CEQA, FPCP, GPR: SOS!!!

heidi08 City Reports, Creative Solutions September 29, 2008

In conversation this weekend with Skip Lisle, we talked about our concerns for the watershed work proposed for discussion in Wednesday’s Agenda. Skip shared my thought that this could significantly impact the beavers and felt that he could offer no assurance of their safety without clearly reviewing the proposal outline. He emphasized that the allegations of the property owners have not been proven, and that since the risk of disrupting the beavers is so high there is a need to verify their concerns before any work begins.

With that in mind, I spent some time researching the grant, ground penetrating radar (GPR) and the California Environmental Qualities Act. (By the way, I never appreciated before what a truly insightful piece of legistlation this was. It’s a great read. Here’s my favorite part:

§ 21000. Legislative intent(c) There is a need to understand the relationship between the maintenance of high-quality ecological systems and the general welfare of the people of the state, including their enjoyment of the natural resources of the state.

Worth A Dam is sending a letter to the city outlinining our concerns and the legal basis for them. We offer four proposals, which I thought I’d share so that you can start thinking in terms of what the city needs to do to protect the beavers as it undertakes this work.

We would therefore propose the city implement the following:

1. A GPR study should be done of the area to learn whether the bank, in fact, is significantly compromised and warrants any repairs. Money for this study should be fronted by the property owners and reimbursed by the city if such damage is discovered. If not, the bank work should be delayed until the beavers voluntarily vacate that lodge.

2. Any work proposed on either bank as part of this project should be submitted to Skip Lisle, MS for review and consideration of likely impact on the beavers. His input should be presented for public consideration prior to pursuit of grant monies or initial excavation.

3. Worth A Dam should be named a primary consultant in this work and be included in implementation and planning meetings. This will allow for constantly updated information about our beaver colony, as well as maximizing public knowledge and community support for the project.

4. When work is undertaken, a live feed camera should be installed at the site so that the area is visible either on the city website or Worth A Dam website and the health and safety of the beavers can be more easily monitored.

Of primary concern is our position that this work can be hugely impactful to our beavers. There is some talk that piling can be driven behind the lodge with minimal disruption, or even that the top of the lodge could be removed “to make sure the slats won’t hurt the beavers”. (I don’t know about you but I wouldn’t stay in any home where near a piledriver.) I can think of no way that this happens without displacing our colony, perhaps permanently. Come wednesday and remind the city to tread lightly.

[youtube:http://youtube.com/watch?v=95kyCZA6FLA]

It was the best of times…and well, you know.

heidi08 Beaver News, City Reports September 27, 2008

So this week the beavers offically “lawyered up” with a little help from Worth A Dam. A sharp environmental attorney recommended by our friends at the sierra club and the estuary project wrote a letter to the city stating, among other things, that removal of the beavers presented a significant impact on the environment and may be a violation of the standards of CEQA. He reviewed the Friends of Lake Skinner case we talked about before, emphasized the limits of city privacy outlined in the Brown Act and encouraged the city to do the right thing.

At the end of the day there was a 6:00pm release of the agenda for wednesday’s meeting. It contained a plan for implementing the recommendations from the subcommittee report, including a proposal to begin work on an “emergency bank stabilization project” effective immediately. Encouraging aspects include the plan to adopt the subcommittee’s recommendation for a water quality testing, a creek walk, volunteer work, and educational opportunities. Less encouraging is the promise to work with alot of nice agencies EXCEPT Worth A Dam.

We anticipate developing partnerships with the Alhambra Watershed Council, Friends of Alhambra Creek, Alhambra Unified School District and other community organizations as part of the grant application

Gee I wonder why we were overlooked? How would you know the best way to take the beavers needs into account without including the people who know them best? Let’s look a little closer at this agenda. Check out item 5.

CITY MANAGER

5.

Consider resolutions authorizing emergency work to stabilize the Alhambra Creek bank.

A)

Resolution Making findings and authorize the Assistant City Manger Community and Economic Development to file a Notice of Exemption in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA);

B)

Resolution declaring the Emergency Creek Bank Stabilization, Alhambra Creek, Escobar to Marina Vista Project, an emergency project in accordance with California Public Contract Code section 22050; and

C)

Approving the Emergency Creek Bank Stabilization, Alhambra Creek, Escobar to Marina Vista Project and allocating up to $500,000 of General Fund reserves to C3007 to complete the project and authorizing the City Manager to execute a construction contract for same.

6.

Comment(s)/Update(s)/Report(s).

Ahh there’s the bee in the rose. The work to be done on the bank should be done with an exemption for CEQA meaning without any regard to the environmental impact (or the beavers) whatsoever. Emergency Creek Bank Stabilization. What exactly is the emergency? I’m hard pressed to decide if its the election or the rainy season. Hmm, which one is more easy to anticipate and plan for? The standard is that they are not supposed to work in the creek after October 15th execpt for emergencies, hence the emergency status and the bogus report in the gazette that city staff “fell into a beaver hole” reviewing the dredging site.

Last night I was encouraged by Julian and Linda’s enthusiasm about this development. Today I’m not so sure. From where I sit it looks like the city has plans to “use” the beavers as a grant writing tool. The property owners have successfully “used” the beavers to get what they’ve wanted all along. And the beavers (and the people who care about them) will pay the price.

The beavers need your support. Come to the meeting wednesday.

[youtube:http://youtube.com/watch?v=u_Gasq6qfzU]

Explanation To Follow

heidi08 pictures September 27, 2008

Photo Cheryl Reynolds

710 77345

heidi08 City Reports, Creative Solutions September 26, 2008

Did you ever type those numbers into a calculator as a child and see what it reads? (Go ahead, I’ll wait. Remember to turn it.) Well I got the most interesting email from Beaver friend Igor Skaredoff about the 300,000 settlement reached yesterday regarding the relatively small 2006 oil spill. Turns out 50,000 of that money has to go to the city of Martinez towards a Marina project, which, since the beavers are in the tidal area of the creek it is theoretically possible that that money could be used to implement the bank stabilization/flood management proposals outlined in the report.

In its settlement, Equilon Enterprises LLC, which operates the Shell Martinez Refinery, agreed to pay a civil penalty of $250,000 to Fish and Game and $50,000 to the city of Martinez, which will use the finds for a community project along the waterfront, according to Lesher.

Igor thinks it’s worth pursuing, and this could be paired with matching grant money if it was done right. This could solve the city’s lawsuit problems and take care of the beavers at the same time. Mark Ross was less hopeful, saying that these moneys are often very specific in their wording and may need to be for the Marina proper. Still, the Granger’s wharf area is part of the Marina and with the beavers working as far down as the train bridge, I would say that’s possible. Remember, healthy beavers mean a healthy creek, so its work worth thinking about.

“We Meant to Do That”

heidi08 City Reports, Educational September 25, 2008

The official word from the city engineer is that the three “notches” in the birm are intentional outlets to allow the high waters to flow back to the creek and to allow high tide to flow up to the plain and create a wetlands. Yes it sounds fishy to me too. And speaking of fishy, somebody better dump a load of mosquito fish in all that standing water because they are having a breeding party over there.

PS If that’s a “notch” I completely understand why they wanted to “notch the dams”.

Positive news: I’m off this morning to Rona Zollinger’s ESA class to talk about beavers and their effect on the habitat. I’m hoping we can work out a regular ESA appearance on the blog, and apparently two students have already signed up to be on a committee with us. How cool is that? Wish me luck…

Update:

Met with 24 members of America’s future and talked beavers for an hour. Great group of kids, very attentive and interested, and lots of informative questions. We have three new “volunteers” that will get an hour a week of class time to work on our “cause”. I gave them tee-shirts and all three had donned them before I left. Rona did a great job of getting them down to work, and had each of them say something they got out of the lecture before I left. I heard a lot of “I never knew that before” and also some very genuine compliments from some tough looking critics who remarked “That really made me pay attention the whole time, and I usually don’t”.

Thanks Rona. The next step will be deputizing your students to do this training program for the lower grades. Can’t wait.