Baywave Study Completed Supply Options

January—Febraury 2017 MMWD Sea level rise reviews water BayWAVE study completed supply options

A flooding by Ann Thomas event in Marin Municipal Water District Janu- (MMWD) is currently preparing a ary 1973 long-term supply plan to help ensure inundated adequate water for district customers the Lucky in the event of prolonged drought or Drive area other emergency. Work on the Water in Corte Resources Plan (WRP) 2040 began in Madera, a 2015 with preparation of the Urban spot that Water Management Plan (Plan), a plan continues that is required by the state for all wa- to be of ter suppliers that serve 3,000 or more concern today. connections. In September, the board Photo courtesy Marin County Dept. of Public Works determined that an “Epic Drought” by Nona Dennis could compromise the reliability of the District’s water system and proceeded t comes as no surprise that Marin San Francisco and San Pablo Bay shoreline, to expand the WRP 2040 by identify- County is vulnerable to sea level from north of Novato to the Golden Gate ing almost 40 water supply options for rise. Sea level at the Golden Gate Bridge. (See also MCL Newsletter May-June further study. tide gauge has risen 8 inches over 2016). It should also prompt the next level I of planning—that is, developing coordinat- the past century and is projected to rise Long-term planning urgency 66 inches by 2100, and in a worst case, 70 ed strategies to avoid, design for, and adapt A new urgency about the need for inches. Maps show projected San Francisco to the emerging reality. long-term water supply planning that Bay levels extending well into Marin Coun- In October, Chris Choo, Principal Plan- is resilient to extreme conditions has ty. This is not news! What is news is the ex- ner in the County Department of Public developed statewide following the dra- tent and asset value of county areas and Continued on page 9 matic reduction in rainfall in 2013-2014 activities that may be affected—thousands and ominous awareness that this could of acres of developed land; thousands of In This Issue— residents, commuters, and major land own- be prelude to a megadrought for which President’s message—page 2 California is woefully unprepared. Most ers; miles of roadways, utilities and other concern centers on the reduced Sierra infrastructure; and billions of dollars. Editorial: Vegetation Plan—page 2 snowpack, largely affecting Central and The Marin BayWAVE (Bay Waterfront Status updates—pages 3, 5 Southern California, but alarm bells Adaptation and Vulnerability Evaluation) Mt. Tam Science Summit—page 6 have also been rung in the North Bay. report will provide local governments, New Marin Supervisor—page 8 At the end of 2012, MMWD’s res- property owners, and public with the data Events—page 10 ervoirs were full, but in the following they need to better understand just how calendar year (2013) they received less widespread and disruptive the impacts of Board member profile—page 11 sea level rise are likely to be along Marin’s Continued on page 8 Business Member profile—page 11

PAGE 1 January—February 2017 A Message from the President—Our work in 2017 As we begin a new destructive. We will continue to support in June for the successful passage of Mea- year, we face a shifting water conservation and efficiency strate- sure AA, the “Clean and Healthy Bay” parcel political landscape and gies as the preferred, low-impact tools for tax measure. challenges to environ- long term local water supply planning in Perhaps the largest current threat to mental protections on a changing climate. In keeping with our the protection of the environment is the a national scale. Here support for local, sustainable agriculture, potential unraveling of hard won na- in Marin, the Marin MCL will continue to support conservation tional and international climate policies Conservation League, practices and the future of ranching within and agreements. Although this is of global with the support of our Point Reyes National Seashore. scale, MCL’s Climate Action Working Group, members, will concen- While our work as an independent orga- is working locally, regularly meeting with trate on fulfilling our mission to protect, nization is strong, we believe that engag- local climate leaders to support regional preserve, and restore the natural assets of ing with a sound network of organized courses of action, including implemen- Marin County. environmental and conservation efforts tation of local climate action plans and One of MCL’s guiding principles is to provides a broader impact. For this rea- multi-jurisdictional adaptation planning give environmental concerns first prior- son, MCL will continue to build relation- for sea level rise. ity. Accordingly, we will continue in 2017 ships and collaborate with others who have In 2017 MCL will continue to carry for- to closely track the County’s Road and Trail common goals. MCL is currently partnering ward its legacy of advocating for environ- Management Plan process, preserve by with MCE in promoting Deep Green, 100% mental interests with both tenacity and preserve, advocating for the protection of electricity generation from renewable en- passion. We appreciate your support. sensitive habitats and for limiting the ef- ergy sources, as a preferred power source. fects of recreational uses where they are And, MCL actively campaigned with others

Editorial—County Vegetation and Biodiversity Management Plan When is a Plan not a Plan?

On November 8 the Marin County Open any herbicide use, no matter what justifica- away from its original purpose as a high- Space District Board of Directors (Board tion might be offered or cautions assured. level decision framework for managing di- of Supervisors) voted not to certify an Rather than take action, the Board request- verse vegetation conditions with an array EIR and to “accept” but not “approve” the ed staff to return with several options to of approaches and tools, toward becoming Vegetation and Biodiversity Management consider. a single-purpose document focused on Plan (VBMP) as a “background document.” herbicide use. Additionally, it would require This was the ambiguous outcome of an Options before the Board developing hypothetical projects for which eight-year planning and environmental On November 8, Open Space District impacts of “with herbicides” and “without process that was intended to comprehen- staff, supported by County Counsel, of- herbicides” alternatives could be compared, sively guide management of 16,000 acres fered three options: 1) Approve the VBMP contrary to the broad purposes and non- of open space on 34 preserves and 3,000 and certify the EIR as is; 2) “Accept” the prescriptive nature of the Plan. acres of private lands on which the County VBMP as an information document and not The second option, recommended by Open Space District holds conservation certify the EIR; and 3) Develop and analyze staff and adopted by the Board, seemed easements. How can this ambiguity be ex- a new “Without Herbicide Alternative” and like a way out—that is, continue current plained and, more to the point, be trans- recirculate the EIR, at an additional expense practice, using the VBMP as an informa- lated into a robust program for protecting of about $200,000 and considerable delay. tion resource. This is roughly equivalent all these acres under county stewardship? Approving the first option raised the to adopting the “No Project Alternative,” In earlier hearings in October, MCL and threat of a legal challenge to the adequa- even though the EIR concluded that the No other conservation organizations testi- cy of the EIR by the small but determined Project Alternative would have “greater im- fied that the management of diverse open group of opponents. The third option might pacts” than the preferred Plan. By failing to space lands requires that all professional have resolved the “adequacy” question by certify the EIR, however, the Board would approaches, strategies, and tools of Inte- analyzing a “without herbicides” alterna- throw away more than $400,000 dollars grated Pest Management (IPM) be avail- tive, but that would require considerable of work on the EIR, in effect rendering the able. Other speakers focused on just one of expense and time without resolving the EIR unnecessary and further, relegating the those tools and called for a total ban on opposition. It would also skew the VBMP Continued on page 7

PAGE 2 January—February 2017 Status Updates—Revisiting Old Projects in the New Year Tracking pending projects and de- Plan and EIR in 2009, would be occupied doing what cows do—peacefully graze the velopment applications requires a long by 2016 and would then have a chance to morning grass. memory, patience, and persistence. For- prove whether it would function as com- ty years between inception of a project pact, transit-oriented development within Easton Pt., Tiburon and its implementation—or failure to be walking and biking distance of shops, ser- Easton Pt. on the Martha Property on implemented—may be a record, but it is vices, and schools. Instead, the buildings Tiburon Ridge is 40-year project-in-wait- not unusual for planning matters such as are vacant and continue to be plagued by ing. The spectacular, environmentally con- updating general plans to remain active for technical and financial woes: leaks result- strained 110-acre site has been the subject years, if not decades. Each New Year merely ing from insufficient or absent flashing of a land use debate since 1976, when a opens a new calendar; as we begin 2017 are being temporarily remedied with plas- federal judge signed a stipulated judgment the processing of pending projects and tic around doors and windows and bright that would allow the property owners to programs will continue through the year factory-colored panels are being painted develop 43 residences. Marin Conserva- and, in many cases, beyond. with more muted hues. The new land- tion League has followed the Easton Point scaping is being maintained, but no one development process since 1992, and re- Tam Ridge Residences predicts when the complex will open. As ported on it in numerous MCL Newsletter The 180—unit Tam Ridge Residences drivers stopped in traffic on Tamal Vista or articles. In previous years two EIRs were (“Wincup”) complex in Corte Madera con- 101 glance at the shrouded buildings and withdrawn prior to certification. In 2014, tinues to creep backward rather than for- note the few workers still on site, they must a third EIR was rejected by the Board of ward. A year ago, MCL expressed hope in wonder: “Will anyone ever live here?” Supervisors due to unresolved mitigation this Newsletter (January—February 2016) issues. In the meantime, to support local that the complex, which was approved as St. Vincent’s/Silveira Ranch efforts to acquire the site as open space, a component of the Corte Madera General Sometimes patience is rewarded with MCL has twice written the owners encour- “no project” as the year aging them to meet with representatives turns. This is the case of the Trust for Urban Land, who has of- with the lands of St. fered to help broker its acquisition. During Vincent’s and Silveira the past year, however, the owners have Ranch in Marinwood. stepped up their demands that the County For years, the last re- act on their application, so we are likely to maining dairy ranch see some action in 2017. At least two issues in East Marin and its remain under dispute: the owner’s proposal bucolic Archdiocese- to mitigate the loss of endangered plants owned neighbor were at an off—site location; and their inability the object of develop- to identify a suitable site for a new water ment proposals—2,000 storage tank to deliver adequate water homes, reduced to pressure. 1,500, and then to Above—The Tam Ridge Residences project in Corte Madera. 750, and finally, with Soccer Facility at San Below—Silviera Ranch in unincorporated northern San Rafael. adoption of the 2007 Rafael Airport Countywide Plan, to a cap of 221 residential Over a period of six years, MCL and oth- units, or their rough ers who opposed the proposed 85,700 sq. equivalent in traffic ft. indoor Soccer Facility at San Rafael generation. Several de- Airport invested untold hours reading velopment concepts, plans, critiquing EIRs, and attending meet- such as for senior hous- ings. For numerous reasons MCL believed it ing, have been advanced was a massive project in the wrong place: in recent years, but none it threatened the Gallinas Creek popula- has materialized. For the tion of endangered Ridgeway’s rail; its site foreseeable future, trav- within the airport's safety zone posed a elers inch along in traf- hazard to outdoor event spectators; it was fic on 101, they can en- inconsistent with City policy, and it would joy watching the cows Photos by Dru Parker Continued on page 4

PAGE 3 January—February 2017

Status Updates from page 3 101 and compromise views of the bay from neighbor- be visually intrusive in the low surrounding hoods to the west; it would marshlands. Nonetheless, the project got place additional pressure on the green light from San Rafael City Coun- adjacent Richardson Bay salt cil in December 2013. Three years later, we marsh and mudflats that are are told that the developers have gained vital habitats for shorebirds; their permits and can go ahead replacing it would exacerbate chronic the entry bridge. Presumably construction weekend traffic congestion of the facility will follow this year. MCL bound for Shoreline Highway; and other critics will be tracking mitigation and it would force parking measures to ensure that adequate protec- onto adjacent streets that are tions of marsh habitat along the creek are habitually flooded in extreme installed and monitored during and follow- Novato's Downtown Core includes this area of Redwood high tides, or into commuter ing construction. This will be a large invest- Blvd. (top) which has potential for mixed-use commercial parking areas. In the mean- ment on a site that one day could be under and residential development such as the Tresch building time, the site is used to store several feet of water due to sea level rise! (bottom) on the next block. heavy equipment. Photos by Dru Parker Whalers Point Hotel Novato Also in the path of rising sea levels is the Richardson Bay shoreline site of the erst- General Plan 2035 while Whalers Point Hotel proposal. The Updating general plans is first application for an 8—story hotel was always arduous, but the North submitted in the late 1970s. Subsequent Marin Unit of MCL has been applications over the year have been ei- engaged in one of the lon- ther rejected by the County or withdrawn ger general plan processes we by the applicant due to unresolved issues. know of. Novato began updat- The most recent application in 2014 was ing its 1996 General Plan with for a three—story hotel. Even though dras- a series of public workshops in tically reduced from the original plan, the early 2009. Seven years later, proposed development still exceeds poli- the draft Novato General cies in the Tamalpais Area Community Plan. Plan 2035 became available for public re- west of Hwy 101, where some high-quality The site, which has a dry land dimension of view this past summer. Public outreach on office buildings and research and develop- only 1.6 acres, is marginal at best for hotel the Plan continues into 2017. Although the ment uses could develop. The Plan proposes development. It is underlain by seismically city has grown in the intervening years, the that the "Downtown Core" become more vulnerable bay mud and is highly suscep- draft Plan does not present any significant pedestrian-friendly and allow residential tible to flooding from rising sea level; a land use changes; it holds fast to tradi- mixed use with updated design guide- hotel would be visually intrusive for trav- tional small town character, environmental lines. The Northwest Quadrant Neighbor- elers descending Waldo Grade on Highway protection and restoration, historic preser- hood, centered around Vallejo St. west of vation, economic vitality, Redwood, could accommodate small scale and sustainability. multi-family housing to complement exist- At the same time, the ing single family residences consistent with draft Plan does identify principles of form-based zoning. Novato’s certain focus areas where Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), which the limited development and North Marin Unit spearheaded in 1997, redevelopment could oc- expires in November 2017. Although the cur. These include the proposed Plan includes the UGB, members North Redwood Boulevard of MCL’s North Marin Unit are encourag- Corridor between Olive and ing its extension by a public vote to ensure San Marin, long an area of that it cannot be easily changed. The Plan debate and the North—No - is scheduled to go to the city’s commissions vato Boulevard Corridor, and City Council in early 2017. (See Novato. The Whalers Point site is on Richardson Bay between between San Marin Drive org/generalplan for more information.) Sausalito and Mill Valley, behind the outdoor teak dealer. and Birkenstock offices,

PAGE 4 January—February 2017 On the trail: updates Marin County preserves tial for emergency access might be narrowed to become trails. Marin County Parks Department con- The department is posting all tinues to move forward with its Road and projects on its general web site Trail Management Plan (RTMP) and is now (marinparks.org), whether they well into its second year of designating are proposed, are in planning which roads and trails in the 34 preserves or budgeting stages, or were will become—or remain—part of its adopted implemented during the 2016 system. (See marincountyparks.org/depts/ construction season. pk/divisions/open-space/main/os-systems- designation.) Having completed designa- MCL continues to track the tion of Regions 1 and 2, the department RTMP process closely and to recently posted a map of designated trails comment on proposed trail for Region 3, which includes such popular projects to “...ensure that the preserves as Indian Valley, Lucas Valley and management of Marin’s road Eva Buxton Ignacio Valley. Next on the agenda will be and trail networks avoids ad- The proposed Azalea Hill Trail alignment,with Mt. Region 4, which includes Indian Tree, Mt. verse impacts due to recre- Tamalpais manzanita (Arctostaphylos montana ssp. Burdell, Verissimo Hills, Little Mountain, and ation, ensures that the natural montana), a species limited to serpentinite. Rush Creek Open Space Preserves. A public environment and the wildlife it workshop is planned for May at the Marga- sustains will persist into the fu- review in early 2017. Watershed staff has ret Todd Center, date to be announced. ture, and assures users of their safety and conducted numerous public hikes of the well-being.” (For the MCL Trail Policy, go 435-foot elevation rise alignment, much of Following the protocol that has been to conservationleague.org/images/stories/ which would follow the old Liberty Gulch shaped by the experience of three previ- pdfs/advocacy/ADV_POS_MCL-Trail-Poli- Road that predates the construction of Bon ous public workshops, the department cy_2015.03.17.pdf.) Tempe Dam. Views from the upper slopes of staff will bring to the table(s) a draft map Azalea Hill are among the most spectacular showing existing roads and trails in Region MMWD watershed on the watershed. The project would enable 4 preserves, and indications as to which Long an object of future planning, the mountain bikers to reach the Pine Mt. areas unofficial (“social”) trails might be decom- proposed multi-use MMWD Azalea Hill Trail of the watershed without having to dodge missioned for reasons of non-sustainability that would connect Bullfrog Road at Bon automobiles on the narrow Bolinas-Fairfax or other considerations, which trails might Tempe Reservoir with the top of Azalea Road. It would also restore habitat by re- be added to the system inventory, and/or Hill. An Initial Study and Negative Declara- moving 4.5 miles of non-system trails that which fire roads deemed to be non-essen- tion of Impact will be available for public currently cross sensitive serpentine habitat on the hill, and will realign the overly-steep existing Azalea Hill trail. MCL representatives have hiked the alignment and are anticipating further study of how sensitive serpentine habitats along the restored and new alignments would be protected from intensified biker and hiker use and likely off-trail incursion, and how invasion of non-native weeds would be prevented. MCL also will pay particular attention to how the descending trail could be designed to control bike speed and preserve the safety and well-being of visitors on foot or horseback (See MCL Trail Policy, above).

The 1,627-acre Mt. Burdell Preserve (left) is one of the Region 4 areas and is easily

Dru Parker accessed via San Marin Drive in Novato.

PAGE 5 January—February 2017 Cautionary message from Mt. Tam Science Summit

he gathering of scientists, resource managers, and conservation interests at the recent October 28-29 symposium “2016 Mt. Tam Science Summit”T delivered a cautionary message on the state of health of Mount Tamalpais. Some of Mt. Tamalpais’s plant communities, such as old growth redwoods and Sargent cypress forests, appear to be thriving, while many communities, such as second-growth redwoods, grasslands, chaparral, open-can- opy oak woodlands, and serpentine barrens are in decline due to ecological stressors. Invasion by non-native species, invasion by native species like Douglas fir, plant dis- ease, varied effects of climate change, decades of fire suppression, and the impact of people “loving the mountain to death” are all taking their toll. According to several indicators, wildlife species appear to be doing fairly well, bird communities overall Photos by Alison Taggart-Barone are in good health, but populations of coho The Mt. Tam salmon and steelhead trout are in perilous Science condition. Many indicators of Mt. Tam’s Summit ecological health remain unknown. Gaps in consisted of a available data reveal that invertebrate com- variety of lec- munities are largely unknown; bats have tures (right), not been studied; lichen species, which are interactive abundant on the mountain, and the condi- displays (above) and tion of seeps and springs and riparian areas breakout on the mountain all need further study. groups, all These are just a few of the many obser- geared to a better What makes Mt Tam unique is its understanding setting within an intensely urban region. of Mt. Tam's plant and vations that emerged in the symposium, animal which was organized by the Tamalpais communities. Lands Collaborative (TLC), a collaboration other scientists, public land managers, con- each one distinct. Mt. Tam’s distinction is of the four agencies that manage parts servation organizations, and environmental the product of its maritime environment, of the mountain—Marin Municipal Water specialists from around the San Francisco whose seasons are driven by tides and cur- District, Mt. Tamalpais State Park, Golden Bay area. Researchers were eager to share rents, a complex geology associated with Gate National Recreation Area, includ- their knowledge of the many indicators— the San Andreas Fault, highly variable soils ing Muir Woods National Monument, and bird and mammal species, plant communi- and microclimates in which rain and fog Marin County Open Space district—in part- ties, rare and endangered plant and wildlife are related to elevation and exposure. Add- nership with Golden Gate National Parks species—that explain why Mt. Tam is a re- ing to the complexity are geologic “islands” Conservancy. Under the banner of “One nowned biodiversity “hot spot.” that support rare plant communities, such Tam,” the collaboration brought together In a global context, the mountain is a part as serpentine barrens and Sargent cypress an impressive assemblage of ecologists, of 34 biodiversity hotspots in the world, forests. What makes Mt. Tam truly unique, ornithologists, wildlife biologists, botanists, Continued on page 7

PAGE 6 January—February 2017

Tam Summit from page 6 Plan from page 2 however, is its setting within an intensely VBMP to the status of a “background docu- to design ongoing and future monitoring urban region. Said Joe Mueller, long-time ment” and not a real Plan to guide man- and direct research programs, for exam- professor of biology and environmental agement of the preserves. ple, toward comprehensive mapping of studies at College of Marin: “Mt. Tam is sur- plant communities or filling data gaps in MCL believes that the problem of the rounded by a lot of people!” but has man- knowledge of invertebrates, which prob- “uncertifiable EIR” likely could have been aged to retain its rich biological diversity. ably represent the largest number of spe- resolved by preparing an Addendum to the cies on the mountain. EIR, a common way to address issues that Looking forward are not fully resolved without prompting The symposium can also be viewed as The symposium can be viewed, on the recirculation of the entire EIR. The Adden- opening a door to heightened interest in one hand, as the culmination of a suc- dum could have addressed two Board con- understanding of the conditions on Mt. cessful year-long effort to assemble the cerns: explain how the VBMP will accom- Tam. The gathering was notable for the knowledge and expertise of scientists and plish the County’s stated goal to reduce use number of young researchers, interns, conservation interests from around the Bay of herbicides over time; and acknowledge and volunteers that the TLC has been region centered on the ecological condi- that while the herbicide glyphosate contin- engaging in projects on Mt. Tam. The tions of the mountain. It was the primary ues to be under scientific scrutiny, the Open second day of the symposium also was impetus behind the writing and publication Space staff will carry out its vegetation an opportunity for long-standing non- of a white paper: “Measuring the Health management programs according to the profits like MCL, Friends of Mt. Tam, and of a Mountain: A Report on Mount Tamal- “best available science.” These two points Environmental Forum of Marin, and nat- pais Natural Resources (2016).” This report could have been included in an Addendum ural resource public agencies to exhibit presents in systematic detail the state of at a fraction of the cost of analyzing a new their conservation activities, acquaint at- current knowledge of ecological resources “non-herbicide alternative” and allowed tendees with their work, and share with on the mountain, along with the best judg- the EIR to be certified, probably without each other their experience and mutual ment of researchers and land managers on legal challenge. interests in caring for Mt. Tam. how these conditions register as “ecological health” and how their health may be trend- Every observer of Mt. Tam has asked When is a Plan not a “Plan”? ing. The report provides a baseline on which a similar question: Can the lands that In effect, the VBMP and EIR were ob- make up what we now call structed by a small group of advocates who “One Tam” be “preserved would ban herbicides from any use by the for all time, as far as pos- County’s land managers to manage vegeta- sible, in their natural and tion on the open space preserves—the same wild state” as William Kent tool kit that is used by the vast majority hoped in 1903 when he of professionals in managing public open proposed that it become space lands. Unfortunately, in its reluctance a national park? The ulti- to certify the program EIR and approve, not mate goal of the TLC and just accept, the Plan (Option 2), the Board community partners like has left future work plans and projects that MCL is to address this might include the use of herbicide along question by being better with other tools open to continuing debate stewards of the moun- and need for CEQA compliance. MCL’s hope tain’s resources. Together, is that the District, nonetheless, can move the symposium and report forward with a reasonable and transparent are an essential step to- public process that allows staff to do its ward that goal. much-needed work: that is, apply current practices to control invasive plants, protect rare and sensitive habitats as well as public health, and adequately manage the Fifty years ago, MCL's hazards of fire fuels, as documented in the concern for the health of Mt. Tam led to devel- VBMP “background document.” oping widely acclaimed —Editor criteria for decisions on uses of the mountain.

PAGE 7 January—February 2017

MMWD from page 1 tions for water use. foot, estimated yield for both dry and aver- In the course of preparing the WRP 2040 age years, and reliability. Evaluation criteria than 11 inches of rain, surpassing the prior report, the staff considered other factors also include institutional complexity, local record low of 19 inches set in 1929. By Jan- in addition to a possible six-year drought control, environmental impacts, technical uary 2014, storage levels had dropped to 30 event that could disrupt or affect water complexity, and public support. A number percent below normal, and a high pressure supply. These include the following: of options dropped to the bottom of the system, referred to in MMWD reports as the list due to high cost, unreliability, or envi- “Ridiculously Resilient Ridge” was stalled • Climate change, using four climate ronmental considerations. over the Pacific, preventing storms from change hydrology sets developed by the A draft report will be available reaching much of California. That month US Geological Survey. January 20 for public review. the Governor declared a drought emergen- • Wildfire impacts to water quality at cy, and the State Water Board called for a Kent, Bon Tempe, and Alpine Lakes. The preliminary conclusion of the draft 25 percent voluntary water use reduction. • Earthquakes that could cause outages WRP 2040 narrows the options to a real- Marin County’s water does not rely on to Bon Tempe and San Geronimo treat- istic set of alternatives that would enable state and federal water projects, including ment plants, and to imported supply. the district to meet demand during a six- year drought: conservation, spot market Sierra runoff and the over-drawn Colorado • Landslides that could causes outages at transfers, indirect potable reuse with new River, on which much of California relies. water treatment plants. MMWD’s water comes largely from Mount or upgraded treatment facilities, upgrading Tamalpais watershed runoff stored in five the Kastania pump station to serve water reservoirs, runoff into two reservoirs in Wide ranging supply options from the North Marin aqueduct, and part- West Marin, a modest amount of recycled The draft WRP 2040’s supply options fall nering with a city or agency that draws wa- water, and about 25 percent purchased into several categories: conservation, effi- ter from the Santa Rosa Plain groundwater from Sonoma County Water Agency. Char- ciency, recycling and water reuse, purchas- basin to enable transfers. tered in 1912, MMWD’s storage system has es and interties with other North Bay, East Finally, the draft WRP 2040 recommends grown from 9,600 acre feet of storage ca- Bay, and more distant water agencies, ex- that the District continue with water con- pacity in 1940 to almost 80,000 acre feet panded reservoir storage capacity , ground- servation and efficiency programs that in 1982 when Kent Lake was more than water, Bay and ocean desalination, and have proved to be beneficial, further inves- doubled. emerging options including cloud-seeding, tigate low- or no- infrastructure alterna- The district has also pursued increased fog capture, and thinning of vegetation to tives such as groundwater exchange, and conservation in the past two decades that increase runoff capture. Controversial op- continue to track hydrologic conditions has reduced the amount of water used by tions such as desalination, construction of and demand patterns and adapt as neces- its customers, and continues to see conser- a Richmond-San Rafael Bridge pipeline, sary. Draft conclusions and recommenda- vation as a primary tool to boost supply. and direct potable reuse of treated waste- tions were presented December 7, and the In 1989, for example, the District’s Water water, have been put under the micro- draft report will be available January 20 for Management Plan projected annual water scope. Factors considered for each option public review and comment. Final action by demand would increase from nearly 35,000 are capital cost, annual cost, cost per acre- the board is anticipated in April 2017. acre-feet to 40,100 acre-feet in 2025. In- stead, annual production of potable water Marin County Board of Supervisors decreased to 24,000 acre-feet as of August 2016, a reduction of 11,000 acre-feet, or 31 percent. Dennis Rodoni elected to District 4 MCL welcomes Dennis Rodoni of Olema West Marin Schools and Tomales High The evolving climate and warmer win- as the newest member of the Marin School before earning a BA in Economics ters, along with recent unusual precipi- County Board of Supervisors. Rodoni will and a teaching credential from California tation patterns, are part of water supply represent the geographically vast and State University at Chico. He has been a planning. MMWD, along with North Marin socially diverse District 4, which includes licensed General Contractor since 1981 Water District, participates in climate fore- West Marin, parts of East San Rafael, and works mostly on residential projects casting programs to obtain information Corte Madera, Mill Valley's Homestead in West Marin. regarding their service areas and impacts Valley, and areas of Novato. Rodini takes on water supply. All the models predict Rodoni has served six terms on the the seat previously held by Steve Kinsey, that the North Bay will experience hotter North Marin Water District Board of Di- who is stepping down after 20 years. weather, more frequent drought, greater rectors. He currently lives with his family evapotranspiration, and more frequent and A Marin native, Rodoni was raised in in Olema. intense wildfires. All these have implica- West Marin, and attended Inverness and

PAGE 8 January—February 2017

BayWAVE from page 1 determine what assets would be valuable, disadvantaged communities, which could and how to value them. The study also en- include East San Rafael. Works (DPW), reported to MCL’s Climate gaged interior communities and districts, In the meantime, the BayWAVE team Action Working Group on progress of the whose connections with the rest of Marin and a County consultant are developing a 18-month effort she is directing, working would be highly impacted by tidal flooding. public outreach program to begin in 2017. with the BayWAVE team in DPW and the The vulnerable Marin shoreline Education will be a key component. Several Community Development Agency (CDA). lessons pop out of the extensive data. Es- As of December, the draft report was un- In general terms, almost all buildings sentially everyone in Marin will be affected, dergoing administrative review and will be along Marin’s bay shoreline are vulnerable not just those who live on low ground. The released to the public early in 2017. to flooding, erosion, and saltwater. The like- County is accustomed to flooding, so a fu- ly effects, however, would vary with loca- Inundation scenarios and assets ture with more flooding might not come tion, elevation, and construction materials. as a big surprise—except that it won’t al- Taking its direction from the recent C- Although the majority of SMART vulnerability study of Marin’s ocean the lands at risk are in coastline, the BayWAVE study began with incorporated and unin- 2009 baseline imagery of the bayshore corporated Novato and taken from aerial LiDAR surveys. The Bay- San Rafael, the towns of WAVE team developed six scenarios based Corte Madera, Larkspur, on “Our Coast—Our Future” models (data. Mill Valley, Sausalito, Ti- pointblue.org/apps/ocof/cms/) to identify buron, and Belvedere are and map areas along the shoreline vulner- all directly exposed. Mu- able to inundation. Scenarios 1, 3, and 5 nicipalities situated on show inundation from a 10-inch sea level higher ground, such as rise in the near term (approximately 2030), San Anselmo, Fairfax and a 20-inch rise in the medium term (approx. Ross, and communities 2050), and a 60-inch rise in the long term like Lucas Valley and San Stephen Sarhad, California King Tides Photo Initiative, Flickr (approx. 2100), respectively. Each of Sce- Geronimo Valley, would December 2016 King Tide at China Camp. narios 2, 4, and 6 adds three feet from a all experience the loss 100-year storm to the preceding scenario. of major transportation routes as well as ways be temporary. Eventually it will be- power and other communication systems The types of assets along the urbanized come permanent. Planning for the future and water delivery and sanitation. Under bay shoreline vulnerable to inundation are must cross jurisdictional boundaries and be a long-term worst case scenario in 2100, considerably more extensive than those collaborative. By engaging all twelve cit- losses to the county and its residents as a along the coast. They include municipal ies, towns and County elected officials and whole would add up to billions in assessed and private properties, above and below- technical staff, the BayWAVE study has laid property value. ground structures of parcels and buildings the groundwork for future coordination. (residences are aggregated), all modes of Next steps Furthermore, agencies within the County transportation, including public transit, government, like DPW, CDA, and Marin highways, and ferries, communications This first phase of the BayWAVE program County Parks, are breaking down tradition- infrastructure, utilities such as water and does not include adaptation planning, al silos and working together. Regulatory wastewater treatment, grazing and other which is being planned as a second phase agencies like the San Francisco Bay Water agricultural lands, emergency services, his- by the CDA. In conjunction with the vul- Board and California Department of Fish toric and cultural features, recreation, and nerability assessment, BayWAVE is develop- and Wildlife are slowly shifting their pro- tidal marshes and beaches, among others. ing an “adaptation tool-kit” showing both cesses to make permitting more efficient, These, in turn are broken up by municipality hard-engineered solutions, such as levees but this continues to be challenging. and flood walls, and soft-engineered solu- and unincorporated community; each has With so many social, economic, and its own vulnerability profile. tions, such as horizontal vegetated levees and expanded tidal wetlands. On a regional natural resource issues at stake, MCL will The report identifies 115 entities that level, the San Francisco Bay Conservation review the report when it is released to the manage assets along the shoreline. All of and Development Commission is identify- public and continue to monitor adaptation them were engaged in the study. Over a ing and mapping the most vulnerable areas planning as it moves beyond the data col- six month period, the BayWAVE team con- along Marin and other bay county shore- lection phase and into uncharted waters in ducted more than 100 interviews with “as- lines. The Bay Area Integrated Regional Wa- the public arena. Watch for public meeting set managers”—e.g., land owners, city, town ter Management Program is using Propo- announcements in coming months. and special district officials and staff—to sition 1 to fund adaptation planning for

PAGE 9 January—February 2017 Events

MCL members and guests paired Ranching in MCL Holiday Party conservation with conversation on De- cember 2 during MCL's annual holiday the Park celebration. Our generous guests con- tributed a full barrel of food and cash Workshop #4 to SF-Marin Food Bank. Thank you!

As the MCL November-December 2016 Newsletter went to press, three of the four scheduled “Ranching in the Park—Not by Accident” workshops had taken place successfully. The fourth and final workshop on October 25—“Hopes and Dreams”— Nolan Photos by Kirsten turned attention to the future of ranching on Point Reyes National Seashore and featured a younger generation of ranchers who are continuing family traditions in the 21st century. Jolynn Mendoza McClelland is of Portu- guese and Swiss descent. Her great-grand- father came from the Azores and began dairy ranching on Point Reyes in 1919. She Clockwise from top left: Doug Karpa, Pamela Reaves; Heather Furmidge, Jana and her husband Robert have reopened Haehl, Sally Gale; guests mingle during the party. the L Ranch and also operate a farm in Sonoma. Her brother Jarrod restocked the B Ranch after their late father Joe, Jr., had college and starting families of their own, rancher and the Park staff may have dif- been forced to sell off his herd of Holsteins she said: “You need to figure out what to ferent views, but things can be worked out in 2010 when milk prices were down and it do...” She wants to leave a profitable legacy given time, and some streamlining would appeared impossible to make financial ends for her children, but every year the profit be nice. Jackie called this process “compro- meet. It was a difficult decision to bring margin goes down as the beef industry goes mise," wherein the rancher and the Park cows back to the ranch, they admitted, but through big consumer and market shifts may want the same thing but go about do- between the two they now manage 450 and new technologies come on board. ing it in different ways. Jolynn spoke of the head on the two ranches. As they bring up Bob McClure, 4th generation dairyman, long-standing good relationship her family their own young children in the ranching has had with Park staff, and Bob McClure tradition they agreed that it is a cherished shared the stage with his daughter Mi- chelle, who recently graduated from Cal agreed, but also acknowledged that a five- way of life but not an easy one. Jolynn is year lease is “as good as you get right now,” proud to carry on, but admitted that “you Poly San Luis Obispo in Agricultural Busi- ness Management. Bob’s father came from and even that does not allow long-term have to put a lot into your farm; sometimes investment, for example, in riparian resto- it means making sacrifices to your family.” Ireland in 1896 and began ranching on I Ranch. Cheese was the main product in the ration. They agreed, however, that “some- Added Jarrod: “It’s hard work, but it’s cool thing is working. We’re still here!” to see your products in a store.” early days; now it is bulk milk sold to local processors like Stornetta. Since graduating, Due to an ongoing lawsuit, National Park Jackie Grossi and her husband Rich Michelle has worked for Sonoma County Service staff were not able to participate in manage beef cattle on M Ranch. She feels Farm Bureau, but she confessed that she any of the workshops to provide the Park’s fortunate to have her children and grand- isn’t certain where her career will take her; perspectives. MCL will continue to track children living nearby. Her daughter Joyce will it be back to the ranch? the Ranch Comprehensive Management partners with her parents in managing the Asked “how is it going with your ranch- Planning process and will use as a resource operation. Joyce spoke of her deep personal the valuable perceptions gained from the satisfaction in helping with the birth of a ing partnership with the Park?” Jackie Grossi hoped that the Ranch Comprehen- workshops. Videos of all four workshops are newborn calf and in working in a commu- posted to conservationleague.org/resourc- nity of ranchers. But with two daughters in sive Management Plan will solve some problems. Jarrod responded that the es/videos.html.

PAGE 10 January—February 2017

New Director Profile with the outdoors and particularly Mt. Ta- tion. The foundation awards small grants malpais extend back many years. While she up to $2,000 to environmental organiza- Arlin was still living in the city, she joined Friends tions in Marin and the Tahoe area, where of Mt. Tam (formerly Mt. Tam Interpretive the historic Alpine Club sits on Echo Sum- Weinberger, Association), the non-profit partner of Mt. mit. Recently, she has become a community San Rafael Tamalpais State Park, and served on the "ambassador" for One Tam, the initiative of board for nine years, six as president. She Tamalpais Lands Collaborative. Arlin has Arlin grew up in also served on the board of Tamalpais Con- been hiking Mt. Tam for over 20 years with San Francisco and servation Club for eight years, producing its her weekly Wednesday group. Her profes- moved to Marin in newsletter. Arlin is now in her ninth year as sional background is in corporate commu- 2004. Her association chair of the California Alpine Club Founda- nications. Marin Conservation League Business Member Profile California Native Plant Society, Marin Chapter

by Linda Novy portunities for The Point Reyes "3rd Thursday Weeders" The Marin Chapter of the California stewardship. Native Plant Society (CNPS) is one of Toward that 34 chapters in an organization that goal, CNPS is boasts 10,000 members statewide. interested in The Chapter joined Marin Conserva- supporting the tion League in 2004. Kristin Jakob, efforts of public Co-Vice President of the organization, land manag- said that CNPS’s vision and mission ers to sustain is to: “…conserve California native habitats. One plants and their natural habitats, and example is the increase understanding, appreciation, monitoring and and horticultural use of native plants.” preparation of CNPS promotes a future vision in native plant which Californians “value native lists on pub- local schools develop native gardens plants, plant communities and healthy lic lands, by trail or area. Long time as wildlife habitat. CNPS provides ecosystems” and strive to preserve the chapter members continually update financial support to other agencies’ state’s “extensive and interconnected and post these lists on the web. Non- outreach efforts, such as the recent natural habitats” as essential to the native invasive plants are listed, too, in Mt. Tam Science Summit (see page 6). wellbeing of all living things. These order to help Marin residents iden- They also offer grants and scholar- goals are in alignment with MCL’s tify those that don't belong in public ship programs to students studying conservation mission. We are grateful lands or in their home landscapes! native plants. And, if you are inter- for CNPS’ support of MCL, not only CNPS board members lead an on- ested in exploring some of Marin’s through their membership but also going effort to remove invasive plants trails and learning about native through their active participation in through the “3rd Thursday Weeders” plants firsthand, join one of the CNPS MCL’s Parks & Open Space Committee group (pictured) in the Point Reyes field trips, which are always fun and and Invasive Plant Subcommittee. National Seashore. Tiburon’s Middle informative. These have been going CNPS outreach programs help edu- Ridge Preserve also is host to a group on since the Chapter was established cate the Marin community about what of board members and volunteers who more than 40 years ago. Beginning people can do to preserve and protect remove non-native grasses to help plant enthusiasts are welcome! our native plants and plant communi- protect the rare Tiburon jewel flower. The Marin Conservation League ties. Kristin went on to say that with Other CNPS programs include supports CNPS deep roots in Marin more people seeking to recreate in a twice-yearly native plant sale at and throughout the state for its nature, there comes with it more Falkirk Mansion in San Rafael, now active conservation programs. pressure on our native vegetation and done in collaboration with Marin Mas- Go to the CNPS web site at cnps- wildlife habitats but also more op- ter Gardeners; and an effort to help marin.org for more information.

PAGE 11 Non-Profit Marin Conservation League Organization Board of Directors U.S. POSTAGE PAID Officers Permit No. 151 Kate Powers, San Rafael, President San Rafael, CA Nona Dennis, Mill Valley, 1st Vice President January—February 2017 Ann Thomas, Corte Madera, 2nd Vice President Larry Minikes, San Rafael, Secretary 175 N. Redwood Dr., Ste. 135 Kenneth Drexler, Fairfax, Treasurer San Rafael, CA 94903 Directors Heather Furmidge, Pt. Reyes Station RETURN SERVICE REQUESTED Sally Gale, Petaluma Doug Karpa, Mill Valley David Lewis, Novato Ralph Mihan, San Rafael Bob Miller, San Rafael Pat Nelson, San Rafael Vicki Nichols, Sausalito Linda Novy, Fairfax Pamela Reaves, San Rafael Susan Stompe, Novato Judy Teichman, Pt. Reyes Station Arlin Weinberger, San Rafael Doug Wilson, Mill Valley Greg Zitney, Novato

Board of Directors meetings are held at 7:00 pm on the 3rd Tuesday of the month at the MCL office and are open to the public.

Staff Shannon Doherty, Operations Admin. Don't let this be your last issue! Kirsten Nolan, Communications Coord. MCL memberships are calendar year— Contact Information 175 N. Redwood Dr., Ste. 135 Renew for 2017 NOW! San Rafael CA 94903 | 415.485.6257 www.marinconservationleague.org [email protected] Name

Issue Committee Meeting Schedule (subject to change—check website) Address Land Use and Transportation: 1st Wed. of the month, 9:00—11:00 am City/State/ZIP Parks and Open Space: 2nd Thurs. of the month, 3:00—5:00 pm Phone Email *Join at the $250 level or above and you will Invasive Plant Subcommittee of POS: be invited to MCL’s Fall Leaders Circle Event! 3rd Wed. of the month, 3:00—5:00 pm SIGN ME UP AS A: Climate Action Working Group: 3rd Fri. of UU$35 Steward UU$100 Baylands UU$500 Redwoods the month, 9:00—11:00 am UU$50 Creeks UU$250 Woodlands* UU$1,000 Peter Behr Agricultural Land Use: meets quarterly; Water and Watersheds, North Marin Unit: UUMy check, payable to MCL, is enclosed UUI will renew via credit card Check website for times and locations

Marin Conservation League was founded in 1934 to preserve, protect and enhance Marin Card Number Exp. Date County’s natural assets. MCL is a non-profit 501(c)3 organization. All contributions and memberships are tax-deductible to the extent Name on Card sec. code allowed by law.

Editor: Nona Dennis Design and Production: Dru Parker. Signature Printed in San Rafael on recycled paper. Mail to MCL, 175 N. Redwood Dr. Ste. 135, San Rafael, CA 94903 Please share and recycle. or JOIN ONLINE at marinconservationleague.org All contributions and dues are tax deductible to the extent allowed by law. MCL memberships are calendar-year based.

PAGE 12