The San Jacinto Watershed Component of the Santa Ana Integrated Watershed Plan

IRWM Plan Proposal for Integrated Regional Water Management

Prop 50, Chapter 8 Planning Grant Application

May 11, 2005

Submitted by: San Jacinto River Watershed Council Table of Contents

ACRONYMS 5

A. BACKGROUND 7

Chapter 1 Executive Summary - Proposal Introduction and Objectives 7 Section 1 - Summary of Proposed Planning Grant Proposal 7 Section 2 - Why a Focused Component Plan? 9 Section 3 - Why Support This Proposal? 9

Chapter 2 - Regional Agency or Regional Water Management Group Description 11 Section 1 - Lead Agency 11 Section 2 - Funding Partners 11 Section 3 - Other Interested and Supporting Stakeholders 11 Section 4 - Plan for Adopting a Final Plan 12 Section 5 - Entities to Adopt Final Plan 12

Chapter 3 – Watershed Background 14 Section 1 - Overview of Project and Watershed Area 14 Section 2 - Physiographic Characteristics 16 Section 3 - Major Watershed Features 17 Gavilan Hills 19 Steele Peak 19 Motte-Rimrock Reserve 19 Section 4 - Internal Boundaries within the Region 21 Section 5 - Major Flood Control Infrastructure 21 Section 6 - Major Land Use Divisions 24 Section 7 - Description of Water Resources 26 Section 8 – Hydrometeorological Characteristics 29 Section 9 - Surface Water Quality 31 Section 10 - Water Supplies – Quantity and Quality 36 Section 11 - Areas of Special Biological Significance and other Sensitive Habitat 41 Section 12 - Values, Social and Cultural Makeup and Trends of the Regional Community 44 Section 13 - Economic Conditions and Disadvantaged Community Status 46 Section 14 - Trends 49 Section 15 - Benefits of Planning for this Region 49

Chapter 4 – Planning Objectives and Major Water Related Issues and Conflicts 51 Section 1 – Planning Objectives 51 Section 2 - Major Water Related Issues and Conflicts 51

Chapter 5 - Integration of Water Management Strategies 55 Section 1 - Water Management Strategies 55 Section 2 - Strategies to be Considered 55 Section 3 - How Strategies were Determined 57

Chapter 6 - Implementation 58 Section 1 –General San Jacinto Component Plan Implementation Scheduling 58 Section 2 – Specific Drivers for SJ Component Plan Implementation 58 Section 3 – Institutional Structure to ensure SJ Component Plan implementation 58 Section 4 – Adaptive Management of the San Jacinto Component Plan 59 Section 5 - NPS Pollution Control Activities 59

2 Program Goals: 60

Chapter 7 - Impacts and Benefits 61 Section 1 - Potential Impacts and Benefits of Plan Development and Implementation 61 Section 2- Description of Potential Impacts 61 Section 3 - CEQA Compliance 62

Chapter 8 - Data and Technical Analysis 63 Section 1 - Plan Development Support Data 63

Chapter 9 - Data Management 66 Section 1- Dissemination of Data 66 Section 2 - Support of Statewide Data Needs 66 Support of SWRCB Statewide Data Management Efforts 66

Chapter 10 - Stakeholder Involvement 67 Section 1- Incorporation of Stakeholder Involvement 67 Section 2 - Outreach 68 Section 3 - Proposed Stakeholders 68

Chapter 11 -Disadvantaged Communities 74 Section 1 - Extent of Disadvantaged Communities 74 Section 2 – Water Supply and Water Quality needs of Disadvantaged Communities 74 Section 3 - Benefits to Disadvantaged Communities 74 Section 4 - Involvement in Planning Process 74

Chapter 12 - Relation to Local Planning 74 Section 1 – Overview and Relation to local planning documents 74 Section 2 – Dynamics between local planning and San Jacinto Component Plan planning processes. 75

Chapter 13 - Agency Coordination 75 Section 1 - Coordination and Cooperation with Relevant Local, State and Federal Regulatory Agencies 75 Section 2 - Coordination with Local Land-Use Planning Decision-Makers 76

B - WORKPLAN 77

Task 1: Project Initiation (January 2006 through March 2006) 77

Task 2:Stakeholder Meetings & SJ Component IRWM Scope Refinement (February 2006-April 2006) 78

Task 3:Watershed Data Inventory (January 2006-April 2006) 79

Task 4: Specific Watershed Analyses (April 2006- July 2007) 80

Task 5: Development of General Watershed Strategies and Programs (April 2006 – July 2007) 83

Task 6: Draft Component Watershed Management Plan Development (January 2007 – September 2007) 84

Task 7: Finalization and Implementation/Adoption of Plan (September 2007- January 2008) 85

Task 8: Interim and Final Progress Reports (January 2006 – January 2008) 85

Task 9: Project Administration (January 2006-January 2008) 85

3 C. BUDGET 87

Funding Match Detail: 88

D. SCHEDULE 90

E. EXISTING SJRWC WATERSHED PLAN OUTLINE 91 Figures FIGURE 1 – LOCATION OF PROPOSED PLANNING PROJECTS WITHIN THE SAN JACINTO WATERSHED 8 FIGURE 2 - SAN JACINTO RIVER WATERSHED BOUNDARY 15 FIGURE 3 – RIVERSIDE COUNTY INTEGRATED PLAN PLANNING AREAS 18 FIGURE 4 – CITIES AND MAJOR COMMUNITIES WITHIN THE SAN JACINTO WATERSHED. 22 FIGURE 5 – WATER AGENCIES AND WASTEWATER AGENCIES WITHIN THE SAN JACINTO WATERSHED (BLUE BOUNDARY) 23 FIGURE 6 - LAND USE IN THE SAN JACINTO WATERSHED (SJNMP, TETRATECH, 2004) 25 FIGURE 7 - MAJOR WATER RESOURCES FEATURES IN THE WATERSHED. (SJNMP, TETRATECH, APRIL 2004) 27 FIGURE 8 – SAN JACINTO WATERSHED AVERAGE RAINFALL AND EVAPORATIVE LOSS 30 FIGURE 9 – GROUNDWATER BASINS IN THE SAN JACINTO WATERSHED (BLUE BOUNDARY) 37 FIGURE 10 – LAND USES IN THE SAN JACINTO WATERSHED 47 Tables TABLE 1 – LAND USE WITHIN THE SAN JACINTO WATERSHED (SJNMP, TETRATECH, 2004) 26 TABLE 2 – BENEFICIAL USES FOR LAKES AND RESERVOIRS IN THE SAN JACINTO RIVER WATERSHED 32 TABLE 3 – BENEFICIAL USES OF INLAND SURFACE STREAMS IN THE SAN JACINTO 33 TABLE 4 – CANYON LAKE AND LAKE ELSINORE TMDL TARGETS AND ACTUAL 34 CONCENTRATIONS 34 TABLE 5 – TMDL HYDROLOGIC CONDITION EXAMPLES 35 TABLE 6 – SAN JACINTO WATERSHED GROUNDWATER BASIN BENEFICIAL USES 38 TABLE 7 - DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES WITH THE SAN JACINTO WATERSHED 48

4 ACRONYMS

AF acre-feet BMPs best management practices CAFO Confined Animal Feeding Operation CDFG Department of Fish and Game CDP Census Designated Places CETAP Community and Environmental Transportation Accessibility Process CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CL Canyon Lake CWA Clean Water Act DWR Department of Water Resources EMWD Eastern Municipal Water District EVMWD Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District GIS Geographic Information System HCP Habitat Conservation Plan IRWM Integrated Regional Watershed Management Plan IWP SAWPA’s Integrated Watershed Plan LE Lake Elsinore LESJWA Lake Elsinore San Jacinto Watershed Authority MSHCP Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System MWD Metropolitan Water District NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NMP Nutrient Management Plan NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NPS Non-point source RCD Resource Conservation District RCFC&WCD Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board SAMP Special Area Management Plan for the Santa Margarita and San Jacinto Watersheds SARWQCB Santa Ana Region Regional Water Quality Control Board SAWA Santa Ana Watershed Association of RCDs SAWPA Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority SJBRCD San Jacinto Basin RCD SJNMP San Jacinto Nutrient Management Plan SJPMP San Jacinto Pathogen Management Plan SJRWC San Jacinto River Watershed Council SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board TMDL Total Maximum Daily Loads TN total nitrogen TP total phosphorous TDS total dissolved solids UCR University of California, Riverside USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers

5 USBR United States Bureau of Reclamation USDA United States Department of Agriculture USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service WMI California State University, San Bernardino Water Management Institute WRCAC Western Riverside County Agriculture Coalition WMWD Western Municipal Water District WY water years

6 San Jacinto Component Plan of the Santa Ana Integrated Watershed Plan Planning Grant Proposal Authorized Under Proposition 50 Chapter 8

A. BACKGROUND Chapter 1 Executive Summary - Proposal Introduction and Objectives

Section 1 - Summary of Proposed Planning Grant Proposal

This grant proposal requests $500,000 to develop a focused component of the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority’s (SAWPA) Santa Ana Integrated Watershed Plan (SAWPA IWP) specific to the 732 square mile San Jacinto Watershed. The focused component will build on the significant work done by the broader SAWPA IWP with regards to groundwater, surface water, reclaimed water and desalter water management. Specifically, this proposal would initiate a number of specific studies to develop implementation plans for:

• Watershed and Waterbody water quality data collection • Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake Nutrient and Canyon Lake Pathogen TMDLs • San Jacinto River Reach 4 Gap Analysis to address competing water quality, agriculture, water supply, habitat and flood control needs within this upper watershed area. • Septic System Management Plan

In addition, the proposal includes funds to support:

• Stakeholder involvement to identify (and fund) additional planning studies likely to focus on: o groundwater and/or reclaimed water management in order to reduce reliance on imported water supplies and to address a potential water supply deficiency during drought conditions in 2025 o Development of a integrated public education program focusing on watershed protection and management. Components for disadvantaged communities will specifically be considered. o Analysis of a complex flood management, critical habitat conservation, wetlands enhancement and • Truly integrating the various stakeholder needs in the San Jacinto Watershed by examining the significant, yet independently developed, planning documents addressing housing, habitat conservation, aquatic resource conservation, water supply, water quality, TMDL and other planning documents.

Locations of proposed projects are included in figure 1.

7 Figure 1 – Location of proposed planning projects within the San Jacinto Watershed

8 The objectives for this proposal are set based on needs identified by the Council through its monthly meetings with the major stakeholders within the watershed. The San Jacinto River Watershed Council’s (SJRWC) strategy for reaching this goal is to take a holistic, interdisciplinary, watershed- based four-pronged approach: 1) Facilitate and improve coordination, collaboration, and assistance among governmental agencies (local, State, and Federal), academic institutions, and local communities and watershed groups, 2) Continue watershed monitoring and assessment systems, and 3) promote and support watershed-based education and outreach, and 4) develop/implement a mechanism that will ensure the support and long-term sustainability of watershed activities.

This proposal would implement regional efforts through coordination and collaboration with multiple governmental agencies, academic institutions, and other organizations within the watershed. This regional and collaborative effort is intended to assist in attaining State/Federal water quality standards related to TMDLs and address multiple statewide watershed management priorities.

Section 2 - Why a Focused Component Plan?

SAWPA has developed an Integrated Watershed Plan that covers the greater Santa Ana watershed and addresses watershed management issues in an integrated fashion within the larger Santa Ana Watershed. The proposed San Jacinto Component Plan is a complementary planning process that will build upon the work already completed by watershed stakeholders participating in the SAWPA planning process. The San Jacinto Component Plan will provide additional in-depth planning that will further enhance the SAWPA planning process and focus on issues unique to the San Jacinto Watershed. This planning process is in agreement with SAWPA's regional planning initiatives and is considered noncompetitive in nature to SAWPA's future implementation grant application.

The SJRWC, in conjunction with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD) and a significant number of other cooperating entities believe that a focused component of SAWPA’s IWP is needed to specifically address the San Jacinto Watershed and the watershed related needs of its stakeholders consisting of interests in agriculture, dairy, cities, County, water agencies, environment, tribal, and more. The San Jacinto Component Plan represents a guidance document that will focus on truly integrating and coordinating the needs of a complex watershed. This plan proposes an amplification of the existing SAWPA IWP by providing a specific, focused component for the San Jacinto Watershed.

Section 3 - Why Support This Proposal? Advantages of funding this grant proposal include: • Consistency with multiple statewide priorities including: o Propose integrated projects that will reduce conflict between water users o Implements 2 TMDLs o Implements SA RWQCB Watershed Management Initiative programs (see below) o Includes NPS pollution reduction, management and monitoring strategies for septic systems o Large watershed and significant number of disadvantaged communities will ensure that proposed projects are consistent with environmental justice concept o And will look for projects to reduce reliability on imported water, consistent with the CALFED-Bay Delta Program objectives.

9 • Consistency with multiple Program Preferences including: o Integrated projects with multiple benefits, o Support and improve local and regional water supply reliability; o Contribute expeditiously and measurably to the long term attainment of water quality standards through TMDL implementation; o Eliminate or significantly reduce pollution in impaired waters and sensitive habitat areas; o Include water quality projects that serve disadvantaged communities (over 47% of the watershed population lives in a disadvantaged community); o Include groundwater management and recharge projects that are located in Riverside County • The proposed work plan specifically supports the following SARWQCB WMI objectives: o TMDL’s • Task 2 - Conduct stakeholder group meetings TMDL Stakeholder groups • Task 4 - TMDL development; focus on data analyses; and implementation planning. • Task 4- Develop/calibrate lake model for nutrient TMDL development for Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake • Task 4- To develop/calibrate watershed model to assess the nutrient sources • Task 4 - Conduct monitoring to identify the sources of pollutant and the response of lake ecosystem. o Nonpoint Source Program • Task 5 - Work with stakeholders to develop educational materials for toxins, nutrient and sediment control • Task 5 - Conduct outreach activities o Monitoring &Assessment • Task 3 - Compile watershed monitoring data from all available sources including SAWPA, RCFC&WCD, Elsinore Valley MWD, Eastern MWD, city of Lake Elsinore, and discharger self-monitor reports. • Task 4 - Conduct watershed monitoring where data gaps exist • Task 4 - Continue monitoring/assessment activities associated with TMDL development o Watershed Management • Task 4 - Continue to participate in the Reclaimed Water Task Force to evaluate the use of reclaimed water to stabilize the level of Lake Elsinore and reduce impairment of beneficial uses caused by excessive nutrient levels. • Task 2, 4 - Coordinate with Lake Elsinore/San Jacinto Watershed Authority JPA. o Wetlands • Task 2,3,5 - Coordinate with local, state, and federal agencies on endangered species and wetland permitting issues. o Groundwater • Task 5 - Participate in the Lakeview subbasin AB 3030 program Advisory Committee • Task 5- Review the Hemet/San Jacinto area AB 3030 groundwater study project reports/management plan

10 Chapter 2 - Regional Agency or Regional Water Management Group Description

Section 1 - Lead Agency The San Jacinto River Watershed Council (SJRWC), a 501 (c) 3 non-profit organization is an open forum of the entire watershed, upper and lower and represents the major stakeholders in a large, complex watershed. The San Jacinto River Watershed Council uses a holistic and broad-based approach to watershed planning efforts. The Council was initially formed in 2000, incorporated in 2003 and filed for non-profit status in 2003. The Council is self-sustaining and dependent upon stakeholder donations. It is the only broad –based stakeholder group with representatives that truly reflect the entire watershed. Board members represent tribal, dairy, landowners, environmental, County Government, Water agencies, Federal, and two at-large director positions.

The San Jacinto River Watershed Council would be the lead entity and grant recipient on this project. The Program Director will be Mr. Jim Gilmore. Jim Gilmore has served, since 1992, as Program Manager for the San Jacinto Basin RCD (SJBRCD) and as Team Leader for the District’s Irrigation Water and Nutrient Management Laboratory. He also serves on the Board of Directors of the Santa Ana Watershed Association of RCDs (SAWA) and is currently President of the San Jacinto River Watershed Council. Major programs for the San Jacinto Basin RCD include the PRISM Irrigation Scheduling Program for growers of wine grapes in the Temecula Valley, which has helped reduce nutrient loading in the Santa Margarita River; invasive plant management (Arundo and Salt Cedar) in the San Jacinto Watershed; and continuing education and technology transfer for growers of trees and vines in western Riverside County. SAWA programs include invasive plant management, habitat restoration and endangered species monitoring and enhancement throughout the Santa Ana River Watershed (including the SJRW). Jim was co-author of the successful grant application that initially established The San Jacinto River Watershed Council. His background is in agriculture, education and journalism. He is a graduate of Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo.

Section 2 - Funding Partners The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (RCFC&WCD) has a multi- pronged role in the San Jacinto Watershed. First and foremost, it protects people and property from the impacts of unconfined flooding through regional capital improvement projects. Secondly, the District has an expanding role in water conservation efforts within the watershed. Thirdly, the District, as the Principal Permittee of the SARWQCB Riverside County MS4 NPDES Permit, the District coordinates and plans regional stormwater compliance activities within the watershed. Finally, the District, through agreements with the County, is also responsible for the review and approval of new developments within the unincorporated portion of the watershed with respect to flood protection and water quality issues. The District also coordinates with the County on Western Riverside Multi-Species Habitat Conservation (MSHCP) planning efforts and is the local lead agency for the United States Army Corps of Engineers Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) for aquatic resources in the San Jacinto watershed.

Section 3 - Other Interested and Supporting Stakeholders

11 The SJRWC has also received letters or e-mails of support from a number of interested stakeholders including SAWPA, EMWD, WMWD, the cities within the watershed, and many others.

Additional funding match partners are also still being considered. Due to the deadline and time constraint of the application, we have proceeded with only funding commitments we can confirm. We currently have a funding match of 37%, but expect to have additional commitments.

Section 4 - Plan for Adopting a Final Plan

The proposed San Jacinto Watershed Component of the Santa Ana Integrated Regional Watershed Plan (SJ Component Plan) will provide a roadmap necessary to truly plan for and integrate the specific needs of the San Jacinto watershed. The SJRWC provides an existing and proven watershed forum, representing a number of the large and diverse stakeholders in the watershed. It, in conjunction with the RCFC&WCD, has the resources to gather and integrate other stakeholders, administer the grant, and oversee the development of the work product. The SJRWC will form a specific workgroup made up of member entities and other interested stakeholders. Over the course of the project, the SJRWC, with input from the workgroup, will oversee the development of a draft SJ Component Plan that, upon completion, would be made available for public review. The public review would include a notice in local newspapers, and a public hearing before the SJRWC to ensure that all possible stakeholder input is received prior to final approval of the SJ Component Plan. Upon receipt and incorporation of stakeholder input, the SJRWC will prepare the final SJ Component Plan, which will be formally submitted to SAWPA for incorporation into their existing SA IRWM.

Section 5 - Entities to Adopt Final Plan

The Council would recommend upon completion of the SJ Component Plan, that the SJ Component Plan be adopted into SAWPA’s Santa Ana Integrated Regional Plan. SAWPA is a Joint Powers Authority representing five water agencies, two of which have jurisdiction within this watershed (EMWD, WMWD). Both EMWD and WMWD’s service areas in this watershed contain numerous disadvantages communities. Over 47% of the watershed’s population lives within a disadvantaged community.

The Plan would also be formally adopted by the Watershed Council. Board members represent a diverse group of stakeholders in the watershed: • Jim Gilmore, At-Large Director, President • Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District/Water agencies • Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority/Federal/local/Govn’t • Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District/County • Scotts Bros. Farms/Agriculture/Landowners • Sid Sybrandy/ Dairy • Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians/Tribal • Sue Nash/Environmental • Alison Shilling/At-Large Director

12 Other stakeholders* who have expressed an interest in participating in this plan and who may also represent disadvantaged communities include: • Santa Ana Watershed Associations of Resource Conservation Districts • San Jacinto Basin RCD • County of Riverside • Elsinore Murrieta Anza RCD • Eastern Municipal Water District • Western Municipal Water District • Lake Hemet Municipal Water District • Nuevo Water District • Friends of the San Jacinto Valley • City of Hemet • City of San Jacinto • City of Perris • City of Lake Elsinore • City of Moreno Valley • Western Riverside County Ag Coalition • Riverside County Farm Bureau • University of California Cooperative Extension-Ag component • UCR-Salinity lab • San Jacinto Wildlife Area (confirm) • Western United Dairymen • Milk Producers Council • Bert Lauda Farms • California Native Plant Society • United States Bureau of Reclamatiom • SARWQCB (as a non voting member) • And many more.

*At the time of the grant application submittal, additional notifications by stakeholders were still being received.

13 Chapter 3 – Watershed Background

Section 1 - Overview of Project and Watershed Area

The San Jacinto Integrated Regional Watershed Management Plan Component of the Santa Ana Integrated Watershed Plan's (SJ Component IRWM) primary objective is to develop a focused component of SAWPA’s existing Santa Ana Integrated Watershed Management Plan, specific to unique and complex needs of the 732 square mile San Jacinto Watershed. Although the SAWPA Santa Ana Integrated Watershed Management Plan adequately addresses watershed management issues within the Santa Ana watershed as a whole, it does not as carefully consider unique water quality, habitat, NPS pollution control projects, need for additional reclaimed water management and potential impacts of TMDL requirements that specifically impact the residents, (human, avian, animal, fish, plant or insect), of the San Jacinto sub-watershed. This work plan, when completed, will have developed a number of specific planning documents, and contemplated the need for, and implemented, additional stakeholder recommended planning documents to address issues that are specific to the San Jacinto Watershed, and have looked for ways to integrate these issues with each other and SAWPA’s existing Santa Ana Integrated Watershed Management Plan. The sheer size of this watershed, and the array of water resources, naturally lends themselves to large regional solutions that integrate a number of watershed issues.

14 Figure 2 - San Jacinto River Watershed Boundary

15 Section 2 - Physiographic Characteristics

The 732 square mile San Jacinto River Basin is located in Riverside County about 80 miles southeast of Los Angeles. It is tributary to the Santa Ana River through Lake Elsinore and Temescal Wash. Due to the large amount of flood storage in Lake Elsinore, flows from the river rarely reach the Santa Ana River, the last occurrence being in 1916.

Of the 732 square mile watershed, approximately 692 square miles at Railroad Canyon Dam, excluding some 18.1 square miles regulated by Lake Perris. Major tributaries include Bautista Creek, Poppet Creek, Potrero Creek, Perris Valley Drain and Salt Creek. The mountainous portion of the drainage area lies principally on the southwest slopes of the San Jacinto Mountains, while the valley portion includes primarily the San Jacinto and Perris Valleys. The cities of Perris, San Jacinto and Sun City, as well as the communities of Canyon Lake, Lakeview, Nuevo and Romoland are areas adjacent to the river. In addition, the cities of Beaumont, Moreno Valley and Hemet, the communities of Homeland, Idyllwild, Edgemont, Sunnymead, Quail Valley, and Valle Vista, as well as March Air Force Base, are all located within the San Jacinto watershed. The river crosses Interstate 215, a major north-south inland artery, near the City of Perris.

Elevations in the watershed vary from a maximum of 10,804 feet at San Jacinto Peak, to 1,680 feet at the mouth of the canyon near Valle Vista, to 1,382 feet at the crest of the spillway on Railroad Canyon Dam. The length of the longest watercourse in the mountainous area is about 28 miles from the headwaters to the canyon mouth, with the valley portion extending another 31.5 miles to Railroad Canyon Dam.

Two major faults, the San Jacinto and the Casa Loma, traverse the watershed, nearly parallel to each other trending in a northwesterly direction. Settlement of deep alluvial deposits between these two faults has created a shallow natural lakebed or sump in the northwest portion of the San Jacinto Valley near Lakeview.

Most of the rocks of the mountainous drainage area are granitic, and the soils are shallow and stony. The lower slopes east of San Jacinto and also the hills between the lower courses of the South Fork San Jacinto River and Bautista Creek consist chiefly of partly consolidated gritty clay shales, overlain unconformably by gravels. Soils in the valleys are recent alluvium, ranging from coarse sand near the base of the mountains to heavy, sandy clays in the lower portions.

Pines and other conifers are found in the mountains above an elevation of 4,000 feet. Mingled with the conifers but extending to lower points on the slopes are live oaks and walnuts. Sycamores, birches, maples, willows, and cottonwoods are found in the sheltered areas where sufficient moisture is available. Grasses and related forage plants grow on the lower slopes during the winter and spring, and on the higher slopes of the mountain ranges throughout the year. Moderate growths of sage and chaparral are also found in the hilly and mountainous portions of the drainage area.

16 Section 3 - Major Watershed Features

The San Jacinto Watershed is a vast area containing many unique watershed features. A short description of major watershed features is provided below. For geographic reference, the watershed features are divided into into geographic units consistent with the Riverside County General Plan Planning Areas. A map delineating the location of these planning areas is contained in Figure 3.

Elsinore Area Plan Watershed Features: Cleveland National Forest The Cleveland National Forest forms the western boundary of the area and encompasses large portions of the Santa Ana and Elsinore Mountains. This area is characterized by natural open space and outdoor recreational uses with pockets of rural residential and wilderness oriented visitor serving uses scattered along State Route 74. Private in-holdings within the Forest boundary are developed with limited residential and commercial uses.

Harvest/Winchester Area Watershed Features:

Double Butte Double Butte is a steep, dual peaked mountain centrally located between Winchester and Homeland. Much of this feature was the site of a County landfill, which has since been closed. The intent is to establish recreational uses once clean up and mitigation measures have been completed.

Lakeview Mountains The Lakeview Mountains, which lie north of Harvest Valley, define the northern portion of the Harvest Valley/Winchester planning area. They nevertheless create a valuable scenic backdrop, especially for the communities of Homeland and Green Acres located directly to the south. Large rock outcroppings and boulders accent the slopes. These mountains are home to the Buck Jewel flower, an indicator of Coastal Sage Scrub habitat. These species also document the relatively dry, arid microclimate that prevails here.

Vernal Pools Vernal pools are seasonally flooded depressions found on ancient soils with an impermeable layer such as hardpan, claypan, or volcanic basalt. The impermeable layer allows the pools to retain water much longer than the surrounding lands; nonetheless, the pools are shallow enough to dry up each season. Vernal pools often fill and empty several times during the rainy season. Only plants and animals that are adapted to this cycle of wetting and drying can survive in vernal pools over time. In this case, the vernal pools are located in the northeast portion of the planning area. Vernal pools serve as habitat for endangered wildlife species and are often associated with areas characterized by rare plant species.

San Diego Canal/Aqueduct Running from north to south and intersecting the western end of Diamond Valley Lake is the San Diego Canal/Aqueduct. Its function is to transport State Project water as well as Colorado River water to Lake Skinner, where the canal ends. From that point, deliveries are made to MWD's member agencies in southern Riverside County and San Diego County via a system of pipelines.

17 Figure 3 – Riverside County Integrated Plan Planning Areas

18 Mead Valley Area Watershed Features:

Gavilan Hills Located in the western portion of the planning area, the Gavilan Hills stretch north to south from Temecula to Corona. They contribute to the area’s most spectacular terrain before dropping precipitously down into Temescal Canyon and Lake Elsinore to the west. In fact, they constitute a natural and spectacular edge between the Mead Valley planning area and other communities to the west.

Steele Peak Located in the southwestern portion of the planning area in the Gavilan Hills is Steele Peak. Steele Peak, at 2,529 feet, is the tallest peak in the planning area and serves as a major landmark for the community.

Motte-Rimrock Reserve The Motte-Rimrock Reserve encompasses a rocky plateau above the City of Perris. The Reserve protects important archaeological sites, including an unexcavated ceremonial site and well- preserved pictographs. The Reserve environment is rich in coastal sage scrub, riparian grassland, and chaparral, and contains six seasonal springs that enrich the diversity of plant species found here. Animal life prospers as well, this being a home to the Stephen’s Kangaroo Rat, a federally protected endangered species.

Lakeview/Nuevo Area Watershed Features:

Lakeview Mountains The Lakeview Mountains define the bulk of the central and southeastern portion of the Lakeview/Nuevo planning area and create a scenic backdrop for the planning area. The mountains, which are dotted with picturesque rock outcroppings, gently slope west to the valley that contains the San Jacinto River. Juniper Flats, a small rural area, is located close to the Lakeview Mountains.

Bernasconi Hills The Bernasconi Hills are located within the Lake Perris State Recreation Area. Portions of these hills are located in the northwest corner of the Lakeview/Nuevo planning area. The Bernasconi Hills are barren, steep, and rugged peaks that are a stark contrast to Lake Perris, which is located immediately north of this planning area. The hills and lake offer opportunities for such outdoor recreational activities as camping, hunting, water sports, fishing, picnicking, and biking.

San Jacinto River The San Jacinto River flows westward from Lake Hemet in the Santa Rosa Mountains, through Canyon Lake, and then to Lake Elsinore. It flows through the central portion of this planning area and has a profound influence over its land use patterns. Currently, the river is a semi-natural watercourse that is normally dry. Through the planning area, the river is partially channelized with earthen levees. The lands adjacent to the river are currently vacant or agricultural in nature. Currently, there is a proposal to channelize the river with earthen berms from the Ramona Expressway to Interstate 215 to reduce flood threats and facilitate future development of adjacent properties. The project is sponsored by property owners in the area and is being prepared by the

19 County of Riverside Flood Control and Water Conservation District. If this project is approved by Federal agencies, the flood threat posed by this river will be significantly reduced. The broad valley in which this river sits may then be developed per the Area Plan Land Use Map. It is assumed that the channelization project will be approved, and it is included in the Area Plan Land Use Map. While the location and width of the channel has been decided, the Open Space- Conservation Habitat areas required to facilitate wildlife movement and biological diversity are not precisely known. Therefore, the Land Use Plan is subject to changes to reflect the final configuration of the habitat conservation areas.

San Jacinto Wildlife Area The San Jacinto Wildlife Area is nestled at the base of the Bernasconi Hills in the northwestern portion of the planning area. While the San Jacinto Wildlife Area is comprised of over 5,945 acres of restored natural lands, including wetlands, only a portion of the Wildlife Area is located within the Lakeview/Nuevo planning area. Because of the wetlands within the reserve, a large array of bird species, including birds of prey and waterfowl, migrate to this area every year.

San Jacinto Area Watershed Features:

Several significant physical features characterize the San Jacinto Valley area and have a material effect on existing and proposed land use patterns. The San Jacinto River traverses the northern half of the valley from northwest to southeast. This reach of the river provides significant habitat, presents flood and dam inundation constraints, and is a major scenic resource for the Valley. The river’s form changes from its natural state to a physically constrained drainage channel within the more urbanized areas. The Diamond Valley Lake in the southwestern portion of the Area Plan is expected to be a significant recreational destination. The varying terrain within which existing and potential development areas are located provides for a variety of unique housing opportunities and views, as well as scenic backdrops for visitors and residents.

San Jacinto River The San Jacinto River, with wide bends, travels in a general east/west path across western Riverside County. Existing land uses along the River vary significantly. Potential new uses are constrained by the steep slopes of the San Jacinto Mountains, the 100-year floodplain, and dam inundation hazards along the River. Dairy farms exist in the western portion of this riverene area. The Soboba Indian Reservation encompasses the eastern portion of this part of the San Jacinto Valley. A variety of uses including a church campus, mobile homes and recreational amenities are located in a swath of land between Gilman Springs Road and the San Jacinto River.

Maze Stone This area is isolated by the Lakeview Mountains to the northwest and the Cities of Hemet and San Jacinto to the east. Existing land uses include rural residential uses, equestrian estates, a mobile home park, agricultural lands and Maze Stone Park, home to a Native American pictograph. Much of the undeveloped land here is included in tentatively approved subdivisions proposing lots at least one half acre in area.

Lower San Jacinto Valley The largest portion of the plan area, the Lower San Jacinto Valley, contains a diverse array of physical features and land uses, generally rural and agrarian in nature. The Diamond Valley

20 Lake, Metropolitan Water District’s new 800,000 acre-feet reservoir, is located in the western edge of this area. A substantial amount of recreational development is planned in conjunction with the reservoir, though mainly near its western dam within the Harvest Valley/Winchester Area Plan, but also near its eastern dam. A few areas of residential development are appropriate here. The remaining land area is constrained by slope and is generally in agricultural production. The Ramona Bowl, home to the Ramona Pageant–a renowned local theatrical production–is located in this area as well.

Section 4 - Internal Boundaries within the Region The entire San Jacinto Watershed is contained within Riverside County. It incorporates 7 Cities and 14 unincorporated communities. The jurisdictional boundaries for these areas are identified in Figure 4. Communities and Cities that are hatched are classified as disadvantaged communities.

In addition, the San Jacinto Watershed is also served by two major water suppliers, Eastern Municipal Water District and Western Municipal Water District. The watershed is also served by a number of wastewater purveyors and several minor water suppliers including Idyllwild, Pine Cove, Lake Hemet, Nuevo Water Company and Lee Lake Water District. The jurisdictional boundaries of these entities are shown in Figure 54.

Section 5 - Major Flood Control Infrastructure The Corps of Engineers, jointly with the District, has constructed about 3.8 miles of rock riveted left bank levee from the Bautista Creek confluence to a point about 1.7 miles downstream of Soboba Road. The District has constructed about 1.7 miles of right bank levee in this area extending about 1 mile downstream of Soboba Road. In addition, the Corps has constructed collector dikes at the mouth of Bautista Creek Canyon and a concrete lined channel from the dikes to the river. These facilities all provide control well in excess of 100-year frequency design.

The District has constructed some levee improvements between the Corps’ levee and Sanderson Avenue. In addition, it has constructed a low flow channel from Interstate 215 Freeway to the entrance to Railroad Canyon. None of these improvements are capable of containing a 100-year frequency flood. The District has also constructed the following improvements on tributaries to the river: Pigeon Pass Dam in Moreno Valley, a small flood control reservoir; Perris Valley Drain, a low flow earth lined channel; and numerous smaller earth channels, concrete lined channels and underground storm drains throughout the basin, none of which would have a significant affect on runoff rates on river during a major flood.

In the past, the river was channelized between Sanderson Avenue and Nuevo Road by local interests with levees. These levees, which are capable of passing only very low flows, were constructed in an attempt to route flows past the natural sump near Lakeview. These levees would have no affect on flood flows.

21 Figure 4 – Cities and Major Communities within the San Jacinto Watershed.

22 Figure 5 – Water Agencies and Wastewater Agencies within the San Jacinto Watershed (Blue Boundary)

Legend: 1. Idyllwild (Water) 5. City of Hemet (Water and Wastewater) 2. Pine Cove (Water) 6. Nuevo Water Company (Water) 3. Lake Hemet (Water and Wastewater) 7. City of Perris (Wastewater) 4. City of San Jacinto (Wastewater) 8. Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (Water and Wastewater)

23 Water conservation improvements, such as reservoirs and spreading grounds, have been constructed and are being maintained by local interests. Lake Hemet located on the South Fork San Jacinto River, a water conservation reservoir, was constructed in 1895 with a capacity of 14,000 acre-feet. By 1940 debris inflow had reduced the capacity to 11,700 acre-feet. The tributary drainage area is 66 square miles. The effect of Lake Hemet on major flood runoff is considered negligible since no provisions have been made for storage of major flood flows. Railroad Canyon Dam is a water conservation reservoir completed in 1928.

Lake Perris, a major State Water Project reservoir constructed in 1973, has a small tributary area and therefore has no effect on major floods on the river.

A summary of the major hydrologic modifications to the watershed follows:

Major Hydrologic Modifications 1928 Construction of Canyon Lake 1973 Construction of Lake Perris, terminus of California Aqueduct 1950-1955 River Levees between Bautista Creek and Sanderson Avenue 1955-1965 Low flow channel from I-215 to Railroad Canyon 1993 Construction of Lakeview Dam 1988 Construction of Pigeon Pass Dam 1993 Lake Elsinore Management Plan (USACE Improvements)

Section 6 - Major Land Use Divisions Land Cover Annual grasses and small shrubs dominate the natural vegetation in the lowland areas of the San Jacinto River watershed, while the vegetation in the foothills include drought tolerant evergreen species. The mountain ranges consist of coastal sage scrub vegetation with Jeffery and Ponderosa pine trees above 5000 feet. Oak and cottonwood trees are present in both canyons and the riparian corridors within the watershed (RCD, 2002).

Riparian corridors as well as the open space foothills and mountains are important habitat for wildlife in the San Jacinto River watershed. Such habitat supports deer, quail, fox, ground squirrels, and various raptors. In addition, local lakes and reservoirs provide food and habitat for wintering raptors and migrating waterfowl (RCD, 2002). Stephen’s kangaroo rat (SKR), which is on the federal endangered species list and the California threatened species list, can also be found in the foothills (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2003).

Land Use

Figure 6 identifies the types and locations of major land uses within the watershed. Land use in the watershed is predominantly agricultural and residential in the valleys and open in the headwaters. Overall, 73.8 percent of the watershed is open, 18.2 percent is agriculture, and 7.95 percent is urban (Table 1).

24 Figure 6 - LAND USE IN THE SAN JACINTO WATERSHED (SJNMP, Tetratech, 2004)

25 The following types of land use were identified in the 2004 San Jacinto Nutrient Management Plan final report prepared by Tetratech:

Table 1 – Land Use within the San Jacinto Watershed (SJNMP, Tetratech, 2004)

Section 7 - Description of Water Resources

The San Jacinto River watershed is a dynamic system with various unique conditions that either enhance or restrict flows through the watershed. The San Jacinto River, Salt Creek, Perris Valley Storm Drain, Mystic Lake, Perris Reservoir, Canyon Lake, and Lake Elsinore are the dominant hydrologic features in the watershed (Figure 7). In many cases, lakes, reservoirs, and other detention facilities impound streamflow. These impoundments can have major impacts on the quantity and quality of the water transported throughout the watershed. Storage of water results in not only the attenuation of peak flows, but also increased soil infiltration and other associated losses. In agricultural areas, the operation of stormwater detention ponds can have pronounced effects on the magnitude of peak runoff from the San Jacinto River watershed. The water quality can also be affected by storage facilities; impacts are caused by settling, biological uptake, etc. The discussion below provides hydrologic and geographic details of major features of the San Jacinto River watershed and explains how each feature affects the hydrology of the system.

26 Figure 7 - Major Water Resources Features in the watershed. (SJNMP, Tetratech, April 2004)

27 San Jacinto River

The San Jacinto River originates in the San Jacinto Mountains and follows the San Jacinto Valley through the eastern portion of the watershed. The River is well gages by the USGS, and can be characterized as an ephemeral system, with flow reaching Canyon Lake and Lake Elsinore only during wet periods.

Flows in the headwaters of the San Jacinto are affected by rising groundwater, interflow and discharges from Lake Hemet. As the San Jacinto River leaves the San Jacinto Valley, it passes through the San Jacinto fault zone. This fault zone is responsible for relatively high subsidence rates, which have resulted in the formation of a closed system that periodically fills with water from the river. This depression forms Mystic Lake.

Downstream of Mystic Lake, the San Jacinto River forms a wide fluvial plain. When Mystic Lake does not overflow, downstream river reaches are often dry. The majority of water that infiltrates the ground is understood to be lost from the system, as groundwater levels are low due to excessive pumping and limited recharge. Infiltration losses occur during transport processes of watershed runoff or streamflow. Ultimately, it is expected that San Jacinto River groundwater sources will be limited.

Between Mystic Lake and Canyon Lake is the confluence with the Perris Valley Storm Drain. The San Jacinto River then flows through the narrow Railroad Canyon before draining into Canyon Lake. The Canyon Lake dam controls the flow downstream of Canyon Lake, which dominates the inflow to Lake Elsinore (Santa Ana RWQCB, 2001).

Perris Valley Channel - To the west of Perris Reservoir lie the communities of Perris and Moreno Valley. Runoff from this urban region drains into the Perris Valley Storm Drain, a major tributary of the San Jacinto River downstream of the Perris Reservoir. This channel, which drains an approximately 90 square mile area is dominated by urban runoff. Hydrographs tend to be very peaky and this facility tends to flow more often than less urbanized tributaries due to the impact of urbanization.

Salt Creek - Salt Creek is one of the main tributaries to Canyon Lake. The headwaters are located in the city of Hemet. As with Perris Valley Storm Drain, sharp peaks in flows are primarily the result of surface runoff from urban areas with little contributions from groundwater or interflow.

Mystic Lake - Mystic Lake is near the center of the San Jacinto River watershed. When formed, the lake is relatively shallow and has a large surface area (up to 4,000 acres), increasing losses to infiltration, groundwater recharge and evaporation. Many years ago local farmers constructed a low-flow channel to divert the San Jacinto River flow around Mystic Lake. According to local experts, siltation has closed the channel and it is no longer active during low flow periods. Therefore, all of the river flow drains directly to Mystic Lake where it is impounded during average and low flow years.

28 When full, the lake has been observed to maintain a substantial amount of volume for over a year with little or no transport back to the San Jacinto River. Due to the significant loss from evaporation, infiltration, and groundwater recharge, much of the volume stored in the lake is lost from the San Jacinto River system. During torrential rainfall events or periods of extended rain, however, the storage capacity of Mystic Lake can be exceeded, resulting in overflow back to the San Jacinto River.

The impact of Mystic Lake on downstream hydrology and water quality is significant. Unfortunately, the last time this area was mapped was in the 1940’s. Due to the subsidance in the area, it is expected that the volume and aerial extent of the lake is significantly larger than previously estimated. The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District has recently completed mapping of this area and is preparing to initiate studies to determine the current volume and extent of the lake.

Perris Reservoir - Just to the west of Mystic Lake lies another major impoundment in the San Jacinto River watershed. The Perris Reservoir is on a northwest tributary to the San Jacinto River. It essentially functions as a sink and impounds the runoff to the river from a 10-square-mile subwatershed. Runoff from the entire subwatershed is considered lost to the San Jacinto system.

Perris Reservoir, which is part of the California State Water Project, is also the largest drinking water reservoir in the San Jacinto River watershed. Many of the local water districts receive water from Perris Reservoir along with water from the Colorado River and groundwater sources. Water from Perris Reservoir helps meet the demands of Elsinore, Corona, Norco, Riverside, Moreno Valley, Perris, San Jacinto Hemet, Temecula, Coachella Valley and Palm Springs.

Canyon Lake - Canyon Lake is at the confluence of the San Jacinto River, Salt Creek, and other small tributaries. Over 90 percent of the San Jacinto watershed drains to Canyon Lake. Runoff from as far as Moreno Valley, San Jacinto, Hemet, and Perris contribute to surface flows that reach Canyon Lake during rainfall events. During normal to dry periods, when the San Jacinto River and the surrounding tributaries are essentially dry, little or no flow enters Canyon Lake.

Lake Elsinore - Lake Elsinore is approximately 3 miles downstream of Canyon Lake at the bottom of the San Jacinto River watershed (Figures 2-11 and 2-14). Surface flow from the San Jacinto River watershed reaches Lake Elsinore only through release, overflow, or seepage from the Canyon Lake dam. Lake Elsinore acts much like a sink, with almost nonexistent outflow. In rare situations, including torrential rains and extended rain periods, the lake overflows into Temescal Creek, which ultimately drains to the Santa Ana River (Santa Ana RWQCB, 1995).

Section 8 – Hydrometeorological Characteristics

The climate in the San Jacinto River watershed varies according to elevation from semi-arid to humid. The lower valley portions of the watershed are extremely hot and dry during the summer months, with more moderate temperatures occurring during the winter. This contrasts with the

29 mountainous upper watershed where temperatures are moderate during the summer months and extremely low during the winter. Snow commonly occurs in the upper reaches of the watershed in the winter. Portions of the snow pack may remain well into the spring months.

The mean seasonal precipitation ranges from 10 to 13 inches in the valley portion of the watershed to about 35 inches at San Jacinto Peak. Evaporation rates can exceed 56” per year.

Figure 8 – San Jacinto Watershed Average Rainfall and Evaporative Loss

The major influences on the regional climate are the Eastern Pacific High, a strong persistent anticyclone, and the moderating effects of the cool Pacific Ocean (USACE 1999). During summer, the Eastern Pacific High blocks storm systems originating in the Gulf of Alaska and produces a temperature inversion that traps air pollutants near the earth’s surface. Temperature inversions, combined with photochemical smog produced from emitted pollutants exposed to conditions of intense sun, have resulted in relatively poor air quality throughout the Los Angeles basin. Cool marine air condenses into fog and stratus clouds below the inversion layer during the evening but dissipates the following morning as the land warms. Onshore airflows, associated with low-pressure systems over the inland desert, are normal conditions, whereas precipitation associated with tropical air masses during the summer is generally infrequent and unsubstantial.

During winter, polar storm systems begin to pass through the area as the Eastern Pacific High weakens and shifts south. Most regional precipitation occurs during this period. Excessive rainfall can occur when the jet stream maintains a position over southern California and carries multiple storms across the region. Major flooding events for this region typically occur December to March and have been documented for the following years during the 20th century: 1910, 1916, 1937, 1938, 1943, 1969, 1978, 1980, 1983, 1993, 1995, and 1998. A strong northeastern wind prevalent in the fall, referred to as the “Santa Ana’s,” can ventilate the basin, preventing the easterly buildup of air pollutants. In winter, photochemical smog exists at decreased atmospheric concentrations because of the shorter daylight duration and the absence of temperature inversions.

Nearly all precipitation in the basin occurs during the winter months. Rainless periods of several months during the summer are not uncommon. Most precipitation and runoff in the drainage

30 area results from general winter storms. General summer storms are rare. Local thunderstorms have little affect on peak rates of runoff on the river, although they may produce critical rates of runoff on the individual tributaries.

Normally, only low flows occur on the river except during and immediately after rainstorms. Flow is perennial in the headwater tributaries and intermittent in the valley reaches. During major storms, after initial wetting, periods of intense rainfall result in rapid increases in stream flow in the steep mountainous portions of the watershed. Runoff collecting in the valley flows rapidly to the Lakeview area. There, a broad natural depression northeast of Lakeview, covering several thousand acres, combined with a construction created by the Bernasconi Hills and Lakeview Mountains near the Ramona Expressway, creates substantial natural storage and regulation of flood flows. This natural regulation causes a reduction in peak flow rates downstream of Ramona Expressway. A similar ponding situation occurs farther downstream in the broad flat Perris Valley area, caused by a constriction known as the Shallow Pond where the river enters Railroad Canyon, results in another reduction in peak discharge of flows entering Railroad Canyon.

Section 9 - Surface Water Quality

The listing of waters designated with beneficial uses attempt to include all significant waterbodies in the San Jacinto basin. The following Beneficial Uses have been assigned to Waters of the US in the San Jacinto Watershed:

ƒ Municipal and Domestic Supply (MUN) ƒ Agricultural Supply (AGR) ƒ Industrial Service Supply (IND) ƒ Industrial Process Supply (PROC) ƒ Groundwater Recharge (GWR) ƒ Hydropower Generation (POW) ƒ Water Contact Recreation (REC1) ƒ Non-contact Water Recreation (REC2) ƒ Warm Freshwater Habitat (WARM) ƒ Cold Freshwater Habitat (COLD) ƒ Preservation of Biological Habitats of Special Significance (BIOL) ƒ Wildlife Habitat (WILD) ƒ Rare, Threatened or Endangered Species (RARE) ƒ Spawning, Reproduction, and Development (SPWN)

31 Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake receive flow from all tributaries of the San Jacinto River watershed and therefore set water quality goals for the entire watershed. Lake Elsinore is a natural freshwater lake that provides a variety of natural habitats to terrestrial and aquatic species. The beneficial uses of the lake include water contact recreation (REC1), noncontact recreation (REC2), warm freshwater habitat (WARM), and wildlife habitat (WILD). Canyon Lake was constructed in 1928 as the Railroad Canyon Reservoir. The beneficial uses of Canyon Lake include municipal and domestic water supply (MUN), agricultural supply (AGR), groundwater recharge (GWR), water contact recreation (REC1), non-contact water recreation (REC2), warm freshwater habitat (WARM), and wildlife habitat (WILD). Beneficial uses of waterbodies in the in the San Jacinto River watershed are listed in the following tables (Santa Ana RWQCB, 1995). The waterbodies include inland surface streams, wetlands, lakes and reservoirs, and groundwater subbasins.

Table 2 identifies the Beneficial Uses assigned to Lakes and Reservoirs within the San Jacinto Watershed.

Table 2 – Beneficial Uses for Lakes and Reservoirs in the San Jacinto River Watershed

32 Table 3 identifies the beneficial uses of Inland Surface Streams within the San Jacinto Watershed:

Table 3 – Beneficial Uses of Inland Surface Streams in the San Jacinto

Surface Water Quality Impairments: Canyon Lake and Lake Elsinore

Section 303 (d) of the Clean Water Act requires states to identify surface waterbodies that do not meet designated uses. The RWQCB has identified such impaired waterbodies in the San Jacinto Watershed and a priority schedule of TMDL development on the 2002 303(d)

33 list. Canyon Lake is listed for nutrients and pathogens. Lake Elsinore is listed for nutrients, unknown toxicity, low dissolved oxygen, and sedimentation and is considered a high priority. A TMDL was been adopted by the SARWQCB in December 2004 to address the nutrient, unknown toxicity, low dissolved oxygen and sedimentation impairments. A second TMDL is tentatively scheduled for adoption in December 2005 by the SARWQCB for the Canyon Lake Pathogen Impairment. Table 4 identifies the nutrient TMDL concentrations for the lakes, existing water quality objectives and the current estimated concentration of nutrients based on actual data during a dry year in the watershed.

Table 4 – Canyon Lake and Lake Elsinore TMDL Targets and Actual Concentrations

The semi-arid climate in southern California causes the water level of Lake Elsinore to fluctuate significantly as a result of infrequent periods of flooding, followed by prolonged periods of drying out. In turn, this hydrologic pattern causes wide swings in the lake’s water quality. During dry periods, the lake levels drop, and evaporative losses cause nutrient concentrations to increase well above the Basin Plan Objective.

High nutrient levels lead to impairments of the Rec1, Rec2, and Warm Beneficial uses in the lakes. High nutrient levels cause excessive algal blooms in Canyon Lake and Lake Elsinore. Algal blooms turn lake murky green and increase turbidity. As the blooms die off, the decay process reduces dissolved oxygen content in-lake, leading to fish kills. The decay of dead algae and fish also produce offensive odors and an unsightly shoreline.

Due to Lake Elsinore being an effective sump, the largest portion of the nutrient problem are nutrients that have been bound up in the sediments in the lake bottom. Approximately 30.8% to 86.7% of the total nitrogen load and 24.6% to 97.4% of the phosphorus load, depending on external hydrologic conditions, come from the in-lake sediments. In Canyon Lake in-lake nutrients represent 9.3% to 50% of the total nitrogen load and 10% to 72% of the total phosphorus load, depending on external hydrologic conditions.

External sources of nutrients include natural sources such as atmospheric deposition and natural forest/open space runoff, and man-made external sources including urban storm water runoff, Confined Animal Facility Operations (CAFO), supplemental tertiary treated wastewater and well water (EMWD & EVMWD), agricultural (and other Livestock) land runoff, open space runoff and septic systems.

Due to the unique hydrology of this watershed, external nutrient source contribution varies dependent on rainfall conditions. For the purposes of this TMDL, Regional Board staff has defined three hydrologic conditions to assist with classification and analysis:

34 Wet Year Heavy rainfall ensures that all the entire watershed contribute flow to Canyon Lake and Lake Elsinore. Both Mystic Lake and Canyon Lake spill. A wet year is the only time when external nutrient loads would exceed internal loads.

Moderate Year Flows from moderate rainfall may enter Mystic Lake, but its capacity is not exceeded. Sandy soils in the upper San Jacinto River infiltrate most runoff from the watershed areas tributary to the San Jacinto River crossing at Ramona Expressway. Flows from Salt Creek and the lower San Jacinto Watershed, however, cause Canyon Lake to spill into the reach of the River that drains directly to Lake Elsinore.

Dry Year Light rainfall is mostly infiltrated or evapotranspirated. Lower watershed areas still contribute runoff to Canyon Lake, but Canyon Lake does not spill. No significant flows to Lake Elsinore.

Table 5 – TMDL Hydrologic Condition Examples

The first step in establishing the TMDL was to determine appropriate indicators and allowable indicator loads and concentrations for each of the lakes necessary to protect assigned Beneficial Uses. Total phosphorus (TP) and total nitrogen (TN), among others, were selected as indicators for the lakes. Due to limited data and funding, only Lake Elsinore was analyzed in detail. Concentrations for Canyon Lake were set based on the study of Lake Elsinore. However, Canyon Lake’s greater depth and more complex limnology may ultimately allow for higher in-lake nutrient concentrations once further study has been completed. Groundwork for these additional studies are proposes as part of this grant application.

Water Quality Impairments – Surface Waters: Fulmor Lake

The third listed water body in the watershed is Fulmor Lake, which is near Indian Creek, an upper tributary to the South Fork of the San Jacinto River. Fulmor Lake is listed for pathogens and is considered a low priority. Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL’s) are required for these water bodies. Table 2-6 presents the RWQCB’s surface water quality standards for the designated uses of Canyon Lake, Lake Elsinore, and Fulmor Lake.

35 Section 10 - Water Supplies – Quantity and Quality

The four primary direct use water supply sources for the San Jacinto Watershed are groundwater, imported water, surface water and recycled water. Major issues within the watershed include groundwater salinity and reliance on imported water supplies. SAWPA and local water districts have identified a need for further planning to identify additional opportunities for conjunctive use and other water conservation measures to reduce dependence on imported water and meet water supply needs in drought conditions. It is estimated that current and projected water supplies for the Santa Ana watershed as a whole will need to be supplemented by 671,000 AFY to protect from drought conditions that may occur after 2025 (Santa Ana Integrated Watershed Plan, 2002, pg. ES-8). It should be noted, however, that SAWPA’s 2002 Santa Ana Integrated Watershed Plan addresses many of these issues in much more detail. It would be the scope of this task to look to build upon the extensive work already done by SAWPA to fund additional planning study as part of Task 5 of the Workplan or to look for ways to integrate these projects with the other needs of the San Jacinto Watershed.

Section 10A - Groundwater

The San Jacinto River historically recharged a deep (over two thousand feet) graben, the San Jacinto groundwater basin, as it left the mountains, then several other basins in succession on its way to Lake Elsinore. When especially heavy rainfall or a series of wet winters filled Lake Elsinore, overflows went down Temescal Creek to the Santa Ana River near Corona. The exhibit below identifies the major groundwater basins within the watershed.

Groundwater remains one of the primary water supply sources in the San Jacinto watershed. However, the supply is threatened by high TDS and nitrates. Initial efforts to build a model of TDS plumes in the San Jacinto Watershed have indicated that changes in groundwater elevations over the last two decades have led to mobilization of TDS plumes. Studies need to be conducted to determine the location of desalter wells to best halt the migration of TDS plumes. This issue is discussed further in the reclaimed water section.

Dairies have also been identified as a source of significant impacts on groundwater quality. To prevent the recurrence of the groundwater quality problem now confronting other regions of the greater Santa Ana Watershed, an appropriate dairy waste management strategy for the San Jacinto Watershed must be developed and implemented. The pattern of dairy land use, the quality of underlying groundwater, and the availability of assimilative capacity in the San Jacinto Groundwater Subbasins should be considered in more detail before recommending a complete dairy strategy. However, it is anticipated that the wastewater management plan, the manure tracking system, and the groundwater monitoring elements of the strategy recommended for the Chino Basin of the Santa Ana Watershed will also apply in the San Jacinto Basin.

Groundwater below March Air Reserve Base is also contaminated by TCE and other chlorinated volatile hydrocarbons. Treatment facilities have been developed to address primary and secondary plumes within the region.

36 Figure 9 – Groundwater Basins in the San Jacinto Watershed (Blue Boundary)

37 Table 6 identifies Beneficial Uses for Groundwater Basins in the San Jacinto Watershed.

Table 6 – San Jacinto Watershed Groundwater Basin Beneficial Uses

Section 10B - Reclaimed Water The development of demonstration water harvesting facilities within the San Jacinto watershed has been initiated by Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD). The objective is to capture surface water flows, consisting of rainfall runoff and stormwater discharges, which would normally flow unimpeded in the river. EMWD has considered this project because rapid urban development has decreased the amount of surface area available for percolation of rainfall and other runoff into the aquifers.

The EMWD is interested in implementing the water capture plan to supplement their reclaimed water supplies. EMWD could use the harvested runoff directly for irrigation or site percolation ponds in locations where the groundwater basin would be recharged for domestic beneficial uses. Initiation of the program will entail a review of the physical and chemical properties of the runoff, hydrology, operational and maintenance controls of the reuse facilities, economics, compliance with the Basin Plan’s water quality objectives, and permitting issues.

38 Several project locations were identified during a feasibility study and include existing storm drains, conveyance pipelines, and recharge facilities. Facilities currently under consideration are the Buena Vista and San Jacinto Retention Basins and the San Jacinto Reservoir. Conceptual projects include the Salt Creek and San Jacinto River Multipurpose Corridors, the San Jacinto Northwest Improvement Plan, and the Lake Hemet Municipal Water District Cooperative Program.

However, one of the factors that contributes to the high levels of dissolved minerals is that water is used, recycled, and used again. This pattern leads to ever increasing salt concentrations within the watershed. A Nitrogen-TDS task force has been established to look into the problem of increasing salt concentrations.

Section 10C - Imported Water When local water supplies inevitably ran short, the area’s economy, based on agriculture, was strong enough to help support the construction of large imported water projects. The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (locally MWD-SC or “Met”) built and still operates the Colorado River Aqueduct, which has imported millions of acre-feet of water from the Colorado River across the Mojave Desert and into the region. A second, newer system, the California Water Project, pumps comparable volumes of water out of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta for delivery to the Santa Ana Region and other parts of Southern California.

To reduce reliance on imported water, a groundwater recharge/storage program within the San Jacinto Basin has been developed by EMWD. A demonstration project was begun in October 1990 with cooperation from MWD and the Universities of California, Riverside, and Los Angeles, and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. The objectives of the demonstration project were to evaluate the infiltration rate, establish the impacts on basin hydrology and groundwater quality, and approximate the distribution of the recharged water. Additional phases of this project are currently planned.

The Hemet/San Jacinto Groundwater Association and Eastern Municipal Water District have developed a Groundwater Management Plan for the Hemet and San Jacinto basins. The objective of the Management Plan is to optimize use and management of the groundwater resources in the Hemet and San Jacinto groundwater subbasins through the cooperative efforts of an association of the major basin pumpers. Eastern Municipal Water District is cooperating with the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), the U.S. Geological Survey, UC Riverside and UC Los Angeles to collect water quality and quantity data, land use information, and data on basin hydrogeology, and to develop appropriate planning tools. A Management Plan will be developed and will include plans or programs designed to maximize the groundwater resources and ensure future water supplies.

To protect the other subbasins in the San Jacinto watershed, including Perris, Menifee, Lakeview, Winchester, and San Jacinto Lower Pressure, Eastern Municipal Water District has initiated an Assembly Bill (AB) 3030 Groundwater Management Plan. AB 3030 was adopted by the California Legislature in 1992. AB 3030 amends Section 10750 et seq. of the Water Code to allow a local agency whose service area includes a groundwater basin that is not already subject to groundwater management pursuant to law or court order to adopt and implement a

39 groundwater management plan. The program could include plans to mitigate overdraft conditions, control brackish water, and monitor and replenish groundwater.

The Colorado River Aqueduct is a source of high salinity water to the region which impacts groundwater basins. State Water Project water contains high bromide concentrations, resulting in the formation of bromate, a specific disinfection byproduct, however, State Water Project water is still a desirable low TDS water source.

Section 10D - Desalted Water The groundwater subbasins in the San Jacinto Watershed were evaluated for water quality and assimilative capacity in a study conducted by SAWPA from 1987-1989. The study covered both TDS and nitrate quality of groundwaters. For the San Jacinto Basin, the study was only superficial in depth and extent. There have been many changes in water supply, wastewater disposal, and reclamation since that time.

The Graben area, which consists of the Canyon, Intake, Upper Pressure, and Lower Pressure Subbasins, was modeled with moderate detail; the other seven subbasins in the San Jacinto watershed were modeled in less detail. The data available for nitrate modeling was meager and therefore the nitrate quality projections should be considered only approximate.

Results of projected subbasin groundwater quality for TDS indicated that all of the San Jacinto groundwater basins with the exception of the Canyon Subbasin have assimilative capacity for planned TDS waste loads. The Canyon Subbasin exceeds the TDS water quality objective at the present time and at the end of the planning period (2005). Lakeview and Hemet Subbasins exceed their respective TDS water quality objectives at the present time (1990 and 1995), but do show improvement in the future. There are mitigation programs being developed for the Hemet Subbasin, as described below.

Based on model projections, the following subbasins in the San Jacinto watershed have no assimilative capacity for nitrate:

Canyon Perris, North Hemet Menifee I Menifee II Lakeview

Presently, Eastern Municipal Water District is conducting studies of the Hemet Subbasin which should provide a better understanding of the quality problems and alternative mitigation measures. Several desalters are in place or planned for the San Jacinto Watershed by Eastern Municipal Water District.

The desalters are being planned by Eastern Municipal Water District as part of an effort to decrease dependency on costly and unreliable imported water and to recover high TDS groundwater. Waste brine is disposed of via the Santa Ana Regional Interceptor line (SARI line).

40 Section 11 - Areas of Special Biological Significance and other Sensitive Habitat

The San Jacinto Watershed contains an extensive network of riparian vegetation communities, Waters of the US, wetlands and critical habitat areas and linkages. The extent of these resources are so significant that two specific planning efforts have been undertaken to identify and preserve them. These efforts are the United States Army Corps of Engineers Special Area Management Plan for the San Jacinto and Santa Margarita Watersheds (SAMP) which addresses aquatic resources, and the second is the Western Riverside Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan which identifies critical species, habitat and linkages. There are no Areas of Special Biological Significance designated within the San Jacinto Watershed.

Aquatic Resources

The SAMP provides support to Riverside County and other stakeholders on locations of aquatic resources and their regulatory status (under Section 404) that will be useful for the large area future assessment of impacts to aquatic resources in the watershed. Specifically, it provides information necessary to identify and characterize regulated waters of the United States (WoUS) including wetlands, in the context of Section 404 permit review. In addition, the planning level delineation of aquatic resources provides a comprehensive mapping of aquatic resources regulated under California Department of Fish and Game’s Section 1600 program. Through the preliminary phases of this program approximately 277 ha (685 ac) of terraces and 78 ha (193 ac) forested floodplains. Large amounts of shrub habitat, such as mulefat, were also found. The SAMP identified that the San Jacinto Watershed is suffering from losses of riparian vegetation associated with floodplain terraces as a result of agricultural development, drainage improvements, and general increased urban development. The ratio of native to non-native communities within the San Jacinto Watershed has also been reduced to 62% due to the general loss of floodplain terraces and flood plain forests. Part of this grant project would look at how to integrate proposed watershed projects and planning efforts to provide critical protection for these resources.

Critical Species Habitat and Linkages

The Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) is a comprehensive, multi-jurisdictional Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) focusing on Conservation of species and their associated Habitats in Western Riverside County, including the San Jacinto Watershed. The plan identifies large tracts of land that should be considered for conservation, but does not specifically identify where conservation should occur. This provides an opportunity to examine the integration of MSHCP objectives with other watershed planning efforts to help ensure core preserves and linkages are established as quickly and effectively as possible. The MSHCP is a component watershed plan with an implementation program targeted at preserving biological diversity and maintain the region's quality of life.

There are five designated planning areas within the Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) component of the Riverside County Integrated Plan (RCIP) that are within the San Jacinto watershed. The total target acreage range for Additional Reserve Lands within these

41 areas in the San Jacinto watershed is 32,205 to 52,455 acres. Designated within the Additional Reserve Lands are specific species native to the areas. The species to be protected within the designated conservation areas are listed below.

• American bittern • arroyo toad • Bell’s sage sparrow • black-crowned night heron • bobcat • burrowing owl • cactus wren • California horned lark • California Orcutt grass • coastal California gnatcatcher • Cooper’s hawk • Coulter’s goldfields • Coulter’s saltscale • Davidson’s saltscale • downy woodpecker • double-crested cormorant • grasshopper sparrow • Los Angeles pocket mouse • least Bell’s vireo • little mousetail • loggerhead shrike • long-spined spine flower • many-stemmed dudleya • mountain lion • mountain plover • mountain quail • mountain yellow-legged frog • Munz’s onion • northern harrier • osprey • Quino checkerspot butterfly • Riverside fairy shrimp • Southern California rufous-crowned sparrow • southwestern willow flycatcher • San Bernardino kangaroo rat • San Diego ambrosia • San Jacinto Valley crownscale • slender-horned spine flower • smooth tarplant • spreading navarretia

42 • Stephens’ kangaroo rat • thread-leaved brodiaea • tree swallow • tricolored blackbird • vernal pool fairy shrimp • vernal barley • western pond turtle • white-faced ibis • white-tailed kite • Wright’s trichocoronis • yellow-breasted chat • yellow warbler

The following biological issues and considerations should be considered when analyzing habitat needs:

• Maintain Core and Linkage Habitat. • Maintain habitat connectivity to facilitate wildlife movement and dispersal. • Maintain connection of conservation areas for mobilization, preservation of native habitat, and conserve existing populations. An example is the conservation of the existing mosaic of upland Habitat east of Diamond Valley Lake and west of the San Bernardino National Forest. Conservation efforts should focus on maintenance of large block(s) of interconnected Habitat for populations of Quino checkerspot butterfly, Bell’s sage sparrow, cactus wren and other species. Conservation should occur in large, interconnected habitat blocks, linking existing Public/Quasi-Public Lands. • Provide connections of transportation corridors for mobilization of native species. • Conserve native habitats including foraging, grassland, and breeding habitats • Conserve the appropriate soil conditions for sensitive plant life. An example is to conserve alkali soils supporting sensitive plants such as San Diego ambrosia, vernal barley and Coulter’s goldfields. • Conserve wetlands such as those found in Temescal Wash, Collier Marsh, Wasson Creek, San Jacinto River, Alberhill Creek, Lake Elsinore and the floodplain east of Lake Elsinore (including marsh Habitats) and maintain water quality. • Conserve wetland Habitats and floodplain along the San Jacinto River including existing vernal playas and vernal pools and associated watersheds. Maintain watershed processes that contribute to and enhance water quality and hydrologic regime. • Conserve existing vernal pool complexes. • Maintain vernal pool hydrology. • Conserve stream courses and adjacent coastal sage scrub, grasslands and chaparral supporting arroyo toad, mountain yellow-legged frog and western pond turtle, with a focus on suitable breeding, foraging, and/or aestivating Habitats along the upper San Jacinto River and Bautista Canyon.

43 Section 12 - Values, Social and Cultural Makeup and Trends of the Regional Community

The San Jacinto Watershed, although urbanizing, still contains a strong mix of agricultural and rural communities that can be described as “a family of special communities in a remarkable environmental setting.”

Overall Community Values include: • Real dedication to a sense of community • Appreciation for the diversity of our people and places within this expansive landscape • Belief in the value of participation by our people in shaping their communities • Confidence in the future and faith that our long term commitments will pay off • Willingness to innovate and learn from our experience • Dedication to the preservation of the environmental features that frame our communities • Respect for our differences and willingness to work toward their resolution • Commitment to quality development in partnership with those who help build our communities • The value of collaboration by our elected officials in conducting public business

There are six major cities within the plan area. The largest (and youngest) is the City of Moreno Valley, incorporated in 1984, it now boasts over 146,000 residents. It is a growing community and the economic center of the San Jacinto Watershed. Older, more rural cities also exist in the watershed including the Cities of Hemet, Lake Elsinore, Perris, Beaumont, Canyon Lake, and San Jacinto. Although these cities are experiencing torrid growth, they are attempting to hold on to their rural and agricultural roots. Two other large cities, Riverside and Murrieta, exist on the boundary of the San Jacinto Watershed. These cities have begun to annex lands encroaching within the watershed boundary. It is expected that the City of Murrieta will eventually accommodate much of its growth by annexing lands in the watershed.

The unincorporated County area also has several major community areas. These areas, including culture, values and trends, are described below.

Meadowbrook Meadowbrook includes some commercial and light industrial uses focused along State Route 74, the central transportation spine within the community. However, Meadowbrook is generally characterized by very low-density residential development and vacant properties set amid rolling hills. Community residents have expressed interest in economic development through implementation of a Rural Village Overlay.

Romoland Romoland is historically centered on a 160-acre urban grid bisected by State Route 74 and the rail line. North of State Route 74 is a small residential community comprised of single family residences and mobile homes, with a few commercial uses stretching along the highway. Farther to the north, the area is characterized by 1-acre lots and horse ranches. Industrial areas are located south of Highway 74. As this area grows, urbanization will extend eastward. A mixed

44 use planning area that lies between Romoland and Homeland could capitalize on the growth of the two communities and act as the focus to bring these two communities together.

Homeland Homeland is located east of Romoland, bounded by the Lakeview Mountains to the north and the Double Buttes to the south. Homeland is currently characterized by a mixture of single family and mobile homes with a strip of commercial uses along State Route 74. Similar to Romoland, but with less industrial uses, this community includes a mixture of small, urban lots and larger lots where animal keeping is an important feature.

Green Acres Connected by State Route 74 but physically separated from Homeland by a finger of the Lakeview Mountains that extends southerly to Highway 74, is the community of Green Acres. Nestled in the foothills of the Lakeview Mountains, this small residential community is located at the current intersection of State Routes 74 and 79. Animal keeping is an important element of the local lifestyle here.

Winchester Near the geographic center of the Harvest Valley/Winchester planning area is the community of Winchester. Consistent with its central location, Winchester is framed by several major features: Salt Creek, the rail line, State Route 79, and the Domenigoni Parkway. Currently, the community of Winchester is characterized by a small western-themed commercial core at the intersection of Winchester Road (State Route 79) and Simpson Road. Surrounding the community core are small homes on large parcels and agricultural uses. Winchester could build upon the western theme and be transformed into a unique, mixed-use Village Center that capitalizes on a transit station and proximity to the Diamond Valley Lake. Medium density residential uses will surround the new Village Center.

Good Hope The rural and equestrian oriented community of Good Hope is located in the southwestern portion of the planning area among distinctive rock outcroppings, just east of Steele Peak.

Mead Valley Cajalco Road is the anchor for the community of Mead Valley. As a major link between Interstates 215 and 15, this important east/west corridor provides the opportunity for the commercial uses along Cajalco Road to assume a more prominent role in the future. South of Cajalco Road is a mixture of equestrian homes, which are set among rolling hills and large stands of Eucalyptus. The sense of community here is reinforced by a community center and a fire station. The area north of Cajalco Road is predominantly a grid-like pattern of half-acre and larger residential lots, the centerpiece of which is a local school.

Old Elsinore Road Old Elsinore Road runs north-south through a narrow valley formed by the Gavilan Hills and the Motte-Rimrock Reserve. The road is lined by rural residential uses set on larger lots that can accommodate equestrian activities.

Lakeview

45 The community of Lakeview, in the northeast corner of the planning area, is characterized by predominantly residential and agricultural uses. Dairies and agricultural uses dominate the land north of the Ramona Expressway, and residential/equestrian uses are found south of the expressway. The residential uses in Lakeview are rural in nature and typically are located on lots between one-half and two acres in size. There is a small cluster of commercial uses at the intersection of the Ramona Expressway and Hansen Avenue, and a prominent warehouse distribution center located on the eastern edge of the community. Hansen Avenue, which runs north-south, is the major roadway in Lakeview, and is lined with tall, majestic palm trees.

Nuevo The community of Nuevo is located between the San Jacinto River on the west and the foothills of the Lakeview Mountains on the east. Nuevo Road and Lakeview Avenue are the major streets within this community. Nuevo is a rural community with an equestrian focus. While there are some smaller parcels, the vast majority of lots are typically between one-half and two acres in size. The community of Nuevo is anchored by a small neighborhood village located at the intersection of Lakeview Avenue and Nuevo Road. This village includes local serving commercial uses, a school, a ball field, and a church. Surrounding the village are some of the smaller residential lots in the area. Community facilities, including a fire station, post office, and school, and a number of private equestrian facilities, are located in the area north of Nuevo Road.

Juniper Flats Juniper Flats is a rural residential community tucked away close to the Lakeview Mountains. This small rural, equestrian-oriented community consists of single family homes on large lots. Juniper Flats Road, a two-lane road, provides the only all weather access through this community.

Boulder Rise Nestled on the western face of the Lakeview Mountains is the small rural community of Boulder Rise. Boulder Rise is located roughly in the area east of Menifee Road and south of San Jacinto Avenue. This area is characterized by the large lot residential uses set among numerous boulder outcroppings.

Valle Vista/East Hemet This community is an urban extension to the east from the City of Hemet. It has a core of older single family residential development, interspersed with mobile homes on small lots. Florida Avenue, lined with locally oriented businesses and commercial uses, bisects this community. This area also includes Hemet High School. Some vacant land still exists within this community to accommodate further infill development of both a residential and commercial nature.

Section 13 - Economic Conditions and Disadvantaged Community Status

The San Jacinto River Watershed was composed of large ranches prior to the 1880s. With the construction of the railroad in the 1880s, larger communities began to form. The City of San Jacinto was incorporated in 1888. Today, the watershed is largely comprised of vacant land (304,194 acres or 67.8% of the total watershed land area). Agricultural lands are the second largest land use with 18.5% (41,521 acres). The following pie chart and attached maps illustrate the distribution of land uses in the watershed (TMDL Technical report, 1993 land uses).

46 Figure 10 – Land Uses in the San Jacinto Watershed

Approximately 400,000 people lived in the watershed in 2000. Existing communities within the watershed are for the most part disadvantaged. Over 47% of the population of the San Jacinto Watershed lives in a disadvantaged community, with median incomes below $37,994. No significant industrial or commercial activities exist within the watershed. Table 7 identifies the specific communities that are currently disadvantaged (highlighted in yellow). The location of these communities can be identified in Figure 4.

47 Table 7 - Disadvantaged Communities with the San Jacinto Watershed CDP/City Size Total Disadvantaged Households: Areas within SJR (acres) Population Community Median Watershed Population household income in 1999

Banning, City 398.3 23,443 23,443 $32,076 Beaumont, City 15537.4 11,315 11,315 $29,721 Canyon Lake, City 3632.2 10,217 $70,106 Cherry Valley, CDP 333.4 5,857 $39,199 East Hemet, CDP 2484.1 14,718 $39,828 Hemet, City 19606.6 58,770 58,770 $26,839 Homeland, CDP 2554.2 3,288 3,288 $20,607 Idyllwild-Pine Cove, CDP 10633.7 3,563 3,563 $35,625 Lake Elsinore, City 17996.8 29,290 $41,884 Lakeland Village, CDP 1837.5 5,548 5,548 $34,136 Lakeview, CDP 2488.1 1,743 $46,141 March AFB, CDP 4674.5 397 397 $31,364 Moreno Valley, City 37315.9 142,548 $47,387 Nuevo, CDP 4161.7 3,945 $49,129 Perris, City 24277.3 36,203 36,203 $35,522 Quail Valley, CDP 954.9 1,756 1,756 $32,344 Romoland, CDP 2299.1 2,564 2,564 $33,523 San Jacinto, City 19430.5 23,923 23,923 $30,627 Sedco Hills, CDP 1255.2 2,713 2,713 $28,766 Sun City, CDP 6004.9 17,850 17,850 $29,814 Valle Vista, CDP 2608.1 10,612 10,612 $32,455 Wildomar, CDP 1648.1 13,810 $49,081 Winchester, CDP 5454 2,237 2,237 $33,472 TOTALS: 187586.5 426,310 204,182 $849,646

% of SJR Watershed Disadvantaged: 47.90% % Disadvantaged Community = Disadvantage Pop/Total Pop CDPs = Census Designated Places Disadvantaged Community Threshold of $37,994. Source: Census 2000 Summary File (SF 3) - Sample Data (www.factfinder.census.gov)

48 However, the relatively low price of homes with the watershed has led to torrid growth of large Cities like Moreno Valley. This growth is changing economic conditions. Taxable revenues are increasing. Further efforts to convert the March Air Reserve Base into a regional commercial airport could bring significant industrial and commercial job growth to the region. Finally, increasing home values have enabled some residents to leverage capital to increase quality of life.

Section 14 - Trends

Riverside County has been identified as one of the largest and fastest growing counties in the United States. This growth has led the County to confront growth related habitat and land use planning problems by revising their General Plan (now called the RCIP) in 2002. Efforts to facilitate orderly development during a period of over 3.5% growth per year are challenging. The stress on local land use planning agencies require other stakeholders to be carefully coordinated with them to ensure that the overall watershed health is protected. Although efforts are in place to address the classic battle between growth, agriculture and protection of the watershed, much more needs to be done. It is not uncommon for large regional projects that could benefit the watershed as a whole to be held up for years because of competing watershed issues that can include habitat acquisition, flood control, affordable housing, water quality and water supply. Further integration and coordination of these competing issues would benefit the watershed as a whole and allow for more orderly development and overall protection of the watershed consistent with the proposed IRWM.

Section 15 - Benefits of Planning for this Region

The San Jacinto Watershed is a large region with conflicting watershed issues. The region is in need of an integrated watershed plan and single forum for stakeholders to address watershed wide issues. This proposed planning is also consistent with local and statewide priorities, and with Program preferences as outlined below. The benefits to planning for this region include: • Addresses complex watershed planning issues now, in a watershed with 47% of the population living in disadvantaged communities and where overall population growth is exceeding 5% a year (California Department of Finance); o Beaumont, was the fastest growing city in Southern California (14.1%), o Murrieta was the 9th fastest growing city in southern california on a percentage basis (6%) and 6th on a numerical gain basis (6,057 residents) o Moreno Valley was the 4th fastest growing city on a numerical gain basis (7,463) • Consistency with multiple statewide priorities including: o Propose integrated projects that will reduce conflict between water users o Implements 2 TMDLs o Implements SA RWQCB Watershed Management Initiative programs o Includes NPS pollution reduction, management and monitoring strategies for septic systems o Large watershed and significant number of disadvantaged communities will ensure that proposed projects are consistent with environmental justice concept o And will look for projects to reduce reliability on imported water, consistent with the CALFED-Bay Delta Program objectives. • Consistency with multiple Program Preferences including: o Integrated projects with multiple benefits,

49 o Support and improve local and regional water supply reliability; o Contribute expeditiously and measurably to the long term attainment of water quality standards through TMDL implementation; o Eliminate or significantly reduce pollution in impaired waters and sensitive habitat areas; o Include water quality projects that serve disadvantaged communities (over 47% of the watershed population lives in a disadvantaged community); • Consistency with the SARWQCB’s WMI objectives for this Watershed o TMDL’s ƒ Conduct stakeholder group meetings TMDL Stakeholder groups ƒ TMDL development; focus on data analyses; and implementation planning. ƒ Develop/calibrate lake model for nutrient TMDL development for Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake ƒ To develop/calibrate watershed model to assess the nutrient sources ƒ Conduct monitoring to identify the sources of pollutant and the response of lake ecosystem. o Nonpoint Source Program ƒ Work with stakeholders to develop educational materials for toxins, nutrient and sediment control ƒ Conduct outreach activities o Monitoring &Assessment ƒ Compile watershed monitoring data from all available sources including SAWPA, Elsinore Valley MWD, Eastern MWD, city of Lake Elsinore, and discharger self-monitor reports. ƒ Conduct watershed monitoring where data gaps exist ƒ Continue monitoring/assessment activities associated with TMDL development o Watershed Management ƒ Continue to participate in the Reclaimed Water Task Force to evaluate the use of reclaimed water to stabilize the level of Lake Elsinore and reduce impairment of beneficial uses caused by excessive nutrient levels. ƒ Coordinate with Lake Elsinore/San Jacinto Powers Authority o Wetlands ƒ Coordinate with local, state, and federal agencies on endangered species and wetland permitting issues.

50 Chapter 4 – Planning Objectives and Major Water Related Issues and Conflicts Section 1 – Planning Objectives

This grant proposal requests $500,000 to develop a focused component of the Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority’s (SAWPA) Santa Ana Integrated Regional Watershed Management Plan (SA IRWM) specific to the 780 square mile San Jacinto Watershed. The focused component will build on the significant work done by the broader SA IRWM with regards to groundwater, surface water, reclaimed water and desalter water management. Specifically, this proposal would initiate a number of specific studies to develop implementation plans for:

• Watershed and Waterbody water quality data collection • Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake Nutrient and Canyon Lake Pathogen TMDLs • San Jacinto River Reach 4 Gap Analysis to address competing water quality, agriculture, water supply, habitat and flood control needs within this upper watershed area.

In addition, the proposal includes funds to support:

• Stakeholder involvement to identify (and fund) additional planning studies likely to focus on groundwater and/or reclaimed water management in order to reduce reliance on imported water supplies and to address a potential water supply deficiency during drought conditions in 2025. • Truly integrating the various stakeholder needs in the San Jacinto Watershed by examining the significant, yet independently developed, planning documents addressing housing, habitat conservation, aquatic resource conservation, water supply, water quality, TMDL and other planning documents.

The objectives for this proposal were set based on needs identified by the Council through its monthly meetings with the major stakeholders within the watershed. The SJRWC’s strategy for reaching this goal is to take a holistic, interdisciplinary, watershed-based approach, which can be divided into: 1) Facilitate and improve coordination, collaboration, and assistance among governmental agencies (local, State, and Federal), academic institutions, and local communities and watershed groups, 2) Continue watershed monitoring and assessment systems, and 3) promote and support watershed-based education and outreach, and 4) develop/implement a mechanism that will ensure the support and long-term sustainability of watershed activities.

This proposal would implement regional efforts through coordination and collaboration with multiple governmental agencies, academic institutions, and other organizations within the watershed. This regional and collaborative effort is intended to attain State/Federal water quality standards related to nutrients/eutrophication and to address multiple statewide priorities.

Section 2 - Major Water Related Issues and Conflicts

The aforementioned Objectives in Section 1 address several watershed related issues and conflicts. Those issues, which will either be directly addressed by this grant ( in bold) or be

51 considered for inclusion in this grant through a stakeholder process described in Task 5 of the work plan are:

• Promote regional and integrated planning • Need to protect impaired water bodies including Lake Elsinore, Canyon Lake and Lake Fulmor • Need to provide flood protection to existing disadvantaged communities within the watershed. • Need to manage non-point source discharges, particularly agriculture, urban, dairy and septic systems to eliminate impairments of downstream waterbodies. • Need to develop an integrated surface water quality monitoring plan • Need to reduce reliance on imported water, by increasing reliance on reclaimed or desalter water • Need to reduce TDS and Nitrogen concentrations in groundwater • Need to purchase and preserve between 32,000 and 53,000 acres of critical habitat, linkages and aquatic resources for over 50 species that are either currently on, or at risk of being added to, the federal and state endangered and threatened species lists. • Need to provide affordable housing.

The following provides examples of conflicts within this watershed that will be directly addressed by this grant or considered for inclusion in this grant through the stakeholder process identified in Task 5 of the work plan:

Conflict #1 – Increased use of reclaimed water, necessary to reduce dependence on imported water, may be leading to increased TDS levels in groundwater and lead to further nutrient impairment of Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake. This is due to the ever increasing salt and nutrient concentration in water as it is reused. This leads to the need to evaluate a reclaimed water master plan, and potentially the use of increased desalters and in-lake nutrient removal processes within the watershed to offset the impacts of reclaimed water use. The need to do such a study is proposed in Task 5.

Conflict #2 – Need to supplement Lake Elsinore with reclaimed water (high in nutrients) in order to maintain lake levels conflicts with need to reduce nutrient concentrations in Lake Elsinore– Lake Elsinore is impaired by excessive nutrients from its lake bottom and the watershed. Lake Elsinore is also in danger of completely evaporating unless the lake level is supplemented by artificial water sources. This potentially impairs recreational and wildlife uses of the lake. Unfortunately, the only reasonably priced source of water for the lake is reclaimed water, which contains nutrient concentrations well in excess of allowable in-lake concentration. A solution must be found to reduce and control nutrient levels in either the supplemental water or the lake such that safe lake operating levels can be maintained and water quality ensured. This conflict is addressed through Task 4, which proposes a subtask to develop a monitoring proposal for the lake and in-lake sediment management plan to reduce internal lake sediments (and bound nutrients). Use of high nutrient reclaimed water by urban and agricultural land owners may also be a source of nutrients to the lake during wet years, when nutrients may be mobilized by flood flows.

52 Conflict #3 – San Jacinto River Reach 4 pits flood control, habitat conservation, water quality and water supply needs against each other - The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is proposing to extend existing levees ending at Sanderson Avenue downstream to Labordi Canyon. This levee extension would provide protection to a number of residents, dairies and agricultural operators currently subject to flooding. However, downstream of Laborde, floodwaters contained by the levees would be allowed to spread naturally, until they would again be collected several miles downstream near the intersection of the San Jacinto River and Ramona Expressway. Under existing conditions, low flow floodwaters would bypass farms and dairies and the San Jacinto Wildlife Area(SJWA) via unmaintained manmade channels and levees constructed by agricultural operators within the area. The manmade low flow system bypasses water around the San Jacinto Wildlife Area, which contains the historical thalweg of the river. The manmade bypass reconnects with the natural low-flow river trace just upstream of Ramona Expressway. Unfortunately, under high flow conditions, these manmade structures have consistently failed, allowing runoff to sheet over additional agricultural and dairy operations (not protected by the proposed project) and allows flood flows to enter the SJWA. The runoff causes significant economic damage to agriculture and dairy operations. More importantly, however, it becomes a major water quality issue when the flood flows inundating the dairies and agriculture operations introduce pollutants that not only endanger local critical habitat for endangered and threatened species within the SJWA, but also ultimately lead to further nutrient and pathogen impairment of Canyon Lake and Lake Elsinore. Both the Lake Elsinore Operations Division and the CDFG have competing water rights interests in receiving as much water from the San Jacinto River as possible, the farmers and dairymen are interested in protecting their lands, and the RWQCB and downstream stakeholders are interested in minimizing the contaminants in the flood flows. Task 4 of this proposal would assess the effectiveness and viability of better managing the flood flows in this unplanned reach of the San Jacinto River between Laborde Canyon and Ramona Expressway. Specific tasks would include determining the bathometry of the Mystic Lake sump, analyzing ways to continue to divert low flows directly to Lake Elsinore through improvements to the man made low flow channel, while also diverting larger flood flows around the agriculture and dairy operations and into the San Jacinto Wildlife Area. The effort would also consider other stakeholder needs such as potential beneficial or negative impacts to groundwater management, water supply, water quality, transportation corridors and affordable housing. Potential funding sources and a schedule for implementation will also be evaluated. Preliminary work on this task has already initiated.

Conflict #4 – Reach 3 of the San Jacinto River Development is conflicted by the need to channelize the river to provide adequate drainage for existing and adjacent disadvantaged communities and the need to provide and restore vernal pool habitat within the existing river floodplain – Reach 3 of the San Jacinto River extends from the entrance to Canyon Lake to Ramona Expressway. This reach of the river is effectively natural, with the exception of low flow levees to protect adjacent farm lands. The floodplain of the river currently inundates over 7,000 acres across an 11 mile reach. The floodplain itself is part of a critical habitat linkage and contains a number of vernal pools that are home to several state and federally listed threatened and endangered plant species. The 200+ square mile valley tributary to reach 3 is also very broad and flat and contains a number of disadvanted communities subject to flooding. In order to provide flood protection for existing residents, a portion of the river must be channelized. However, channelization of the river could lead to loss of critical habitat and linkage for

53 endangered and threatened species. Flood control, city, RWQCB representatives, CDFG and USFWS representatives have been working on balancing these needs, but further hydrologic study and biological study must be done to determine how to balance these competing needs.

54 Chapter 5 - Integration of Water Management Strategies Section 1 - Water Management Strategies SAWPA has developed an IWP that covers the greater Santa Ana watershed and addresses watershed management strategies in an integrated fashion within the larger Santa Ana Watershed. The proposed San Jacinto Component Plan is a complementary planning process that will build upon the work already completed by watershed stakeholders participating in SAWPA planning process. The San Jacinto Component Plan will provide additional in-depth planning strategies that will further enhance the SAWPA planning process and focus on issues unique to the San Jacinto Watershed.

Further, the San Jacinto Component Plan will look at ways to integrate SAWPA’s IWP with other major watershed planning processes including the Riverside County RCIP (including the MSHCP), the SAMP effort, the Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake TMDLs and other efforts.

Section 2 - Strategies to be Considered The San Jacinto Component Plan specifically will develop (bold) or consider developing (dependent on available funding and stakeholder prioritization of need) strategies for addressing the bulleted watershed issues identified below. The IRWM water management strategies that will be considered as part of each watershed issue are also identified: :

• Pathogen and nutrient TMDL implementation and refinement of TMDL watershed models o Water quality protection and improvement

• An integrated watershed surface water monitoring program (water quality) o Water quality protection and improvement

• Water quality, flood control, habitat and water supply issues in reaches 3 and 4 of the San Jacinto Watershed o ecosystem restoration, o environmental and habitat protection and improvement, o flood management, o recreation and public access, o water quality protection and improvement o wetlands enhancement o stormwater capture and management

• Sediment, nutrient and water level management in Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lakes o water quality protection and improvement o recreation and public access o water conservation o water recycling o wetlands enhancement and creation (back basin of Lake Elsinore)

55 • Non-point source pollution sources such as septic systems o Water quality protection and improvement o NPS pollution control

• Integration of strategies proposed as part of several significant, but independently developed planning processes within the San Jacinto Watershed. o Watershed planning o Ecosystem restoration o Environmental habitat protection and improvement o Water supply reliability o Flood Management o Groundwater Management o Recreation and public access o Stormwater capture and management o Water conservation o Water quality protection and improvement o Water recycling o Wetlands enhancement and creation

• Impacts of reclaimed water use on groundwater (TDS) and surface water (nutrients) o Environmental and habitat protection and improvement o Water supply reliability o Groundwater management o Stormwater capture and management o Water conservation o Water quality protection and improvement o Water recycling o Wetlands enhancement and creation o Imported water o Conjunctive use

• Educational needs of watershed residents including the significant number of residents currently living in disadvantaged communities o Watershed planning o Ecosystem restoration o Environmental habitat protection and improvement o Water supply reliability o Flood Management o Groundwater Management o Recreation and public access o Stormwater capture and management o Water conservation o Water quality protection and improvement o Water recycling o NPS pollution control

56 Refer to Chapter 4, Section 2 for additional background information on several of the aforementioned issues. It should also be noted that Task 2 of the work plan includes a stakeholder process to further review and prioritize watershed needs based on a review of existing planning documents and consideration of each of the 20 water management strategies identified in Table A-1 of Appendix A of the Integrated Regional Water Management Grant Program Guidelines document. Based on available funds and stakeholder identified priorities, additional planning studies will be considered to develop strategies to complement, integrate and/or address gap areas of existing planning documents. Two specific proposals included for consideration are identified above (strategies to address impacts of reclaimed water and strategies to address the educational needs of watershed residents). However, the stakeholder process will independently evaluate and prioritize these two proposals along with other stakeholder recommended proposals.

Section 3 - How Strategies were Determined Many of the Water Management Strategies that would be implemented in the San Jacinto Component Plan are a result of current watershed conditions. The strategies outlined above were determined through numerous meetings of the SJRWC. As noted previously, the SJRWC represents a broad array of stakeholders representing tribal, dairy, private landowners (including agriculture), environmental organizations, County Government, water agencies, federal government, and two at-large director positions, including a member representing RCDs. These representatives discussed the needs of the watershed and determined appropriate strategies for development.

57 Chapter 6 - Implementation Section 1 –General San Jacinto Component Plan Implementation Scheduling The San Jacinto Component Plan will provide a strategic plan that will identify ways to integrate projects from other independently developed planning efforts and identify additional implementation projects necessary to addresses gap areas in those planning efforts. To ensure that proposed projects are feasible and implementable the SJRWC and its work group will:

• Recommend and secure agencies to act as the project lead, • Identify the CEQA requirements for the proposed projects, • Propose a schedule and priority for proposed projects, • And identify possible funding mechanisms.

Once an implementation project has been identified for inclusion in the San Jacinto Component Plan SJRWC representatives will meet with the likely lead agency(s) to discuss feasible implementation schedules for the projects and possible road blocks to implementation including lack of funding, permitting complexities, dependency on other projects, etc. These issues will be discussed in the San Jacinto Component Plan and will factor into the development of the implementation schedules.

Once the final SJ Component Plan has been approved by the SJRWC and adopted into SAWPA’s IWP, the SJRWC will continue and expand its role as the regional forum for San Jacinto Watershed issues. This role will include: • Assisting lead agencies in securing necessary funding for projects, • Assisting with alleviating project roadblocks by facilitating discussions between project proponents and opponents, • Providing a forum to coordinate projects with other interested or impacted stakeholders, and • Continuing to coordinate with SAWPA and other regional entities to ensure that watershed strategies are current and implemented.

Section 2 – Specific Drivers for SJ Component Plan Implementation

It should also be noted that several of the planning studies proposed in Task 4 are preliminary steps to the implementation of the Lake Elsinore/Canyon Lake Nutrient TMDL and the Canyon Lake Pathogen TMDL. Projects proposed as part of the proposed planning tasks will be necessary to ensure compliance with TMDL numeric targets and implementation plan deadlines. These projects will therefore have a regulatory driver (and timeline) to ensure implementation of each proposed project until water quality numeric targets for the TMDL are met.

Section 3 – Institutional Structure to ensure SJ Component Plan implementation This proposal has two existing and complementary institutional structures to ensure the implementation of the SJ Component Plan. The first, SAWPA, is a proven regional Joint Powers Authority, who has been implementing a Water Resources Plan for the Broader Santa Ana Watershed since 1998 and their current Santa Ana IWP since 2002. The San Jacinto Component Plan builds upon the work already completed by watershed stakeholders

58 participating in SAWPA planning process would amend the existing IWP. SAWPA is made up of five regional water suppliers in the San Jacinto Watershed. Two of SAWPA’s member agencies have jurisdiction within the San Jacinto Watershed. SAWPA has extensive experience coordinating regional watershed plans and projects including contracting with LESJWA and the SARWQCB to provide administration and facilitation services for various watershed issues in the San Jacinto Watershed.

The SJRWC is the second existing institutional structure capable of ensuring project implementation. The San Jacinto River Watershed Council has been in existence for the past 5 years to identify issues within the watershed and providing a forum to address those issues. Products of the SJRWC include an outline for a Watershed Management Plan, facilitating stakeholder involvement on the County of Riverside and UCR Cooperative Extension Proposition 13 proposals, coordinating with LESJWA and SAWPA on development of a San Jacinto Nutrient Management Plan, and playing an active role in the TMDL stakeholder workgroups responsible for ultimately implementing the TMDLs affecting the San Jacinto Watershed. The SJRWC represents a broad array of stakeholders representing tribal, dairy, agricultural landowners, environmental organizations, County Government, water agencies, federal government, and two at-large director positions, including a member representing RCDs.

Both SAWPA and the SJRWC are proven and broad-based forum for addressing and implementing watershed strategies within the San Jacinto Watershed that play complimentary roles in the watershed Planning process. It is expected that SAWPA will continue to address broader Santa Ana watershed issues while the SJRWC continues to act as the local forum to coordinate stakeholders and activities specific to the San Jacinto Watershed. The SJRWC will continue to build on existing partnerships and develop new partnerships with stakeholders and agencies in the watershed as a part of the San Jacinto Component Plan planning process.

Section 4 – Adaptive Management of the San Jacinto Component Plan

The SJRWC will work with SAWPA to ensure the ongoing adaptive management of the San Jacinto Component Plan. The proposed San Jacinto Component Plan includes a proposal to develop a surface water monitoring program to assess overall watershed health. This program will assist the SJRWC and its work group with assessing the ongoing effectiveness of the San Jacinto Component Plan and identify whether the San Jacinto Component Plan will need further modification. In addition, on-going SJRWC meetings will provide the SJRWC with a forum to work with, and listen to, stakeholders regarding their assessment of the effectiveness of watershed strategies implemented within the San Jacinto Watershed. Findings made by the SJRWC will be discussed with SAWPA representatives on the Council and the need for further amendments to the plan to further refine proposed strategies to address monitoring results, field findings, or changing watershed needs.

Section 5 - NPS Pollution Control Activities

In 1998, the State of California began the implementation of its 15-year program strategy for the Non Point Source Pollution Control Program (NPS Program), as delineated in the Plan for California’s Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Program. The strategy described the vision and

59 goals of the NPS Program, including the basic NPS Program process elements of planning, coordination, implementation, monitoring and tracking, and assessment and reporting of NPS Program activities.

The San Jacinto Component Plan includes management measures to address septic system non- point source pollution that is impairing Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake. Additional NPS issues may be recommended for inclusion in the planning process by stakeholders. The State’s NPS Program Goals and Implementation Plan Objectives are.

Program Goals: 1. Track, monitor, assess and report NPS Program activities 2. Target NPS Program activities 3. Coordinate with Public and private partners on all aspects of NPS program. 4. Provide financial and technical assistance and education and 5. Implement Management measures and associated management Practices

Implementation Plan Objectives are: 1. Promote the implementation of Management measures and related practices by all levels of water quality managers 2. Preserve water quality in water bodies that are currently meeting California water quality standards and protect them from future degradation from impacts of nonpoint source pollution 3. Promote the implementation of Management measures and use of management practices for the NPS component of TMDLs or in CWA section 303 (d) listed waterbodies in order to improve water quality. 4. Promote better leverage of interagency and private entity resources for NPS programs

Management measures, practices and implementation measures for the septic system management plan will be developed as a part of Task 4. Stakeholders involved in the septic system management plan will likely include the cities and County agencies, such as the Riverside County Environmental Health department, whom have jurisdiction over reviewing, approving and enforcing against septic systems. Additional stakeholders would include local sewering agencies and other interested stakeholders. These stakeholders, through the workgroup, will review the requirements of the TMDL and the State’s NPS pollution control plan to identify the appropriate management measures and management practices that will be employed through the implementation of the plan.

Proposed management measures and practices might include more stringent design criteria, additional inspections, conversion to sewer, or other measures proposed by the work group.

Implementation responsibilities would likely fall on those entities jurisdiction over septic systems. However, it is expected that the workgroup will coordinate with other stakeholders, including local sewering agencies, to look for creative solutions and funding for alternative management strategies developed as part of the proposal.

60 Implementation schedules would be developed based on the findings of the work group, and be based on assessment of effectiveness, benefits, impacts, costs and other factors to be determined by the workgroup.

Other NPS management programs proposed as part of Task 5 will go through a similar process.

Chapter 7 - Impacts and Benefits

Section 1 - Potential Impacts and Benefits of Plan Development and Implementation In addition to the benefits identified in Section 15 of Chapter 3, the proposed SJ Component Plan would have the following additional benefits on the watershed: • Facilitate planning, implementation, and integration of watershed projects in one of the fastest growing watersheds in California. • Take initial steps at implementing the Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake nutrient TMDLs. • Take the initial steps at implementing the Canyon Lake pathogen TMDLs (through septic system management plan and monitoring plan tasks). • Develop an integrated watershed surface water monitoring plan that includes monitoring for two TMDLs (LE/CL Nutrient TMDL and CL Pathogen TMDL). • Assist in developing a coordinated and integrated watershed education program with an emphasis on the large number of disadvantaged communities within the area. • Examine the costs and benefits of alternative flood control solutions to ensure the maximize water quality and water delivery to the San Jacinto Wildlife Area, maximize flood protection of agricultural lands, and maximize delivery of water to Lake Elsinore. • Further develop an existing and diverse stakeholder forum (the SJRWC) for watershed wide discussion, collaboration, coordination and integration of watershed projects. • Allow stakeholders to identify additional planning needs in the watershed that may include a solution to the San Jacinto River Reach 3 flood control/habitat conservation problem, a reclaimed water master plan, an educational guidebook for watershed denizens, and/or other projects yet to be identified through the stakeholder process.

Section 2- Description of Potential Impacts

The likely impacts of the proposed SJ Component Plan are as follows:

• Cost savings to local agencies from coordinated watershed monitoring program;

Likely future impacts of the proposed SJ Component Plan are: • Cost savings to local agencies by identifying watershed projects that can be integrated and potentially cost shared. • Implementation projects that significantly decrease nutrient concentrations in CL and LE due to in-lake sediment management and septic system management.

61 • Monitoring data that allows revisions to existing water quality models of CL and LE to revise TMDL Numeric Targets and allow better management of the watershed and the lakes. • Increased flood protection for agricultural lands adjacent to Reach 4 of the San Jacinto River. • Improved water quality into the San Jacinto Wildlife Area due to proposed flood protection improvements in Reach 4 of the San Jacinto River. • Maximized stormwater runoff tributary to Lake Elsinore due to proposed flood protection improvements in Reach 4 of the San Jacinto River. • Potential improvement to flood protection for disadvantaged communities tributary to Reach 3 of the San Jacinto River and conservation of critical habitat for endangered and threatened vernal pool plant species. • Reduction in septic system failures within the watershed. • Overall better watershed health due to increased knowledge by residents, local government and businesses of watershed issues.

Tasks 4 and 5 include an analysis of costs and benefits associated with the proposed work tasks. This analysis will further refine the benefits and potential impacts of the planning effort and proposed implementation project to both the watershed itself and adjacent areas.

Section 3 - CEQA Compliance

There is not a CEQA action required to adopt the proposed SJ Component Plan. However, the SJRWC will provide a public comment and review period, with a public workshop to ensure that all interested stakeholders have an opportunity to comment on the draft SJ Component Plan.

Tasks 4 and 5 of the work plan also identify that the CEQA process must be considered for each implementation project. This includes identification of the likely lead agency and the type of CEQA document that would likely be required for the proposed project.

62 Chapter 8 - Data and Technical Analysis

Section 1 - Plan Development Support Data

Types and Amounts of Data available in the watershed This proposal will build upon a broad array of studies already completed by other agencies and entities and identified in Chapter 12 of this proposal. These studies include significant supporting data including GIS layers identifying land use, aquatic resources, critical habitat, floodplains, and other watershed features. Other types of data include water quality, water supply, and flood flow data kept by various local, state and federal agencies. It is expected that this data will vary in scope, quality and quantity. However, much of it has already been consolidated into the holdings of the following sources:

1) SAWPA – SAWPA maintains a GIS system with extensive water level and water quality data from over 10,000 wells within the Santa Ana watershed. They also have GIS layers, identifying the locations of cities; water districts; sewering agencies; senate, assembly and congressional seats; transportation infrastructure; major faults; soils types; mountain ranges; endangered species habitat critical habitat locations; delineations of sub-watersheds; delineations of wetlands areas; delineations of groundwater basins; major water supply/reclaimed water/effluent pipelines; forest; open space; and 2000 era land use information. This data is extensive, but may need to be updated to reflect recent planning processes. SAWPA also maintains other water quality data in a format compatible with EPA STORET. 2) RCFC&WCD – RCFC&WCD maintains aerial photo mapping of the watershed, floodplain mapping of the watershed, flood control infrastructure maps; Master Plans of Drainage for development of future flood control projects; maintains a record of aquatic resources under ongoing development as part of the Special Area Management Plan (SAMP); and maintains both digital and hardcopy versions of contour mapping of the entire watershed. The Flood Control District also maintains all water quality data collected as part of the Riverside County MS4 NPDES Permits. This surface water quality data is kept in a format that is compatable with SWAMP and EPA STORET. 3) Santa Ana RWQCB/EPA – Both the Regional Board and EPA keep an extensive record of water quality and water supply data within the watershed. This data is of course complaint with state and federal data management programs. 4) County of Riverside – The County of Riverside maintains an up-to-date GIS system identifying major land uses, critical habitat locations consistent with the MSHCP, transportation infrastructure layers; and other data relavent to the operation of the County. 5) Resource Conservation Districts – It is expected that local RCD’s will have extensive volunteer monitoring data and other pertinent watershed information. 6) Lake Elsinore San Jacinto Watershed Authority (LESJWA) – LESJWA has collected significant amounts of water quality and quantity data to support improvements to Lake Elsinore. LESJWA has also authored several planning studies to identify potential projects to improve in-lake water quality. 7) Other local agencies and stakeholders – it is expected that many local water districts such as EMWD and stakeholders will also maintain data identifying the location of existing

63 and proposed infrastructure projects, both surface water, groundwater and water supply water quality data, and other types of data that may be useful to this effort.

It is expected that the bulk of the data collection effort will be to ensure that existing data sets at SAWPA are up to date and to identify smaller stakeholders who have additional data to supplement SAWPA’s data.

Studies to Support Planning Process This grant proposal includes for special studies under Task 4 and a stakeholder process to develop additional studies under task 5. Data gaps, additional monitoring and studies necessary to support these major areas of emphasis are identified below.

Task 4 San Jacinto River Reach 4 GAP feasibility study – This study will require updated aerial and topographic mapping to determine the potential limits of flooding, the bathometry of mystic lake and to assess costs for potential alternative solutions. The RCFC&WCD photogrammetry staff has just completed mapping this area and expects to have the data available for use in this study. It is not expected that additional water quality or flow data will need to be collected for this study due to existing TMDL, Agriculture, and MS4 water quality data collection efforts within this reach of the watershed. There are also existing hydrologic and water quality models of the watershed that have been developed by RCFC&WCD and the SARWQCB, respectively. Therefore, the significant remaining effort in this task should by the updated hydraulic modeling and water quality modeling of selected alternatives.

Watershed/Waterbody Monitoring Program – This planning study would develop a watershed wide monitoring program to a) assist in determining compliance with proposed TMDLs; b) assist in determining sources of TMDL pollutants; and c) assist in identifying other potential pollutants of concerns (and their sources) within the San Jacinto Watershed. The most significant data gap to be addressed by this study will be the determination of locations necessary to potentially determine compliance with the TMDL on a stakeholder basis. In addition some study may be required to determine how to better collect data to support and modify existing water quality models of the watersheds and the lakes.

Septic System Management Plan – Specific data needs for this project will include an accurate map of existing septic systems, surface water quality data from areas with significant numbers of septic systems, and close coordination with County Environmental Health and local sewering agencies. The SARWQCB developed a model of the San Jacinto Watershed to estimate nutrient loads to Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake. It is expected that this model may be used or refined as part of this task. Additional monitoring may need to be considered to better assess the impacts of septic systems from various communities on nutrient loads to the lakes. Required technical studies will likely include a cost-benefit analysis of increased enforcement, conversion to sewer, and other alternatives proposed by the workgroup formed by this task (who will likely be made up of city and County staff responsible for permitting and overseeing septic systems, as well as sewering district’s with jurisdiction in the area).

64 Lake Elsinore In-Lake Sediment Nutrient Reduction Plan and Canyon Lake Sediment Nutrient Treatment Evaluation Plan – It is expected that these efforts will rely extensively on studies performed by the SARWQCB in support of the TMDL, studies prepared by LESJWA and SAWPA. However, additional modeling of Canyon Lake may be required, as the existing model of Canyon Lake is simplistic and does not contemplate the impacts of seasonal overturning on nutrient concentrations in the lake. Technical studies will likely include analysis of alternative sediment control measures. Further evaluation of the needs of this study will be determined as part of the work associated with this task.

Task 5 Examine Potential Strategies, Projects and Implementation Opportunities – As this is a stakeholder driven task to identify other planning projects that may be valuable to the watershed, it is difficult to predict data gaps, or additional water quality data needs at this time. However, this effort will use the California Watershed Assessment Guide (California Bay Delta Authority, 2004) as a guide for prioritizing and developing recommended implementation actions. Potential projects for consideration include: • San Jacinto Reach 3 Channelization/Habitat Conservation Project; • Reclaimed water master plan for the San Jacinto Watershed or a subset thereof; • Educational outreach materials regarding watershed management.

Assessment of Water Monitoring

Task 4 includes a Watershed/Waterbody Monitoring Program subtask to collect information on existing surface water monitoring programs, assess gaps and overlap, and propose a revised consolidated program that is sufficient to necessarily assess compliance with TMDLs, overall watershed health and any additional monitoring necessary to support other special study needs.

65 Chapter 9 - Data Management Section 1- Dissemination of Data As mentioned in Chapter 8, Section 1, a number of existing entities who are participants in this grant proposal maintain web sites, GIS, or other portals to disseminate data to stakeholders, agencies and the public. It is expected that one of these existing portals will be used to transmit draft data between interested parties and the grant administrators. The final studies and data will be submitted to SAWPA for incorporation into their overall IWP. However, the SJRWC may also attempt to coordinate with the California State University, San Bernardino’s Water Resources Institute, to determine if they are interested in cataloging collected information as part of their extensive water resources archive.

Section 2 - Support of Statewide Data Needs This proposal supports statewide data needs by developing planning documents that will support the Santa Ana RWQCB Watershed Management Initiative Objectives and statewide project preferences and statewide priorities. Information collected will be transmitted to regional entities such as SAWPA and/or California State University, San Bernardino’s WRI program for cataloging. Final documents will also be transmitted to the SARWQCB and the SWRCB.

Support of SWRCB Statewide Data Management Efforts Both the RCFC&WCD and SAWPA maintain water quality databases that are compatible with SWAMP and EPA STORET. Further, RCFC&WCD, in conjunction with the SARWQCB and other TMDL stakeholders have developed a Quality Assurance Project Plan that is consistent with SWAMP. It is expected that any water quality data collected under this grant proposal or due to implementation programs proposed by this grant will be collected in conformance with a SWAMP compatible QAPP and stored in a database that can transfer data in a form compatible with SWAMP and EPA STORET.

66 Chapter 10 - Stakeholder Involvement Section 1- Incorporation of Stakeholder Involvement Because the lead entity on this project is a watershed council, stakeholder involvement is and always will be a primary concern and focus. Stakeholder involvement is the foundation of the San Jacinto River Watershed Council. The San Jacinto Integrated Watershed Management Plan would address multiple watershed issues, coordinate these issues at multiple levels and provide the integration necessary for implementation. Stakeholder involvement involves leadership and commitment. The San Jacinto River Watershed Council has been in existence since 2000,formally as a 501(c) 3 since 2003. The SJRWC is solely funded through donations by its’ stakeholders and provides an open forum of communication within the SJ Watershed Cooperation, coordination and the willingness to recognize multiple issues and opinions will make the San Jacinto Integrated Watershed Management Plan a meaningful, implementable document. The SJIWMP is the roadmap for stakeholders to achieve this objective.

Stakeholder involvement via activities would include: • Watershed strategic planning that is open, public and involves the communities (existing) • Regular monthly meetings (existing) • Committees that reflect participating stakeholders within the watershed (existing and planned) • Involvement on committees and task forces by stakeholders (existing and planned) • Education and outreach to all stakeholders in the watershed (existing and planned) • Integration of local knowledge within the watershed with the integration of good science (existing and planned) • Increase awareness and learning in the watershed on water issues by community-based activities (existing and planned) • Affect ,where applicable, water policy issues (existing and planned)

Stakeholder involvement via work items in the work plan would include: • Develop a Watershed Management Workgroup • Develop ,as necessary, subcommittees to achieve tasks • Retain a consultant through a competitive bid process involving stakeholders • Coordinate existing ongoing Council efforts with Plan tasks • Refine San Jacinto Integrated Watershed Management Plan Outline • Actively involve all stakeholders in the Watershed Data Inventory task . Participation is key. • Participation/coordination in several studies that will be be part of the SJIWMP • Develop strategies and plans for the Watershed Plan via workgroup • Identify stakeholder responsibilities in carrying out the plan • Develop alternative strategies for funding opportunities for additional studies needed • Look for additional matching grant opportunities • Develop partnership agreements necessary to implement the Plan • Maintain adaptive,flexability in managing the Plan • Inclusive stakeholder participation in reviewing documents and final Plan

67 Section 2 - Outreach

Specific Activities The SJRWC is currently active in many ways for outreach in the San Jacinto Watershed. Specific activities include: • Stakeholder outreach on the UCR Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan • Stakeholder outreach for the County of Riverside Pollution Prevention proposal for the San Jacinto • TMDL Workshop participant since its inception • Western Riverside County Ag Coalition active participant • Development of literature for educational purposes for the watershed • Participation with SAWA regional stakeholder meetings • Participation in SAWPA monthly meetings • Participation with LESJWA meetings and activities • Watershed Council meetings are rotated to different locations on a monthly basis for accessibility by all stakeholders.

Target Groups

Current targeted groups for outreach in the watershed are: disadvantaged communities, individual landowners/stakeholders and at this time agricultural operators. Identification of Agricultural operators has been a significant void in the past. The Western Riverside County Ag Coalition (WRCAC) was formed in March of 2004 to assist ag operators with their environmental issues. This group was formed by a core group of San Jacinto Watershed Council ag operators who recognized the need for the Ag community to form a coalition to address concerns. The Watershed Council and WRCAC have agreed to assist the SARWQCB in identifying agricultural operations and entities in the San Jacinto for the TMDL implementation effort. This effort has been supported by ag entities: Riverside County Farm Bureau, Milk Producers Council, and Western United Dairymen. SAWPA and EMWD are assisting in in-kind GIS mapping capabilities.

Section 3 - Proposed Stakeholders

Section 3A - SJ WATERSHED COUNCIL LIST OF STAKEHOLDERS’ BY CATEGORIES

Federal Agency -Army Corps of Engineers -Environmental Protection Agency -US Forest Service -US Bureau of Land Management -US Bureau of Reclamation -March Air Reserve Base -USDA NRCS -Bureau of Indian Affairs

68 -US Fish and Wildlife -Indian Health Services -March Air Reserve Base -US Geological Survey -US Dept. of Agriculture

State Agency -Regional & State Water Boards -Coalition of Governments -Cal Trans -CA Dept. of Transportation -CA Coastal Conservancy -CA Resource Agency -Riverside/Corona Resource Conservation District -San Jacinto Resource Conservation District -Elsinore Murrieta Anza Resource Conservation District -CA Coastal Commission -San Jacinto Wildlife Area/CA Dept. of Fish and Game -Agricultural Commissioner's office -CA Dept. Of Water Resources -CA Division of Mines and Geology -CA Dept. of Health Services -CA State Parks Foundation -Natural Resources Conservation District -Resource Conservation and Development Council -County of Riverside -CA Department of Forestry & Fire Protection -CA Dept. of Health Services -CA Dept. of Parks and Recreation/Lake Perris -Riverside County Reg. Parks and Open space -CA Dept. of Forestry

Water Resource Management Agencies/Organizations -Eastern Municipal Water District -Elsinore Water District -Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District -Fern Valley Water District -Idyllwild Water District -Lake Hemet Municipal Water District -Metropolitan Water District -Nuevo Water District -Pine Cove Water District -Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District -Santa Ana Watershed Association of Resource Conservation Districts (SAWA) -Santa Ana Watershed Project Authority (SAWPA) Western Municipal Water District -LESJWA

69 -Western Riverside Land Conservancy -Santa Ana River Watershed Group -Lee Lake Water District

Local/County Governments -City of Canyon Lake -City of Beaumont -Sun City -Lakeland Village -City of Lake Elsinore -City of San Jacinto -City of Hemet -City of Moreno Valley -City of Perris -City of Idyllwild -City of Riverside -Riverside County Dept. of Transportation -RCIP -MSHCP -Various City Chambers of Commerce -Riverside County Dept. of Health

Staff from Elected Representatives -Assemblyman. Member John J. Benoit -Assemblyman. Member Russ Bogh -Assemblyman. Member Ray Haines -Assemblyman Member Bonnie Garcia -Senator Dennis Hollingsworth -Senator Barbara Boxer -Senator Dianne Feinstein -Senator Jim Battin -Riverside County Supervisor Bob Buster -Riverside County Supervisor Jim Venable -Riverside County Supervisor Marion Ashley -CA Congressional Delegate Ken Calvert -CA Congressional Delegate Mary Bono -CA Congressional Delegate Jerry Lewis -CA Congressional Delegate Darrell Issa

Community & Environmental Groups -Western Riverside County Ag Coalition -Audubon Society -CA Native Plant Society -Friends of the San Jacinto River -Friends of the Northern San Jacinto Valley -Western Riverside Council of Government -Sierra Club

70 -Soboba Band of Mission Indians -Ramona Band of Mission Indians -Morongo Band of Mission Indians -Ducks Unlimited -Nature Conservancy -Lake Elsinore Reclaimed Water Task Force -Cleveland Ridge -Menifee Municipal Advisory Council -Quail Unlimited -Friends of Nuevo -Poultry Association -Tri-County Conservation League -Golf Course Association -Western United Dairyman's Association -Riverside County Farm Bureau -CA Milk Producers Council -CA Waterfowl Association -Citrus Growers Association -Wildlands Conservancy -Riverside Land Conservancy -Riverside County Property Owners -Cal Trout -Kayak Club

Business -Business Industry Association -Canyon Lake POA -Nurseries/Nursery Association -Landscape architects -More than 150 large Ranches/farms/dairy/land owners identified -McAnally Enterprises -Golden Era Productions -So. Ca Edison -Pat Boldt Consulting -Tetratech -David Evans and Associates -Kleinfelder -Other Engineering firms -Other Environmental Consultants -Energy producers? SCE, So Cal. Gas

Academia University of California Riverside/ Dr. Anderson Dr. Mason/ Mt. San Jacinto Community College UCR/Cooperative Extension UCR Salinity Laboratory

71 Youth Groups -4 H -Future Farmers of America -Boy Scouts & Girl Scouts of America

Section 3B - How Stakeholders Are Identified

Stakeholders are identified in the San Jacinto River Watershed Council in various ways. A stakeholder list of almost 400 entities was identified at the commencement of the Council. This list has been updated and in fact one of the ongoing strategic planning items for the Council is to grow the stakeholder base over the next year. In a recent Strategic Planning session, various communication mechanisms were discussed to enhance stakeholder involvement: literature, radio, and press releases to name a few.

Section 3C - How Stakeholders Participate in Planning and Implementation

In order to meet the overall goal and objectives of the San Jacinto Integrated Management Plan, coordination and collaboration efforts from stakeholders and other interested parties are key to the projects success. The active participation of stakeholders and other interested parties will ensure that people who depend upon, have an interest, and are knowledgeable about water quality and water resources are kept well informed and participate in the development of mutually beneficial solutions for the watershed.

The SJRWC would integrate and coordinate planning, management, monitoring, and community activities across agencies, jurisdictions, and nongovernmental entities. The Council would provide inclusive and participatory involvement by all agencies and all stakeholders to ensure meaningful input, including disadvantaged or hard to reach communities and stakeholders.

Section 3D - How Stakeholders Influence Decisions Regarding Water Management

Recent legislation (AB2534 and AB 1405, Statutes of 2002) declared the State’s intent to support, assist, and collaborate with local partnerships and stakeholders as they go about the important work of protecting our watershed resources. These bills recognize the important role that non-agency stakeholders and stakeholder efforts, such as watershed councils, RCDs, and other groups can play in watershed planning implementation.

Stakeholders are essential to the success of a watershed management process. One of the reasons that full stakeholder collaboration and participation is so important is because it contributes to capacity building, i.e.,”supporting the development of strong and stable local or regional watershed partnerships”(Riley 2003 Draft white paper). This is critical both to stakeholder groups who need training and assistance and to agencies that depend upon the stakeholders to implement stewardship activities on private lands and to support public investments in watershed protection.

72 Stakeholders can influence decisions in many ways. Capacity building can take on many forms: information, communication, training, outreach and education, hands-on coordination, facilitation, planning, implementation and monitoring. Many local grassroots organizations need basic information about agency responsibilities and services, regulatory programs, and planning and management activities that affect the watershed. Similarly, the agencies need the input or “voice” of the community.

Section 3E - Identifying Additional Stakeholders Midstream of the Plan

The SJRWC anticipates that there will be additional stakeholders midstream of the plan. We are constantly trying to encourage additional participation and develop capacity building for the SJR Watershed Council. We believe that the larger entities are already aware of the Council but that there are individuals and smaller interest groups that may still be unaware of the Council activities.

The SJRWC has developed a strategic plan that addresses identifying additional stakeholders over the next few years to continue the momentum currently in place with the Watershed Council. We also expect that with the implementation of TMDLs in the watershed, additional stakeholders will have an interest in participating in the Council and its efforts to assist with the TMDL implementation process.

Any new stakeholders will immediately be added to the email list and permanent list. Participation on committees is encouraged.

Section 3F - Efforts to Address Environmental Justice Concerns

The SJRWC is the only broad-based, grassroots organization that affords information to any and all individuals in the San Jacinto Watershed. This is also evidenced by the significant amount of disadvantaged communities in the watershed (See Figure 4 and Table 7). The San Jacinto Board membership consists of Tribal, Dairy, landowners, Environmental, Water agency, County Government, Federal and two at-large Board seats open to the general public. Meetings are held monthly and rotated to various locations in the watershed for educational purposes and to make meetings more accessible to everyone. The SJRWC encourages ALL participation at all levels within the community. We recognize and address the fact that there are multiple perspectives on issues affecting the watershed and that concerns may be of environmental, economic and/or social in nature.

Section 3G - Omitted Water Related Entities

To the best of our knowledge, there have been no omitted water related entities from within the San Jacinto Watershed. Should an omission occur, we would readily include the entity and encourage participation in the development of the San Jacinto Integrated Watershed Management Plan.

73 Chapter 11 -Disadvantaged Communities Section 1 - Extent of Disadvantaged Communities As noted in Chapter 3, Section 13 and in Table 7, over 47% of the people within this watershed live within several disadvantaged communities within the watershed. The locations of these communities are highlighted (in hatching) in Figure 3.

Section 2 – Water Supply and Water Quality needs of Disadvantaged Communities Several of these communities are located in areas serviced by septic systems (Quail Valley and most other communities within the watershed). Many residents of these communities often rely on local water resources including Lake Elsinore and the San Jacinto River for recreational activities and local groundwater basins for water supplies. In addition, several of these communities are low lying and are in areas subject to flooding (Particularly communities of Perris, Romoland, Homeland, Hemet and others adjacent to them).

Section 3 - Benefits to Disadvantaged Communities This grant proposal proposes a number of projects that would benefit disadvantaged communities including: • Proposing TMDL implementation projects to reduce impairments of sediments (and associated nutrients) to Lake Elsinore • Proposing a management plan for septic systems that would reduce harmful pathogens and nutrients that may be impairing adjacent waterbodies and Canyon Lake. • Proposing an education program (Task 5) that can benefit disadvantaged communities (particularly by focusing on problem areas in these communities including litter control and septic system management).

Section 4 - Involvement in Planning Process Due to the extent of the disadvantaged communities in the area, it is expected that several entities including water districts, municipalities, other local governments and special interests groups will provide extensive and overlapping representation for these communities. For example, both the Cities of Hemet and Perris are both considered disadvantaged, and both are participating in this effort.

Chapter 12 - Relation to Local Planning Section 1 – Overview and Relation to local planning documents One of the primary purposes of the proposed San Jacinto IRWM Plan is to identify, build upon, integrate and identify gaps in other local planning documents. Several significant planning documents provide watershed strategies to be integrated into this planning effort. Several of these planning documents are outlined below:

ƒ Santa Ana Watershed Basin Plan - SARWQCB ƒ Santa Ana Integrated Watershed Plan - SAWPA ƒ Riverside County Integrated Plan (includes General Plan, MSHCP, and CETAP)

74 ƒ San Jacinto Nutrient Management Plan – LESJWA ƒ Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake Nutrient TMDL Technical Report and Implementation Plan – SARWQCB ƒ Canyon Lake Pathogen Indicator TMDL Technical Report and Implementation Plan – SARWQCB ƒ Various City General Plans ƒ San Jacinto and Santa Margarita Watershed Special Area Management Plan ƒ Nutrient Source Assessment ƒ Various Water Supply and Groundwater Management plans – local water agencies ƒ Various Master Plans of Drainage and Hydrology studies – RCFC&WCD ƒ Wildlife Area Management Plan (update in progress) ƒ Others

Section 2 – Dynamics between local planning and San Jacinto Component Plan planning processes. While the awareness of watershed planning has expanded over recent years, the incorporation of watershed planning concepts and principles into other local planning documents such as general plans has not been broadly achieved. A challenge for watershed proponents is to demonstrate the value of watershed planning for looking at long term costs, benefits and avoided costs to water suppliers, farmers, environmentalists, etc. of watershed restoration or conservation investments. The dynamics between the two levels of planning (local and regional) is important because the information and recommendations from the San Jacinto Component Plan can be used to support consistent and coordinated planning that reduce overall implementation costs and better protect and support a sustainable watershed.

The San Jacinto Component Plan has several advantages with respect to integrating the two levels of planning. Several of the agencies responsible for developing these local planning documents are either members of the SJRWC, SAWPA or are supportive of a San Jacinto Component Plan. Specific agencies include the County of Riverside, several of the cities within the watershed, RCFC&WCD, Eastern Municipal Water District (EMWD), Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District (EVMWD), and Western Municipal Water District (WMWD).

Incorporation of input from these agencies and ongoing coordination with these agencies through SAWPA and the SJRWC planning and implementation processes will help ensure that the local planning and San Jacinto Component Planning processes are complementary and coordinated. The existing and ongoing forums provided by SAWPA and the SJRWC will also ensure that the San Jacinto Component Plan adaptively managed through implementation.

Chapter 13 - Agency Coordination

Section 1 - Coordination and Cooperation with Relevant Local, State and Federal Regulatory Agencies Watershed planning, monitoring and management should be integrated with regulatory programs to assist in expediting and streamlining future implementation projects whenever possible. By including entities like NRCS, RWQCBs, RCDs, USACE, CDFG, USFWS in the planning

75 process for complex issues future roadblocks to projects can be resolved or avoided and overall watershed health and sustainability can be achieved quicker and more economically. Other agencies with regulatory duties include RCFC&WCD, cities, the County and its component departments, water districts, etc. Both SAWPA and the SJRWC have extensive experience in coordinating with regulatory entities with jurisdiction within the San Jacinto Watershed. As identified in Section 10, Stakeholder Involvement, several regulatory entities have been identified and will be invited to participate in the planning process. It should also be noted that several of these entities including the County, several water districts and CDFG are members of the SJRWC. The SARWQCB is also a liaison, non-voting member of the Council. Finally, several cities and RCFC&WCD have expressed interests in participating in this planning process.

Coordination with the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board will be particularly critical to TMDL Implementation tasks including: Watershed/Waterbody Monitoring Program, Lake Elsinore In-Lake Sediment Nutrient Reduction Plan and Canyon Lake Sediment Nutrient Reduction Plan. The Dept. of Environmental Health and local cities and sewering agencies will play a significant role in the Septic Management Plan. The San Jacinto River Reach 4 Gap Feasibility Study will require coordination with RCFC&WCD, SARWQCB, CDFG, USFWS, County of Riverside, USACE, and the City of San Jacinto, to name a few. Other additional regulatory entities required for coordination will be identified as part of Tasks 2 and 5 of the work plan.

Section 2 - Coordination with Local Land-Use Planning Decision-Makers

Chapter 10 includes an extensive discussion on the stakeholder involvement process for the development of the San Jacinto Component Plan. However, it should also be noted that both SAWPA and the SJRWC have extensive contacts with local land-use planning decision makers. For example, the County of Riverside is a SJRWC member. Also, all but one city had also expressed direct interest in participating in this grant proposal by the time it was due. Further, the RCFC&WCD, a partner in this grant application, also serves as the lead Permittee for the Santa Ana MS4 NPDES permit. This provides RCFC&WCD with direct access to City Managers through quarterly meetings with them regarding permit compliance issues.

76 B - WORKPLAN

SAWPA has developed an Integrated Regional Water Management Plan (IWP) that covers the entire Santa Ana watershed and addresses watershed management issues in an integrated fashion. The proposed San Jacinto Component Plan is a complementary planning process that will build upon the work already completed by watershed stakeholders participating in SAWPA planning process. The San Jacinto plan will provide additional in-depth planning that will further enhance the SAWPA planning process and focus on issues unique to the San Jacinto Watershed. This San Jacinto Watershed-specific planning process is in agreement with SAWPA's regional planning initiatives and is considered noncompetitive in nature to SAWPA's future implementation grant application.

The San Jacinto River Watershed Council, in conjunction with the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District and a significant number of other cooperating entities believe that a focused component of the Santa Ana IRWM is needed to specifically address the San Jacinto Watershed and the watershed related needs of its stakeholders representing agriculture, dairy, city and county government, water agencies, environment, tribal, and others. This plan represents a guidance document that will focus on truly integrating and coordinating the needs of a complex watershed. This plan proposes an amplification of the existing SAWPA IWP by providing a specific, focused component for the San Jacinto Watershed.

Task 1: Project Initiation (January 2006 through March 2006)

Development of a Watershed Management Workgroup-The workgroup will serve as the primary means to inform stakeholders of the status of the project, receive input from the stakeholders, and identify and collect data and information. The SJRWC, which already represents Agriculture, water agencies (including LESJWA, SAWPA, EMWD, WMWD and other smaller water suppliers), tribal and private landowners, environmental stakeholders, County Government, and Dairy, will form an initial core workgroup that will:

o Inform stakeholders of the status of projects o Receive and organize input from the stakeholders o Identify, organize and collect data and information o Identify and incorporate additional stakeholders

Most stakeholders in the watershed have already been identified through other planning efforts. This workgroup will build off existing coalitions and bonds already formed within the SJRWC.

Retention of a Consultant - During this stage the SJRWC will prepare an RFQ to select a consultant for completing tasks 1 through 8 of this work plan. The consultant’s scope of work will also include refining a process for stakeholder involvement and coordination, ensuring that data is managed in a method compatible with local and statewide data management efforts such as SWAMP and GAMA, and that draft and final work products are managed, produced and disseminated in a manner consistent with statewide data needs.

77 Initiate coordination of existing ongoing efforts – The objective of this task is to develop contacts necessary to maintain continuous coordination, both during and after the completion of the SJ Component Plan planning effort. The workgroup will immediately begin to coordinate with the several ongoing planning, study and monitoring efforts within the watershed. These efforts include the USACE’s Special Area Management Plan (SAMP), the RWQCB’s Canyon Lake and Lake Elsinore TMDL efforts, planning efforts associated with the Riverside County Integrated Plan (RCIP), including the Multi-Species Habitat and Conservation Plan (MSHCP), LESJWA Prop 13 projects, volunteer monitoring efforts and other proposed or ongoing planning, study and monitoring efforts. In addition, the workgroup will establish or further develop roles in other regional project planning efforts for habitat conservation, water supply development, flood control, water conservation, affordable housing and both lake and watershed water quality planning.

The final products for Task 1 are:

• Establish SJRWC Watershed Management Workgroup • Signed Contract with Consultant • Established contact list and assigned workgroup member responsibility for coordination of other “in progress” studies.

Task 2:Stakeholder Meetings & SJ Component IRWM Scope Refinement (February 2006-April 2006)

In order to develop the most effective management plan possible, a series of initial meetings with stakeholders will be conducted to identify additional, as well as refine and prioritize current work plan watershed strategies. These meetings may identify studies or strategies that modify the watershed planning studies proposed in Task 4 of this proposal. Initial watershed management planning studies and objectives are based on the draft SJRWC Watershed Management Plan outline prepared by the SJRWC. The stakeholders, however, are best situated to identify overall watershed strategy gap areas and refine the scope of work contained within this work plan. Modifications of the SJ Component Plan work plan will be subject to the approval of the SJRWC.

In addition to the specific studies proposed in Task 4, the workgroup will also examine, based on existing case studies, research, stakeholder input and the professional judgment of the selected consultants, potential watershed strategies that could be implemented within the watershed to complement, integrate and/or address gap areas of other existing planning documents such as SAWPA’s IWP. This task will only identify preliminary concepts that will further be evaluated, prioritized, and selected for inclusion in Task 5.

Each of the following general watershed strategies will be reviewed for adequacy within the San Jacinto Watershed and considered for inclusion within this work plan:

78 ™ Ecosystem Restoration ™ Wetlands enhancement and creation

™ Environmental and habitat ™ Conjunctive use protection and improvement

™ Water Supply Reliability ™ Desalination

™ Flood management ™ Imported water

™ Groundwater management ™ Land use planning

™ Recreation and public access ™ NPS pollution control

™ Storm water capture and ™ Surface storage management

™ Water conservation ™ Watershed planning

™ Water quality protection and ™ Water and wastewater improvement treatment

™ Water recycling ™ Water transfers

Regional planning documents to be considered during this review include the existing SJRWC Watershed Management Plan outline, SAWPA’s IWP, the RCIP, and other identified planning documents prepared by local, state or federal stakeholders.

The final product for Task 2 is:

• Refined San Jacinto Integrated Watershed Management Plan Outline • Refined Scope of Work for SJ Component Plan (See Section E Draft Watershed Plan Outline for existing plan)

Task 3:Watershed Data Inventory (January 2006-April 2006)

This task will be conducted concurrently with the prior task. Although the scope of the SJ Component Plan will go through a refinement phase, the data gathering needs will likely remain the same. This task will consist of the following:

• Collection and review of all research and planning efforts in the San Jacinto watershed and tributaries with particular emphasis on information related to: point and non point sources of pollution; water quality; sediment transport; hydrology; and habitat, Collection and consolidation of the data and resulting documents will be incorporated into SAWPA's existing databases and GIS. The Stakeholders will also determine if the California State University, San Bernardino Water Resources Institute is interested in obtaining copies of documents and electronic files for their library.

79 • Identification and collection of data for all past and present watershed and water quality monitoring activities.

• Collection of other relevant data, including land use, demographics, economics, and regulatory information. Stakeholder meetings will identify additional sources of data and the ability to obtain such data.

• Identification of existing mapped and unmapped floodplains, hydrologic and hydraulic flood control data within the watershed including recent Riverside County Flood Control aerial photography and recent storm data.

It should be noted that due to the significant efforts of SAWPA to develop their current Santa Ana Integrated Watershed Plan, the County of Riverside’s efforts to update and develop the MSHCP/General Plan, the SARWQCB studies and reports relative to TMDL/303(d) Listed water bodies within the watershed and associated water quality data collection, the USACE’s effort to develop a comprehensive list of aquatic and biological resources through the Special Area Management Plan (SAMP), and the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District efforts to map floodplains, collect water quality data and develop updated contour mapping of the region, it is expected that significant data sets will be readily available in a format compatible with common GIS systems. Much of the effort will be geared towards identifying secondary and smaller efforts within the watershed that can supplement these major efforts.

It should also be noted that several regional entities, including SAWPA and San Bernardino State University, have already developed databases, libraries, and/or GIS systems to store and distribute watershed management data. This task would also include discussions with these entities, to determine the most cost effective way to store and deliver developed data through their existing systems.

The final products for Task 3 are:

• A Watershed Data Inventory database and consolidated GIS layers.

Task 4: Specific Watershed Analyses (April 2006- July 2007) The San Jacinto Watershed is a complex region with competing and overlapping watershed issues. Fortunately, several planning efforts have begun to scope the extent of these competing needs. These include the MSHCP, SAMP, revised County General Plan, CETAP, TMDLs for Canyon Lake and Lake Elsinore, San Jacinto River hydrology studies and other efforts of local, state and federal stakeholders. In addition to the numerous planning and water quality studies that are already in progress, Stakeholders have identified several additional significant watershed issues requiring further study and analysis. These specific studies are outlined below. It should be noted that some of these tasks may be able to begin concurrently with Task 3, others may need to be delayed to ensure that all relevant data has first been assembled. Completion dates for individual studies may vary to meet regulatory deadlines. As necessary, each study will also analyze costs, funding sources, NEPA/CEQA compliance issues (including defining lead

80 agencies for proposed implementation projects and identifying the level of CEQA documents required) and propose long term timelines for implementation.

• San Jacinto River Reach 4 gap feasibility study (Complete by July 2007) – An approximately 2 mile extension of Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District levees are currently being assessed. Under existing conditions, low flow floodwaters bypass farms,dairies and the San Jacinto Wildlife Area via unmaintained manmade earthen levees constructed by agricultural operators within the area. The manmade low flow system reconnects with the natural low-flow river trace just upstream of Ramona Expressway, approximately 4 miles downstream. Unfortunately, under high flow conditions, these manmade earthen structures have consistently failed, allowing runoff to sheet over agricultural and dairy operations and enter into the San Jacinto Wildlife Area. The failure of the earthen levees causes significant economic damage to agriculture and dairy operations from flooding. It also becomes a major water quality issue when the flood flows inundating the dairies and agriculture operations introduce pollutants that into local critical habitat for endangered and threatened species within the San Jacinto Wildlife Area, and lead to further nutrient and pathogen impairment of Canyon Lake and Lake Elsinore.

The Lake Elsinore Operations Division and the CDFG both have competing water rights interests in receiving as much water from the River as possible, the farmers and dairymen are interested in protecting their lands, and the RWQCB and downstream stakeholders are interested in minimizing the contaminants in the flood flows. This study would assess the effectiveness and viability of better managing the flood flows in this unplanned reach of the San Jacinto River. Specific tasks would include determining the bathometry of the Mystic Lake sump, analyzing ways to divert low flows directly to Lake Elsinore through improvements to the man made low flow channel, while also diverting larger flood flows around the agriculture and dairy operations and into the San Jacinto Wildlife Area. The study will also consider other stakeholder interests such as potential impacts to groundwater management, water supply, water quality, and transportation corridors. Potential implementation project funding sources, CEQA requirements and a schedule for implementation will also be evaluated. Preliminary work on this task has already initiated.

• Watershed/Waterbody Monitoring Program (Complete by March 2007)- This task will develop a watershed and in-lake monitoring program to further assess water quality impacts from stormwater runoff. The task will also include interim support for existing TMDL monitoring programs.

The proposed Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake Nutrient and Pathogen TMDLs require the continued development of a watershed and in-lake monitoring program to determine compliance with the TMDL. The monitoring program also supports further TMDL model development. This task will also determine if additional pollutants/stations should be monitored to assess background levels

81 and natural sources for nutrients and pathogens, as well as other pollutants potentially impairing the San Jacinto watershed. The task will also incorporate any additional monitoring necessary to support other tasks in this work plan and consider ways to incorporate volunteer monitoring. Potential funding sources, CEQA requirements and implementation schedules will also be evaluated.

ƒ Septic System Management Plan (Complete by January 2007) – Septic Systems within the San Jacinto Watershed are suspected of contributing to nutrient impairments of Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake, as well as contributing to a pathogen impairment of Canyon Lake. Septic Systems also potentially have other deleterious effects on the environment. However, many of the septic system problem areas are also located in rural, disadvantaged communities such as Quail Valley and the City of Perris. This task would identify particularly problematic septic system communities such as Quail Valley and the City of Perris, and would examine potential management efforts for septic systems, including impacts of recently proposed legislative changes to septic system regulatory oversight, potential impacts of increased inspection of septic systems, options and effectiveness of enforcement against septic system failures, and the efficacy of conversion to sewer. Costs, funding sources, CEQA requirements and potential implementation strategies would necessarily be analyzed as part of this task. It is expected that this task will necessarily involve significant stakeholder coordination and outreach, to develop a workable solution to the septic problems.

ƒ Lake Elsinore In-Lake Sediment Nutrient Reduction Plan and Canyon Lake Sediment Nutrient Treatment Evaluation Plan (Complete by June 2007) –

Significant preliminary work towards these plans has commenced through the efforts of the LESJWA and the SARWQCB TMDL efforts. This task would assist stakeholders in further developing these preliminary studies.

The proposed Lake Elsinore In-Lake Sediment Nutrient Reduction Plan will include an evaluation of the applicability of various in-lake treatment technologies to prevent the release of nutrients from lake sediments to support development of a long-term strategy for control of nutrients from the sediment. The plan will also contain a proposed sediment nutrient monitoring program to evaluate the effectiveness of any strategies that are implemented.

The Canyon Lake Sediment Nutrient Treatment Evaluation Plan will include a plan and schedule for evaluating in-lake sediment nutrient treatment strategies for Canyon Lake. The proposed plan will also include an evaluation of the applicability of various in-lake treatment technologies to prevent the release of nutrients from lake sediments in order to develop a long-term strategy for control of nutrients from the sediment. The plan will also contain a proposed sediment nutrient monitoring program to evaluate the effectiveness of any implemented strategies.

82 The final products for Task 4 are:

ƒ 4 completed studies to incorporate into the San Jacinto Component Plan.

Task 5: Development of General Watershed Strategies and Programs (April 2006 – July 2007)

Specific strategies funded by this task will be based upon stakeholder recommendations from Task 2.

The stakeholders will prioritize the need for recommended additional studies based on overall watershed needs. Since an extensive amount of planning work has already been done within the watershed, the focus of this task will be on finding ways to integrate proposed projects and identification and prioritization of gap areas in existing watershed strategies requiring additional study. The SJRWC has identified several areas where additional study may be warranted, these areas include:

• Planning Strategies – Including additional master plans, tools or integrated watershed analysis necessary to facilitate future decision making. An example project would include the consideration of a Master Plan for Recycled Water within the San Jacinto Watershed. An alternative, or possibly additional study, may look at the channelization/habitat conservation needs of Reach 3 of the San Jacinto River.

• Regulatory Programs – Ordinances, permits, land conservation practices or other devices that could be integrated to benefit the watershed.

• Improvement Projects – Development of short term and long term integrated improvement projects necessary to address watershed issues.

• Additional Research and Monitoring – For example to examine the efficacy of specific water quality BMPs within the watershed.

• Educational Programs – New programs or integration of existing programs to be used by municipalities, schools, environmental groups, homeowner associations, developers, industries, etc. A specific example of a work product already under development is the "Guidebook for Living in the San Jacinto Watershed", which would describe the watershed, environmental issues and measures that the residents of the watershed can take to improve conditions in the watershed. This effort could greatly benefit from the identification and incorporation of other education efforts already ongoing within the watershed. Consideration of educational materials focused at the needs of disadvantaged communities will also be a high priority (particularly

83 litter control, septic system management, and other common issues impacting these communities).

It is expected that this strategies and programs proposed under this task will rely heavily on past study done by stakeholder groups, or concurrent study (or additional contributions) funded by individual or groups of stakeholders. The strategies and plans will include an analysis of potential costs, potential funding sources, CEQA compliance issues (selection of lead agency, other CEQA issues), impacts and benefits and timelines for implementation.

The final products for Task 5 are:

ƒ Strategic plans for projects to address a broad array of watershed strategies.

Task 6: Draft Component Watershed Management Plan Development (January 2007 – September 2007)

Task 6 will consolidate the efforts of Tasks 4 and 5 into the several drafts of the San Jacinto Component Plan. The work group will review and comment on each successive draft of the San Jacinto Component Plan until the workgroup recommends a final draft for SJRWC approval. The final draft San Jacinto Component Plan is an implementation plan and strategy for watershed protection. The San Jacinto Component Plan is the roadmap and guidance document to assure a sustainable watershed. It will consist of the following elements:

• Watershed stakeholders, watershed baseline information, modeling and analysis results; • Stakeholder responsibilities in carrying out the plan; • Short term and long term implementation strategies for watershed protection; • Financial and human resources, including alternative funding strategies; • Partnerships and cooperative agreements necessary to implement the Plan; • Schedule for implementation, including future studies necessary and water quality monitoring recommendations; • Schedule for reevaluation of the Watershed Management Plan based on watershed indicators, new regulations, and other developments and concerns.

A long term program management and implementation strategy will ensure that the plan remains a living document and a useful tool for long term decision making in the watershed. It will recognize ways to add and reassess data and to provide further strategies and projects.

The final product of Task 6 is:

• Completed final draft San Jacinto Component Plan.

84 Task 7: Finalization and Implementation/Adoption of Plan (September 2007- January 2008)

Upon completion, the final draft San Jacinto Component Plan will be publicly noticed and a workshop will be conducted to ensure that stakeholders and other potential users or interested parties are able to comment on the draft San Jacinto Component IRWM. Received comments will be reviewed and incorporated into the San Jacinto Component IRWM by the workgroup and consultant. The SJRWC will then approve the document.

The finalized San Jacinto Watershed IRWM will be submitted to SAWPA for inclusion into their existing Santa Ana River Integrated Watershed Plan.

The final products of Task 7:

• Final San Jacinto Component IRWM.

Task 8: Interim and Final Progress Reports (January 2006 – January 2008)

The SJRWC Project Director (Jim Gilmore) and the SJRWC Project Manager (Pat Boldt) and selected consultant shall ensure that Proposition 50, Chapter 8 quarterly and final progress report requirements are met. The reports will include an assessment of the progress of the project, identification of tasks completed, a breakdown of the budget used, detail of any revisions to the scope of work or schedule, identification of any problems encountered, and any work products completed during the reporting period. A final report will be prepared at the conclusion of the project summarizing the effort.

The final products of Task 8:

• Interim and final progress reports.

Task 9: Project Administration (January 2006-January 2008) Various administration and reimbursable costs will be incurred over the life of the work plan by the SJRWC Executive Director, President and other employees/officers of the SJWRC. These costs may include time for meeting facilitation, general administration costs, time and materials, preparation of billings, consultant contract selection and negotiation, review of consultant work products, authorization and payment of contract invoices, etc.

The final products of Task 9:

• Itemized quarterly billings of administrative costs.

85 86 C. BUDGET Work Item Agency Source of Funds Grant Total Cost Funding Request Match (rounded to nearest $500) Task 1:Project Initiation $7,000 SJRWC Executive $7,000 Develop Workshop Group Director Time Hire Consultant Coordinate Planning

Task 2: Stakeholder Meetings & $10,000 SJRWC Executive $10,000 $20,000 SJ Component IRWM Scope Director Time Refinement Task 3: Watershed Data Inventory $15,000 Volunteer time to collect $40,000 $55,000 and deliver data to the SJRWC. Task 4: Specific Watershed Analyses

San Jacinto River Reach 4 Gap $75,000 Feasibility data $100,000 $175,000 Feasibility Study including mapping developed by RCFC&WCD

Watershed/Waterbody Monitoring $95,000 RCFC&WCD $50,000 $145,000 Monitoring Expenses and SJRWC Executive Director time to update QAPP. Septic System Management Plan $5,000 SJRWC $20,000 $25,000 Lake Elsinore In-Lake Sediment Administration Nutrient Reduction Plan and Canyon Lake Sediment Nutrient $40,000 Lake Elsinore/Canyon $50,000 $90,000 Treatment Evaluation Plan Lake TMDL Stakeholders

Task 5: Development of General $10,000 SJRWC Administration $75,000 $85,000 Watershed Strategies and Programs and Facilitation Task 6: Draft Component Watershed $45,000 $45,000 Management Plan Development Task 7: Finalization, CEQA Review, $5,000 SJRWC Admin and $10,000 $15,000 and Implementation/Adoption of Plan Facilitation Expenses Task 8: Interim and Final Progress $25,000 $25,000 Reporting Task 9: Project Administration $25,000 $75,000 $100,000 TOTAL $287,000 $500,000 $787,000

MATCHING FUND CONTRIBUTION =$287,000/$787,000=36.5%

87 Funding Match Detail:

Task 1 – The SJRWC Executive Director will provide the initial effort to kick-start the grant as described by these tasks. It is estimated that at least 80 hours worth of work (at a billing rate of $85/hr) will be necessary to complete task 1.

Task 2 – The SJRWC Executive Director will facilitate stakeholder meetings, coordinate with the selected consultant, and assist in preparation of documents to support the refinement of the scope of work. It is estimated that this task will require 3 weeks of the Executive Directors time, or approximately 120 hours.

Task 3 – The SJRWC Executive Director and various stakeholder staff are expected to spend a relatively significant amount of time collecting and formatting data for inclusion in this effort. It is estimated that approximately 3 person-weeks worth of effort will be expended to collect and format the data, at an average hourly rate (technician) of $30/hour.

Task 4, Gap Study – The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District will take the lead on preparing the hydrologic and hydraulic studies necessary to complete the GAP analysis. This effort is likely to begin in the near future. Sub Tasks include:

Preparation of Hydrologic/Hydraulic Study, 640 person-hours ($60/hour)- $38,400 Mapping of Mystic Lake and River- - $25,000 Meeting coordination, preparation, other administration and supplies - $11,600

Task 4, Watershed/Waterbody Monitoring – The SJRWC and RCFC&WCD are predicting that the RCFC&WCD will need to cover the costs to maintain USGS flow gages within the San Jacinto River watershed that are necessary for TMDL monitoring. The RCFC&WCD spends an average of $92,000/year under contract with USGS for this service. In addition it is expected that RCFC&WCD staff and the SJRWC Executive Director will spend approximately 40 person- hours updating QAPP procedures for the proposed monitoring programs.

Task 4, Septic System Management Plan – It is expected that the SJRWC Executive Director will spend approximately 80 person-hours coordinating with entities responsible for septic system oversight and sewerage agencies to help facilitate the development of this plan.

Task 5, Development of General Watershed Strategies and Programs – It is expected that the SJRWC Executive Director and SJRWC members will spend approximately 3 person-weeks (120 person-hours) coordinating with stakeholders and assisting in the refinement of the General Watershed Strategies and Programs.

Task 7 - It is expected that the SJRWC Executive Director and SJRWC members will spend approximately 60 person-hours coordinating with stakeholders and facilitating the CEQA process.

Task 9 - Project Administration-The Program Director and Executive Director will spend approximately 250 hours over the 2 year duration of the project on Project Administration items

88 including: supervision of the project, supervision of consultants, invoicing, tracking of progress reports and other reporting issues.

89 D. SCHEDULE

2006 2007 2008 ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul AugSep Oct Nov Dec Jan 1 Task 1: Project Initiation 65 days Mon 1/2/06 Fri 3/31/06

2 Development of Watershed Management Workgroup65 days Mon 1/2/06 Fri 3/31/06

3 Retention of Consultant 65 days Mon 1/2/06 Fri 3/31/06

4 Initiate Coordination of Existing ongoing efforts 65 days Mon 1/2/06 Fri 3/31/06

5 Task 2: Stakeholder Meetings & SJ Component63 IRWM days ScopeWed 2/1/06 Fri 4/28/06 Refinement 6 Conduct Initial Stakeholder Meetings 63 days Wed 2/1/06 Fri 4/28/06

7 Task 3: Watershed Data Inventory 63 days Wed 2/1/06 Fri 4/28/06

8 Collect and Review Research/Planning Efforts in SJ63 Watershed days Wed 2/1/06 Fri 4/28/06

9 Identification of Monitoring Activities 63 days Wed 2/1/06 Fri 4/28/06

10 Collection of Other Relevant Data 63 days Wed 2/1/06 Fri 4/28/06

11 Identification of Floodplains & Hydrologic Data 63 days Wed 2/1/06 Fri 4/28/06

12 Task 4: Specific Watershed Analyses 347 days Mon 4/3/06 Tue 7/31/07

13 San Jacinto River Reach 4 gap feasibility study 347 days Mon 4/3/06 Tue 7/31/07

14 Watershed/Waterbody Monitoring Program 260 days Mon 4/3/06 Fri 3/30/07

15 Septic System Management Plan 218 days Mon 4/3/06Wed 1/31/07

16 Lake Elsinore In-Lake Sediment Nutrient Reduction325 Plan day ands Mon 4/3/06 Fri 6/29/07 Canyon Lake Sediment Nutrient Treatment Evaluation Plan 17 Task 5: Development of General Watershed Strategies347 days Monand 4/3/06 Tue 7/31/07 Program s 18 Examine Potential Strategies, Projects, Programs and347 days Mon 4/3/06 Tue 7/31/07 Implemention Opportunities

19 Task 6: Draft Component Watershed Management171 day Plans Tue 1/2/07 Tue 8/28/07 Development 20 Consolidate Work Performed in Tasks 4 & 5, Develop171 Report days Tue 1/2/07 Tue 8/28/07

21 Stakeholder Review and QA 171 days Tue 1/2/07 Tue 8/28/07

22 Task 7: Finalization, Implementation/Adoption 111of Plan days Wed 8/1/07 Wed 1/2/08

23 Public Notice and Workshop (s) 111 days Wed 8/1/07 Wed 1/2/08

24 Submit Final IRWM to SAWPA 0 days Wed 1/2/08 Wed 1/2/08 1/2

25 Task 8: Interim and Final Progress Reports 523 days Mon 1/2/06 Wed 1/2/08

26 Prepare and Submit Quarterly Progress Reports 523 days Mon 1/2/06 Wed 1/2/08

27 Prepare and Submit Final Summary Progress Report523 days Mon 1/2/06 Wed 1/2/08

28 Task 9: Project Administration 523 days Mon 1/2/06 Wed 1/2/08

29 Perform Ongoing Project Administration 523 days Mon 1/2/06 Wed 1/2/08

30 Project End Date 0 days Wed 1/2/08 Wed 1/2/08 1/2

90 E. EXISTING SJRWC WATERSHED PLAN OUTLINE Table of Contents

Executive Summary List of Tables List of Figures List of Technical Appendices Acronyms Glossary

Section One: Watershed Overview 1.1 Watershed Plan Goals 1.2 Local Sponsors 1.3 Previous Studies 1.4 Public Involvement and Coordination 1.5 Identification of Watershed Issues 1.5.1 Flooding 1.5.2 Poor Water Quality 1.5.3 Loss of Habitat 1.6 Watershed Opportunities

Section Two: Watershed Background

2.1 Study Area Description 2.2 Beneficial Uses 2.3 Water Quality Status of Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake 2.4 Climate/Rainfall 2.5 Waterbody Characteristics 2.5.1 San Jacinto River 2.5.2 Perris Valley Storm Drain 2.5.3 Salt Creek 2.5.4 Mystic Lake 2.5.5 Perris Reservoir 2.5.6 Canyon Lake 2.5.7 Lake Elsinore 2.6 Watershed Land Use 2.7 Watershed Geology 2.7.1 Regional Topography 2.7.2 Regional Geology 2.7.3 Soils 2.7.4 Seismicity 2.7.4.1 Faults 2.7.4.2 Earthquakes 2.7.4.3 Geologic Hazards 2.8 Water Resources

91 2.9 Surface Water 2.10 Groundwater 2.10.1 Groundwater Quality 2.11 Watershed Infrastructure 2.11.1 Transportation 2.12 Watershed Reaches

Section Three: Hydrologic, Hydraulic and Sediment Studies

3.1 Hydrologic Analysis 3.1.1 Precipitation and Streamflow Records 3.2 Hydraulic Analysis 3.3 Geomorphic Analysis 3.4 Erosion and Sedimentation Analyses

Section Four: Environmental and Cultural Studies:

4.1 Water Quality 4.1.1 Surface Water 4.1.2 Groundwater 4.2 Biological Resources 4.2.1 Vegetation 4.2.2 Wildlife 4.2.3 Sensitive Resources 4.2.3.1 Sensitive Habitats 4.2.3.2 Sensitive Species 4.3 Cultural Resources 4.3.1 Records and Literature Search Results

Section Five: Regulatory Considerations:

5.1 Environmental Restoration Activities 5.2 Operation and Maintenance Activities 5.3 Cumulative Impacts 5.4 Integrated Watershed Plan Component

Section Six: Economic Studies

6.1 Historic Flood Damages 6.2 Economic Analysis Methodologies 6.3 Without-Project Flood Inundation Damages 6.3.1 Watershed Floodplain Inventory 6.3.2 Flood Inundation Damages 6.3.3 Risk Analysis 6.3.4 Flood Damage Summary 6.4 Water Demand and Supply Analysis 6.5 Baseline Recreation Analysis

92 Section Seven: Watershed Plan Formulation

7.1 Introduction to Plan Formulation 7.2 General Planning Criteria, Objectives, and Constraints 7.2.1 General Planning Criteria 7.2.2 Planning Objectives 7.2.3 Planning Constraints 7.2.4 Watershed Problems and Potential Measures 7.3 Flood Reduction Measures 7.4 Ecosystem Restoration Measures 7.5 Water Quality Measures 7.6 Measures, Alternatives and Development of Alternative Plans 7.7 Description of Alternatives 7.8 Summary Analysis and Plan Selection Process 7.9 Recommended Plan

Section Eight: Watershed Management Plan

8.1 Plan Development 8.2 Plan Description 8.3 Plan Elements-Summary of Benefits and Costs

Section Nine: Implementation and Monitoring 9.1 Implementation 9.1.1 Monitoring

Section Ten: Public and Agency Coordination

Section Eleven: Conclusions

93