August 9, 2000
Andrea Tuttle, Director
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
1416 Ninth St.
P.O. Box 944246
Sacramento, CA 94244-2460
Subject: Compliance with the Basin Plan & Porter Cologne Act - TMDLs and the Forest Practice Rules Application
Dear Director Tuttle:
After reading your letter of July 27, 2000, it is clear that there is some confusion on the subject of the California Department of Forestry's responsibility under the Basin Plan, Porter Cologne, and Forest Practice Act, as lead Agency responsible for water quality on Timber Harvest Plans. I will, again, state CDF responsibility under the law. Attached is your response to me as well as a copy of the Richard Wilson letter of April 27, 1998 and a TMDL fact sheet.
There is no argument that CDF is the lead agency, by MAA, for water quality issues on Timber Harvest Plans and the THP is the Water Quality Control Plan for the area of timber harvest. Thus, to follow the law the following mandates must be met:
"Controllable water quality factors shall conform to the water quality objectives contained herein. When other factors result in the degradation of water quality beyond the levels or limits established herein as water quality objectives, then controllable factors shall not cause further degradation of water quality. Controllable water quality factors are those actions, conditions, or circumstances resulting from man's activities that may influence the quality of waters of the State and that may reasonably be controlled."
(a) ".......Every timber operation shall be planned and conducted to meet the following objectives where they affect a primary limiting factor: (1) Comply with the terms of a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) that has been adopted to address factors that may be affected by timber operations if a TMDL has been adopted, or not result in any measurable sediment load increase to a watercourse system or lake."
Note: this rule [916.9 (a) (1)] merely states CDF responsibility to enforce Basin Plan Guidelines as well as TMDL mandates.
The above regulatory framework is stated in this letter for grounding in the discussion that CDF must accept stated responsibility of its mission to protect water quality values (through all of the above) in exercising its lead agency responsibility. This is not acknowledged in your response to me. Failure on the part of CDF to fully, and correctly, understand these facts and implement appropriated standards as its mission, under these mandates, is, in part, responsible for the degradation of stream and watercourse in historic areas of timber harvest.
In your letter there are some conceptual errors. The North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board has adopted the implementation plan for the NCRWQCB Garcia River TMDL. The State Water Resources Control Board has not yet adopted this TMDL and implementation plan into the Basin Plan. I did not ask for enforcement of an implementation plan before adoption by the SWRCB. However, there are adopted EPA TMDLs for the Garcia River, Noyo River, Van Duzen River and Yager Creek, South Fork Eel River, South Fork Trinity River and Hayfork Creek, and Redwood Creek. These EPA TMDLs have broad objectives or targets that correspond with the above stated framework (and CDF responsibility under same) that call for reduction of controllable sources of sediment. This can and should be accomplished in the THP review process by: inventory of current road, landing, and crossing problem sites - with improvements to be completed to offset potential sediment generation from harvesting, requiring plan preparer to employ mitigations, including rehabilitation of problem sites that will reduce and offset sediment input potential, and the use experts in such planning (see Richard Wilson letter - attached and review hillslope targets in some of the above listed EPA TMDLs). Use of such sediment reduction planning devices is consistent with, and mandated by, the above noticed framework. In fact, all THP review should incorporate such planning.
Implications as Lead Agency
Though, under existing mandates, CDF has responsibility to incorporate specific technique in planning for sediment reduction, effectiveness of such review and mitigation for sediment effects in the THP review process is not demonstrated. CDF has made some progress in this area to date. There is some distance to go yet. Dissatisfaction with the CDF's capacity to implement policy for sediment reduction, amongst other scenario, can lead to recision of Waiver of Waste Discharge and incorporation of Waste Discharge Requirements.
Limiting factors for CDF Implementation of Effective Sediment Control Policy
The Department of Forestry and department staff must have a clear understanding of their mission and responsibility in the administration and implementation of the THP review process as well as water quality objectives and sediment reduction policy in relationship with the FPA/FPRs, water law, and TMDLs.
Training and updating staff on stated objectives, policy, and technique to be applied in THP administration is needed to attain desires results on the ground. A limited (or nonexistent) training program, and lack of staff for such training, is a primary obstacle for bringing all parties on board and having an effective program.
CZARA
The State of California has gained approval from the EPA and NOAA for their non-point source management program. This approval was given by the EPA and NOAA on the basis that the State of California non-point source control program for forestry activities be brought into compliance, e.g. that is to deliver on effective non-point source reduction programs. CDF has responsibility to develop and implement sediment reduction controls under the Coastal Non-point Source Program.
Implications - Monitoring Study Group - Pilot Monitoring Program/Hillslope Monitoring Project
Much work has gone into this project. Conclusions are to be dawn on effectiveness of the FPRs administration and the relationship to changes in channel conditions..
In assessing monitoring results obtained from the Garcia River drainage it must be noted that these results may not be comparable to results from other drainages as the Garcia River has received assessment and implementation practices on THPs (through TMDL considerations) that are not equivalent to assessment and implementation on THPs in other drainages. This difference in application of mitigations may skew results and findings. Of course, you would get better compliance and results in areas where special attention and mitigations are applied. Relationships of changing or different management conditions, through changes in the FPRs (over time) and other lands use management schemes (including TMDL considerations) must be factored into such monitoring processes and conclusions drawn from them.
In the case where FPRs application is being studied in relationship to instream conditions, it would seem appropriate to link assessment of upslope conditions to these same relationships and effects. Linkage of channel conditions with upslope conditions and timber harvest activity is what we are trying to determine. These relationships should be monitored and studied over a sufficient time period for trend development. Creation of a base line and ending the project will provide little useful information.
It is agreed that the areas to be found most problematic are watercourse crossings and road construction. This is especially true in steep and unstable ground. However, this is not news and CDF needs to promptly take appropriate steps to address these issues.
Conclusion
CDF's responsibility is clear. The areas of problems causing sediment production in timber harvest have been noted as well as various methods of employing sediment reduction policy.
Director Tuttle please take the necessary steps to correctly implement the current FPRs as well as other applicable State and Federal mandates.
Sincerely,
Alan Levine
Coast Action Group
P.O. Box 215
Point Arena, CA 95468
cc: U.S. EPA
NCRWQCB
CDFG
NMFS
BOF
Att. Joe Brecher
Mary Nichols, CA Res. Agency
RRRAUL Home | Search RRRAUL | News | Logging | Fishery | Watershed | Photographs | Contacts | Organization | Calendar | External Links |