San Mateo County Fish and Wildlife Committee Minutes, 6/21/00
Meeting was convened at 5:35 p.m. by Chair Wade Leschyn. Present were Richard Izmirian, Keith Mangold, Gloria Purcell, Carroll Ann Hodges, Timothy Frahn, Mary Paglieri, Anne Mozer and Jerry Hearn.
Changes made to the agenda: Richard requested the addition of officer election; Wade refused due to the regular timing being so soon. Tim said to put it into New Business for discussion this meeting, to which Wade agreed. Richard moved to ask the Park Commission to remove Wade from the Committee. Mary seconded. Withdrawn by Richard until after discussion.
No public comment.
Chair report: Wade apologized for the personal remark he included in Committee email.
Staff report: Gary reported on the fire on the knoll near Captain’s House in Coyote Point Park.
The Budget goes to the Board on June 28, scheduled for 10:00 a.m. The Planner position is partially back in the Budget; a f.t.e. for six months has been added, but not a Planner, instead a Manager Analyst III. $95K is proposed for playground improvements; $25K for boundary surveying, $45K is included for the Fitzgerald Marine Reserve EIR, and salary increases are planned. The $128K needed this year for radio upgrade will be paid for by the County. There is a $6M deficit, but Parks are not being cut in dollars; the % of County funding coming to Parks is down, however. Tim said the RCD was able to “pay for the position” for Chris Fischer. Carroll Ann asked about Proposition 12 funding. Gary replied that monies are being allocated within the state budget; they are not asking for projects or doing a per capita division, as has been the case in the past; so now we have to try to get into the budget legislatively. The process is evolving; it is a moving target.
Discussion followed about doing a Committee letter of support for the Parks budget and specific needs--the timing is too late; individuals may write letters or comment. Parks has asked for a Planner, 3 Rangers (Fitzgerald, Edgewood, and San Bruno Mt.) and playground equipment. Discussion ensued about the Planner position. August or September possible hiring date. Gary will send us the staff report that went to the Park Commission.
Seymour Bridge is on hold for two or three months; footings to be ripped out and lowered a bit before the November cutoff time.
Old Business: Grant request for Environmental Resource Center Frog and SF Garter Snake census. Chris Larsen was not present, and the questions we had asked have not yet been answered. Tim asked another question regarding endangered species. Regulatory oversight exists; Tim wants to be sure USF&W has seen proposal so that protocol and permits are being followed. Also, he asked about end/target dates and survey sites. Chris had said they wanted to start surveying in June; we had said that due to our process, the money would be available in August at the earliest if we approve the project. Gloria moved to continue til next month’s meeting; Jerry seconded. Unanimous. Discussion continued.
Rich: How would the survey affect management of the RL Frog? Are there management implications? How would this project dovetail into previous frog census we funded (the roadkill two year project: Chris Fischer, in the audience, promised to follow up on that study)? Chris also said volunteers may need to be permitted separately from Dr. Holland’s permits.
Jerry said that we need to have a “shepherd” or “tracker” for each grant project so we get reports, a product. Gloria volunteered to track this project and contact Chris Larsen, and Wade said he would also.
Wade said Vern would like projects within the Parks funded. Tim said that the funding we use is not limited to park land; the F & G wording is “to use in the County”. Commissioner Rich......., in the audience, said that the Commission relies on our recommendation of projects. Wade asked how the process works; would Chris Larsen come to Gary to get the permit(s)? What about private landowner? Gary replied, “If it is on County Park land.”
Tim will be the tracker for the Steelhead Use of Seasonal Reservoirs on Arroyo Leon project.
Gary wrote the contract, holding back 10% of the funding until the final report is submitted, to encourage completion. Tim said that can devastate a small group with a limited budget. RCD Steelhead should be done April 2001 at the latest.
Watershed Restoration Fund: Jerry will track; he reported that our $12,000 seed money for San Francisquito Creek has resulted in an ongoing project monitored by Stanford. We got the initial report--it was given at the Park Commission meeting last month--the steelhead ARE native and not hatchery steelhead genetically; they are closer to Mendocino steelhead than they are to the hatchery strain. Title of report is Microsatellite Analysis of Steelhead on San Francisquito Creek.
Feral Pigs: Santa Cruz is interested in non-lethal management, Jim Nee, Agriculture Commissioner has said. The Fur subcommittee meeting to go voer the Mountain Lion brochure was attended by Commissioner Bern Smith. Anne Mozer and Gloria Purcell were absent; Wade, Carroll Ann and Mary (Chair) were present. Suggestions for the brochure should be emailed to Mary.
Master Plans and EIRs in process:
Gloria reported briefly on the San Bruno Mt. Master Plan workshop. Richard asked about the timing of our comments. They need to go to the July meeting of the P.C. Discussion of timing and our responsibility. The Trails Plan is done; the comment period on that ended. We decided to hold a subcommittee meeting, followed by a special meeting of the full Committee in order to make the deadlines. July 10 is the end of the comment period; July 6 is the Park Commission meeting. Tim, Gloria, Richard and Wade volunteered to be the subcommittee and meet on Monday June 26 at 5:30 in Room 101 (Gary will secure the room).
Jerry will hand out our comments at their meeting. Wade will email results of the subcommittee meeting to the list.
Thursday the 29th will be the special meeting; we need a quorum of five.
New Business: Grant request for Watershed Mapping, presented by Trish Mulvey of the SF Estuary Institute.
They are making a map of the Bay Area Region in cooperation with USGS. Each portion of the project has discrete funding, so each piece will be completed fully and separately. She described the “quads”, database, and cost estimates. Target completion date is June 2001.
Questions: Richard: Why come to us? Why not USGS? “Your funding would give priority to the Bay Area for the USGS project/schedule”. Processing raw data? “No field work is involved; bringing the current database from a resolution of 1:100,000 to a 1:24,000; this would bring us watershed shape delineation rather than just water feature”. What is the benefit to SMCO? “The Platform work in process...” (I need someone to clarify this).
Tim: What is the scope of this? “Magnified greatly; putting database to add to maps; put names on USGS topo maps, with Reach codes”. Carroll Ann wanted clarification on the organization identity: “Stand-alone non-profit” and Trish explained their relationship to SF Estuary Project, a separate organization. Chris Fischer asked: what base is being used--the old quads?--because some water features have moved. Answer:”What they have”. Will there eventually be aerial? “Yes.” Wade: If I did an Internet search now, what would I get? “Lots of exciting stuff is on there now; if funded, SMCO will follow Alameda and Suisun; Marin would follow SMCO.”
Tim: again, benefit--who would use this? “Stormwater programs, resource agencies, flood control” Tim said that Public Works has a project going on now; would they be interested? Carroll Ann suggested ABAG? “ABAG has no funding”. On the question of the project’s value to us: “You need to decide that”. Tim asked Chris Fischer what she (the RCD) would be able to do with it. She replied, “ A base map is invaluable to watershed assessments and the ability to demonstrate/show, regional area. Can scan to 1 inch equal to 330 feet at pretty good resolution. Some concern about the water feature shifting in the short term accuracy.” Jerry said you can bring in other data (i.e., riparian habitat) and link/plug it in. Tim said that Bill V. had a flyer about the appropriate uses of these F & G Propagation Funds; locally activated project restrictions? Usually we don’t do government projects. The fund information was found (Tim) and read aloud; possibilities included a Public Information category, scientific research on fish and wildlife, and “other expenditures approved by the department”. The discussion centered on the suitability of funding by us. Other paths suggested (Planning?) Tim asked Chris Fischer about the scope of their project, the cost to do. She said $15,000 and that they are hoping for CA funding (they have applied to Ted Lempert, Assembly). Fishnet 4C connection mentioned by Jerry, also that providing a scientific basis for County projects was a goal for our Committee. Gary proposed we forward the request to Park Comm. to forward to staff to find a venue for this. Jerry gave an example: San Francisquito Creek, City of Palo Alto and City of Menlo Park did a mapped, detailed bank stabilization study costing approx. $100,000. This creates a standardized framework. Other agencies can use it; reduces cost and duplication. Several members mentioned they were impressed by the time frame. Wade said the project is a stretch for our fund purpose. Commissioner Rich....as citizen said that funding should go from the Federal to the local, not the other way. Richard discussed Gary’s idea; Gary will find out within a month; he is willing to facilitate exploring other paths for the project; all agreed a good project.
Motion to fund, not to exceed $6,000, by Jerry, Richard second. Failed.
Motion by Gloria, Mary second to have Gary informally search for sources within the County and report back to our next regular meeting, when we will decide what action if any we want to take.
July 6 Park Comm. meeting.
Trails EIR
Fitzgerald still preparing responses to comments; August?
other timelines not known
SF Watershed: Keith doing; no movement. Gloria asked to be removed from responsibility for tracking.
Carroll Ann praised Richard’s handout of the article on County Fish and Wildlife Commissions.
Next agenda:
Gary’s report about the map project (Gloria)
Nomination Committee selected
Mountain Lion brochure (Mary)
Recruitment of members (Gloria)
Survey project (Chris Larsen)
Kelp study Monterey (Keith)--noted that it recommends SMCO stop harvest
Review of the May 2 brainstorm/annual planning meeting (Anne)
Richard asked that all the plans and EIRs NOT be agendized; just the ones we plan to discuss or act upon.
Officers: Wade asked Keith, as Vice Chair to Chair this portion, as he has a conflict of interest. Richard: We have a crisis in leadership. Wants a vote of confidence. Motion to remove Wade as Chair. Mary second. Discussion. Vote was unanimous to remove Wade from Chair. Wade resigned from the Committee.
Tim was nominated by Richard as temporary Chair for the next meeting, since Keith cannot attend. Jerry seconded. Unanimous. Add to the agenda list: Nomination Committee (note that I added that to the list above for convenience). Jerry volunteered to do the July and September Minutes.
Meeting adjourned at 8:52 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Gloria Purcell