Coastal commission exec looks at challenges ahead

Humboldt Bay Symposium addresses culture, history, science

4/27/12

The California Coastal Commission's executive director spoke about the past and future of the state's most powerful coastal development regulatory agency Thursday at the Humboldt Bay Symposium in Eureka.

Charles Lester, appointed executive director by the commission in September, talked to nearly 160 environmentalists, government officials and professionals at the symposium about being the “big, bad” agency that oversees California's coastal developments.

The rest of the day's activities included presentations on the bay's cultural significance and history, rising sea levels, climate change and managing matter dredged from the bay. The symposium continues today with presentations on fisheries, aquaculture, recreation and the bay's economy.

Lester's presentation looked ahead to protecting the coast for the next 40 years in honor of the 40th anniversary of the Coastal Initiative, the proposition that established the commission. He emphasized the importance of local government's management of local coastal developments.

”Local governments are essential to how we enact the Coastal Act,” Lester said, adding that he wanted to dispel the myth that the Coastal Commission is a “big, bad” organization that “always says no.”

According to Lester, the commission has approved nearly 20,000 permits since the 1980s, voting down only 85 permits.

Over the years, Lester said, the commission has improved public access and recreation opportunities, increased trails, protected watersheds and maintained urban and rural boundaries. California has 76 local governments in the coastal zone. Sixty of those governments now have or have started local coastal programs, or LCPs.

Jen Kalt, policy director for Humboldt Baykeeper, a nonprofit environmental group, asked Lester if the commission would consider setting a deadline for the renewal of local coastal permits. Many developers go through the process at the local level and essentially have to redo their plans when they reach the coastal commission because the local coastal plan is out of date, she said.

Lester said mandating updates is not something the commission plans to implement currently but that the matter has been discussed from time to time. A provision in the Coastal Act indicates that LCPs should be reviewed every year, but updating the plans is not mandatory.

Lester said this is compounded by the shrinking resources of local governments and the commission. Commission staff has been reduced by 36 percent since the 1980s, he said, with widespread furloughs and cuts to both local governments and the commission.

Another symposium attendee asked Lester about streamlining the permit process when it comes to environmental cleanup. Wiyot Tribe Environmental Director Stephen Kullmann cited the Indian Island cleanup as an example, indicating that it had been hindered by a lack of funding and a stringent permit process.

Lester said the commission should always aim to streamline the permitting process, but he suggested that those applying for permits meet with staff early on to ensure a smooth process down the road.

”It's difficult to do that sometimes,” he acknowledged.

Looking to the future, Lester said the commission needs to focus on several concerns, including population growth and rising sea levels.

According to Lester, California's population will rise from the nearly 38 million recorded in the 2011 U.S. Census to 60 million by 2050. He said the pressures for more development are unavoidable, and the conflict will be further complicated by understanding how to protect public infrastructure, such as coastal highways, as well as resources.

”I don't think for a second that those urban-rural boundaries are going to stay fixed unless we continue to address them,” he said.

To see how the coastline has changed over the years, view recent and historic aerial photographs of the California coastline at www.californiacoastline.org. For more information on the symposium, visit www.humboldtbay.org/harbordistrict/symposium/2012/.

Read Original Article

Bay District Looks to Expand Oyster Industry

April/May 2012

The Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation, and Conservation District is exploring ways to expand the oyster industry while protecting the environment. Last August, the District was awarded a $200,000 grant from the Headwaters Fund, which—if successful—could allow expansion of oyster farming into pre-approved areas of the bay.

The project will examine ways to grow oysters without impacting eelgrass beds and other species in the bay mudflats. The District will also—if oyster growers and resource agencies can figure out how —work to put permits in place that will allow new or existing companies to expand into specific areas.

Seeing an economic opportunity that is not reliant on outside investors, the District decided to explore the possibility of a master permitting process that would address environmental impacts on a more holistic level. It would also reduce the burden on reviewing agencies while reducing costs of individual permits.

Five shellfish companies currently operate on 325 acres of tidelands in Humboldt Bay, employing 56 full-time workers, with total annual sales of $6 million. Oyster growers estimate that 1.2 jobs can be created for every six acres put into production.

Bugs and worms steal spotlight in wetland restoration

Regulators are shifting from chemistry to biology as they manage stream health

4/22/12

As waterways go, San Marcos Creek is hardly iconic. Even in the spring, it’s barely noticeable next to the city’s hardware stores, banks and eateries.

But the stream has quietly gained regional significance as a test case for an emerging approach to regulating water quality that has broad implications for businesses, residents and aquatic species across California.

Instead of just minimizing the amount of various contaminants in the creek, regional pollution police will regulate how insects, worms and snails fare as San Marcos develops the “creek district.” A permit issued in January by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board was the first of its kind in the region to include biological performance of a waterway as an enforceable standard.

Ecosystem assessments have been used as indicators of riparian health for years. “What we have lacked until now is any requirement for how a stream section functions in terms of biological integrity,” said David Gibson, executive officer of the regional board, which regulates pollution.

The change is part of a decades-long progression of interpreting and implementing the 1972 Clean Water Act. For San Marcos Creek, it means a requirement to boost populations of benthic, or bottom-dwelling, organisms so they score “fair” or “good” on an index that today says they are in poor shape.

The regional board’s parent agency in Sacramento — with support from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency — is developing rules that should prompt the statewide expansion of a similar approach starting in 2014. Biological mandates likely will work their way into other stormwater permits needed by cities, approvals for working in waterways and mandates to restore polluted areas.

“As a layman, I am convinced this is the simplest long-term measure of how healthy a stream is,” said Gary Strawn, a member of the regional board’s governing panel. “It’s the up-and-coming thing, not just in Sacramento, but nationwide.”

Well before he joined the board, Strawn helped organize the San Diego Stream Team, a group of volunteers who periodically don waders and use specially designed nets to sample creek bottoms for crayfish, worms, flies and other “benthics.” More regulatory emphasis on that kind of data could give residents a greater role in drawing attention to areas where creatures suffer in the roughly 100,000 miles of perennial streams that crisscross California.

Despite decades of work, recent assessments have found that only about half of all stream segments were in good biological condition. A limited review in the San Diego region showed three-quarters of streams were in poor or very poor condition, prompting the regional board to rethink its approach to controlling stormwater contamination.

Humboldt Baykeeper Celebrates 40 Years of the Clean Water Act

This year marks the 40th anniversary of the federal Clean Water Act--a landmark in environmental and community health legislation. The Clean Water Act (CWA) established benchmark legislation to "protect and restore" our nations waters. In doing so, it set a goal of ensuring that our waters would be fishable, swimmable, and drinkable by 1983--a goal we are still trying to accomplish to this day. The need for this monumental legislation was preceded by the Cuyahoga River disaster in Ohio. The industrial river had become so polluted that it caught fire. This event provided the impetus for Congress to pass legislation recognizing the federal responsibility for the care of our nation's waters and the right of the people themselves to ensure that their waters are clean.

When the Clean Water Act first became law, two-thirds of our nation's lakes, rivers, and coastal waters were unsafe for fishing, drinking, or swimming, and untreated sewage and industrial waste was routinely dumped into waterways. Under the CWA, the newly created EPA implemented programs to control the discharge of pollutants to our waters, as well as set standards for the quality of waters themselves, and the EPA has moved us towards the CWA's original goals. We have a long ways to go still.

Humboldt Baykeeper is part of the international Waterkeeper Alliance, a network of clean water advocacy organizations, and together we are celebrating all that clean water and the CWA represents with the 40th Anniversary of the CWA. Locally, Humboldt Baykeeper is taking time in 2012 to celebrate the North Coast's beautiful watersheds in honor of the Clean Water Act and its worthy goal.

Dioxin Listing and Humboldt Bay's Industrial Legacy

Humboldt Baykeeper was launched in October 2004 to safeguard coastal resources for the health, enjoyment, and economic strength of the Humboldt Bay community. Local community members recognized a need to have an organization specifically focused on Humboldt Bay and its surrounding tributaries after strong community resistance defeated a proposed Liquefied Natural Gas Terminal on its shores. Humboldt Bay's historical industrial uses have resulted in many contaminated sites that continue to impact water quality today. Dioxin, heavy metals, petroleum products, and other contaminants persist in areas where they were used in the industrial era, and these contaminants continue to impact Humboldt Bay through storm water, ground water, and other discharges.

The past use of wood preservatives such as pentachlorophenol (also known as "penta") at the dozens of lumber mills that once lined the shores of the Bay and its sloughs have led to the release of contaminants such as dioxins and furans. In 2006, Humboldt Baykeeper successfully petitioned the State Water Resources Control Board to add Humboldt Bay to California's Threatened and Impaired Waters list under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act due to the presence of dioxin in the tissue of fish and shellfish in the Bay. As a result, Humboldt Bay is now listed as impaired by dioxin, a legal status that continues to facilitate action and clean-up.

Cleaning up Humboldt Bay and Monitoring Development

Humboldt Baykeeper had long known that dioxin from past industrial uses around Humboldt Bay was plaguing water quality in our community. In 2006, along with Californians for Alternatives to Toxics, Humbold Baykeeper filed a CWA suit against the Simpson Timber Company for the continued discharge of contaminants including dioxin into the Bay at their former plywood mill site. Located at the foot of Del Norte Street in Eureka, the former mill site and an adjacent tidally influenced channel were discharging superfund levels of dioxin directly into Humboldt Bay.

Through Humboldt Baykeeper's Toxic Initiative Program, this ongoing threat to Humboldt Bay was identified, and in accordance to the 2008 settlement, Simpson Timber has removed the source of the contamination and restored the wetland channel. Humboldt Baykeeper continues to monitor the results of the completed cleanup at Simpson Timber Company's former bayside mill. Recent sampling at the site shows continuing success of the remediation work in the tidal channel adjacent to the property.

Fishable, Drinkable, Swimmable Waters--Moving Towards our Goal

While the CWA provides a legal framework for citizens to combat pollution, direct watershed-stewardship is equally important for fishable, drinkable, and swimmable waters.

In 2005, Humboldt Baykeeper initiated a Citizen Water Quality Monitoring Program that has since expanded from 9 to 35 monitoring sites ranging from the Elk River to the Little River. The program utilizes over 30 volunteers to monitor the health of local waterways. Sampling events are primarily used to identify hotspots, trends, and changes in current conditions that could prompt additional investigation. The program educates Citizen Monitors about water pollution and how to reduce such pollution through individual actions. The program was recently strengthened with input from scientific experts at Pacific Watershed Associates, and with those recommendations, we now have an improved sampling protocol for local waterways for 2012 and beyond.

Creating a community of clean water advocates is one of Humboldt Baykeeper's main goals. In 2009, Humboldt Baykeeper initiated an internship program in conjunction with Dr. Alison Purcell O'Dowd, Assistant Professor and Environmental Science Program Coordinator at Humboldt State University. Humboldt Baykeeper student interns study riparian and instream conditions in Widow White Creek, a tributary of the Lower Mad River in McKinleyville. Widow White Creek has been impacted by urbanization of 25% of its watershed, as well as logging and low-density residential development in the upper watershed. It historically supported coho salmon, steelhead trout, cutthroat trout, three-spine stickleback, and sculpins. First Flush monitoring, monitoring during the first big storm event of the year with a half an inch or more rainfall, over several years identified extremely high levels of fecal coliform in the creek, particularly at monitoring sites near residential and commercial areas.

Eureka looks at last push for Waterfront Drive extension; city staff asks council to move forward now or scrap project

4/14/12

The controversial Waterfront Drive extension project is coming back before the Eureka City Council on Tuesday, and it's time to fish or cut bait, according to a city staff report.

Eureka city staff are asking the city council to either direct staff to continue working on the project by completing an environmental impact report, or stop the project and funnel the state transportation funding into another project.

The project -- a two-lane extension of Waterfront Drive from Del Norte Street to Hilfiker Lane -- has been on hold for nearly two years. The city began the project's environmental review process in 2004 but came to a standstill in 2010 due to opposition from environmental groups and the California Coastal Commission, an agency that would eventually review the project's permits. Commission staff were concerned the project is inconsistent with the California Coastal Act, and would negatively impact surrounding wetlands.

According to a staff report, $153,000 remains in the project fund for environmental work, but if the council decides to continue environmental review, it is likely the city will need to request more transportation dollars from the Humboldt County Association of Governments to complete the EIR.

”Given the amount of time that has passed since work has been done on the (draft environmental impact report), there will be additional costs with resuming work on the project and updating documentation that has been prepared thus far,” Environmental Planner Lisa Shikany wrote in a memo.

Additionally, staff recommends consulting with Caltrans to ensure the city does not have to repay the funding if the city can't complete the EIR, or can't get it certified.

”To date, Caltrans has taken the position that due to Coastal Commission's opposition and our perceived inability to permit the project, the city will not be required to repay funds expended to date,” the staff report said.

The project aims to reduce traffic on Broadway, improve access to businesses in the area and provide public access through multi-use trails. The proposed roadway would connect to Broadway at Truesdale Avenue and may have possible connections at McCullens Avenue and Bayshore Way.

Shikany's memo states the city “will face many challenges” if it moves forward, but identifies four primary concerns over the project: issues with filling in the wetlands, impacts to environmentally sensitive habitats and possible conflicts with the Bayshore Mall parking area and the Coastal Conservancy. The conservancy has funded enhancements for the PALCO Marsh, which would be adjacent to the new roadway.

The staff report also included a list, dated March 21, 1997, of projects that are eligible for the transportation funds if the council decides to abandon the project. The projects include other improvements on Broadway, Fourth and Fifth streets; improving the route to the Humboldt County Library; adding bike routes to certain areas and closing some streets between Fourth and Fifth streets for pedestrian use only.

Original Article