These are concepts on the Multi-Year Stream Maintenance Program agreed to between regulatory agencies and District staff in four meetings between June and September 2000. The regulatory agencies represented were USACE, USEPA, USFWS, CDFG, and RWQCB--San Francisco Region.
* Subsequent to the year 2000 meetings with agencies, the District revised the bank protection program to include additional mitigation. See revised Appendix E of the SMP.
| Program Description | |
| #1 | The primary types of work covered in the routine Stream Maintenance Program are sediment removal, vegetation management, and bank protection in and adjacent to stream channels and canals. Vegetation management is defined as including manual and mechanical removal and herbicide spraying of vegetation. |
| #2 | The Stream Maintenance Program may qualify for multiyear permits (or other forms of multiyear approvals) from the USACE, the California RWQCBs, and the CDFG. Effects on species listed under the federal ESA will require review by the USFWS and/or NMFS. |
| #3 | The permit applications will include a program description, impact assessment, mitigation proposal, monitoring plan, and assessment of effects on rare species. The permit applications will be submitted in January or February 2001, the draft EIR will be released for public review 1 month later, and the EIR will be finalized in June 2001. It is assumed that a decision on the permits can be finalized by July 2001 or 6 months after submittal of the permit application, whichever occurs latest. |
| #4 | Work, impact, and mitigation areas will be described in both linear feet and acres in the EIR and permit applications, and will be identified separately for each basin (San Francisco Bay and Monterey Bay). Amounts of work of different types will be identified by jurisdiction of each agency. |
| Impact Analysis | |
| #5 | The one-time accounting approach for impacts is acceptable. Repeatedly mitigating for impacts at the same location will not be required for routine stream maintenance. |
| #6 | Impacts to wetlands in concrete channels are currently treated in the same manner as those in earthen channels |
| #7 | Replacement of existing bank protection structures with similar or less impacting designs has minimal impacts and is considered a routine maintenance activity. |
| #8 | No consensus was reached on the level of impact of new bank protection work and whether it should be considered routine stream maintenance. All agencies recognize the proposals the District has incorporated into the bank protection program to incorporate more biotechnical designs; however, they find that there is still the potential for impacts which are cumulatively not minimal. They encourage the District to further investigate residual impacts of the bank protection program.* |
| Mitigation | |
| #9 | Mitigation will match impacts by basin (San Francisco Bay vs. Monterey Bay drainages). |
| #10 | It is preferable to complete mitigation prior to impacts. As much mitigation should be completed in the early years of the program as possible. |
| #11 | Larger, sustainable sites are preferable to smaller, fragmented sites. Adjacent land uses, especially those in public ownership, will be evaluated to determine sustainability and suitable size of a site. |
| #12 | Specific streams or stream reaches will be targeted for mitigation, restoration, and enhancement, where the most value and function will be obtained. When looking at values and functions, the net gain in value and function will be considered in addition to the existing values and functions. Areas outside of target streams can also be considered. Target streams will be identified in the EIR and permit applications. |
| #13 | Creation of freshwater and tidal wetlands must be included as part of the mitigation program. Other mitigation techniques, such as invasive species control and land preservation, are acceptable as long as the mitigation package includes creation of wetlands. |
| #14 | Land preservation opportunities should be sought in the lower and middle watersheds as well as the upper watershed. Greater functions and values will be recognized for preservation activities that include some component of ecological restoration or management of natural resources. |
| #15 | A comprehensive program of controlling nonnative, invasive riparian vegetation (such as Arundo donax) is acceptable as mitigation for the impacts of vegetation management. |
| #16 | A comprehensive program of controlling nonnative invasive tidal vegetation (Spartina alterniflora) is acceptable as either partial mitigation for the impacts on tidal wetlands, or as compensation for the temporal loss of tidal wetlands when impacts precede mitigation. |
| #17 | An equal length of creekside will be planted with riparian species for any new impervious bank protection projects (concrete lining, gunite, sack concrete but not rock riprap). Agencies recommend that this type of planting not be placed at the top of bank only and not consist of infilling among other vegetation. The District will include guidance in the EIR and permit application on how such replacement planting sites will be selected.* |
| #18 | All agencies encourage the District to reconsider the need for mitigation to address the impacts of the bank protection program.* |
| #19 | Mitigation will be coordinated and linked within the Stream Maintenance Program, with other District projects (especially the multiple species Habitat Conservation Plan [HCP]), and with preservation and enhancement efforts of others. |
| #20 | The agencies recommend that all potential mitigation sites be identified in the EIR and permit applications, or a commitment be made to have a percentage of mitigation done within specific target streams. The feasibility of providing mitigation at either the specific sites or within the target streams will be evaluated and discussed in these documents, and interim deadlines will be provided. The agencies suggest that the 5-year point of the permit may be a good period to evaluate the status of the mitigation program. |
| Reporting | |
| #21 | Work areas and mitigation efforts will be tracked on an annual basis and reported to the agencies. |
| #22 | For the first 5 years, the District will provide the agencies with a tour after completion of the work season of representative work areas (especially those along target streams) for that year and all mitigation sites. Preconstruction photographs will be provided. |