data available in a timely manner to groups involved in salmon recovery and watershed planning.
Lynn also ask the Partnership what information and data needs we have and how they might best be met. Do we need specific types of information and data? Are there specific times that we need information and data? Do we have problems accessing information and data that we should be able to retrieve? Are there other issues we face regarding access and sharing of information and data?
There was a general discussion about the information/data needs and preferences of various Partnership members. A lot of the needs are related to:
Compiling data collected under special projects such as the Level 1 Assessment the Partnership just funded or salmon recovery projects. If this information can be compiled so it is available to different groups it will save time on subsequent projects.
Accessing existing information/data. The Salmon Recovery Data Viewer CD just completed for WRIA 22 is one example of how data can be made available. Another approach would be web-based storage. Each has advantages and disadvantages.
This page created and maintained by Chehalis River Council
Send comments or questions to the: Chehalis River Council