South Fork Trinity River Basin Coordinated Resource Management Planning

Final Report April 1 - September 30,1996

Prepared for

County of Trinity and The Trinity River Task Force

under contract No. TFG93-09

Patrick Truman and Associates Post Office Box 81 Weaverville, CA 96093 (916) 623-51 01 SOUTH FORK TRINITY RIVER CRMP FINAL REPORT

APRIL 1 - SEPTEMBER 3 1,1996

Introduction

Background

Goals & Objectives

Chronology of Events

Cumulative Expenditures

Status & Deliverables

Meeting Minutes Exhibit

Correspondence Exhibit South Fork Trinity River

Coordinated Resource Management Planning

Final Report - April 1 to September 30, 1996

I. INTRODUCTION

On August 16, 1994, Patrick Truman and Associates (PTA) entered into an agreement with the County of Trinity through the Planning Department, Natural Resources Division. Services are for coordination, facilitation and plan development for the South Fork Trinity River Coordinated Resource Management Planning Committee (CRMP) and its activities. The PTA proposal approved by Trinity County specified a thirteen month workplan through September of 1995. However, the contract period was extended to December 31, 1995, and then amended through September 30, 1996. Funding from the County grants program is made available from the Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) through the Bureau of Reclamation and does not include Northwest Economic Adjustment Initiative (CERT) or Option 9 funding. This Final Report reflects activities from April 1, 1996 through September 30, 1996.

11. BACKGROUND

A Coordinated Resource Management Planning Steering Committee was formed in October of 1993, consisting of a variety of private landowners, organizations and governmental representatives, to guide the development, structure and participation of the CRMP planning process. The CRMP membership consists of both private sector and public agency representatives. In addition to technical assistance contributed by the Natural Resources Conservation Service, formerly the Soil Conservation Service, the CRMP has secured funding from the Trinity River Restoration Program for first and second year staffing to assist in CRMP organization and development of private land restoration and improvement projects, implemented by the Trinity County Resource Conservation District.

The Steering Committee has developed a set of initial objectives which will form the basis for CRMP organization and actions in the near future. These objectives range from building local community trust and cooperation, to providing leadership in coordinating actions of diverse public and private interests, to organizing and assisting private landowners in performing watershed assessments, erosion prevention projects and water quality improvements necessary to protect and restore the basin's wild fish populations. The CRMP committee serves as a liaison between agencies, industries, local grassroots groups and private citizens. Its task is to promote cooperation and voluntary participation among all CRMP members and any interested parties in providing for watershed and fisheries restoration, while striving for local economic improvement and stability. In addition, the committee, in cooperation with the Watershed Center Research & Training Center and the Trinity Resource Conservation District, are in the process of identifying the available workforce in order to accomplish the magnitude of expected restoration work.

Patrick Truman and Associates (PTA) in collaboration with Pacific Watershed Associates (PWA), serve as coordination, facilitation and planning staff for the CRMP. PWA, authors of the "Action Plan for Fisheries and Watershed Restoration in the South Fork of the Trinity River," recommended several physical and biological action items, as well as the formation of a CRMP, as mechanisms for accomplishing fisheries restoration and economic recovery for communities in the South Fork Trinity River watershed.

CRMP GOALS

Develop and implement Coordinated Resource Plan for the recovery of the fisheries and economies of the South Fork Trinity River Basin.

Build trust, promote equality, cooperation and voluntary participation among all members of the CRMP process.

CRMP OBJECTIVES

Provide the leadership necessary to bring diverse interest groups to agreement on resource management opportunities.

Perform upland watershed analysis and inventory.

Determine risk potential for sediment yield from private and public land.

Assess water quality and quantity improvement opportunities.

Prevent listing of species under the Endangered Species Act through habitat improvement and population recovery.

Increase forest productivity through soil conservation.

Provide access to, and facilitate transfer of, technical information and expertise.

Serves as a liaison between the agencies, industries, and local grassroots groups.

Determine structure and participation of the CRMP process. CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS

April 1996

Support by the SFTR CRMP and many others for the 1996 Trinity River Restoration Program reauthorization was successful. A new bill for 1997 and 1998 passed the House of Representatives and the Senate Natural Resources Committee on a unanimous vote.

At the request of the SFTR CRMP through the TCRCD and NRCS the Farm Services Agency allocated $28,000 to Trinity County to initiate fuels reduction demonstration projects on private land. Eight landowners through the RCD signed up in the Hyarnpom and Farmer Ranch Road area of Hayfork with 42 treatable acres..

NRCS and the RCD initiated two projects with the USFS South Fork Management Unit of the Shasta-Trinity National Forest. The two projects consisted of planting 15,000 riparian plants on decommissioned roads and the other was for erosion control work on the South Fork Trail.

The SFTR CRMP toured the AppleIButter project work, in the St. John's Loop Road area completed by Redwood Community Action Agency.

June 1996

The SFCRMP Coordinator mailed 700 request for assistance to Trinity Pines landowners and has received 50 responses. Reconnaissance of the resource concerns expressed resulted in a primary concern for road erosion and fuels reduction. The Post Mountain PUD requested FEMA funds from past storm events, which will be used with restoration program funds to upgrade the road network.

The USFS South Fork Management Unit responded favorably to the SFCRMP's proposal do conduct a road erosion inventory in upper South Fork in conjunction with Pacific Watershed Associates and the RCD. The Shasta-Trinity NF also became a signatory to the SFCRMP MOU.

On May 8, 1996 a CRMP sponsored road decommissioning training workshop was conducted in Hoopa and was well attended by USFS South Fork Management Unit personnel.

The RCD installed 15 hobotemps to monitor high stream temperatures in the Hayfork Basin through the summer and a permanent flow station will be installed at the base of Hayfork Valley.

Under the PL566 program a rancher owning 800 acres signed a five year, cost-sharing conservation contract to develop a planned grazing system of cattle rotation, cross fencing, seeding and spring development.

The SFCRMP Committee reached consensus to recommend Tharon Ode11 of Simpson Timber Company as the Trinity River Task Force representative. August 1996

The SFCRMP Committee met again in Burnt Ranch where community members engaged in a long discussion with the Committee on SFCRMP priorities, Redwood Community Action Agency, the Watershed Research and Training Center, fish, wildlife and water restoration, rezoning, the CERT process, env trinity e-mail, subscriptions, newsletters, the RC&D, and other related topics.

The Burnt Ranch meeting was intended to focus on a variety of resource issues and included presentations on the geomorphic processes of the lower South Fork & mainstem Trinity River, monitoring of fish stocks in the lower South Fork & mainstem Trinity River, restoration and temperature monitoring projects, Hayfork Adaptive Management Area Implementation Guidelines, and the Trinity River flow decision & EISIEIR.

In September the USFS South Fork Management Unit requested that the SFCRMP sponsor a Watershed Analysis for the upper South Fork Trinity River and will provide $60,000 if their request is approved. The RCD and NRCS will co-lead the development of the WA.

CUMULATIVE EXPENDITURES

Accrued Expense Budget Balance

Personnel: $ 3 1,393 34,000 2,607 Travel: 120 1,000 880 Newsletters: -0- 2,000 2,000 Office/Phone/Supplies 1.393 3.000 1.607

Totals $ 15,318 40,000 7,094

Note that not all bills have been paid as Pacific Watershed Associates have not submitted their final invoice under this contract and that there was a glitch on the SFCRMP brochure as explained in the next section.

STATUS & DELTVERABLES

The SFCRMP brochure was to be distributed to every address in Trinity County as a insert of the Resource Conservation District's SummerIFall Newsletter. A last minute glitch developed at the printers and it was not included. It is now scheduled as an insert for the Winter edition which will be produced in-house.

Comments on the draft CRMP Implementation Plan, developed in conjunction with Pacific Watershed Associates have been received and a final is being prepared. The chapter on roles and responsibilities has been modified for ease of reading, a new chapter will be added on monitoring, and additional completed projects and MOU signatories will be added.

A road maintenance workshop draft presentation has been scheduled for early October with Carl Bonomini and management staff. The purpose is to review the workshop in anticipation of presentations to field crews around the county.

After attending the Annual California CRMP Conference in Santa Rosa in late May it became quite evident to me that a self-supporting CRMP Conference in Trinity County would be improbable. The level of volunteers and the donations of fine wine and cheeses were beyond anything we could provide. Daily dinners on a hill in the middle of the grape fields, the standard has been set and Santa Cruz County will attempt to meet it in 1997.

At the October SFCRMP meeting will be a discussion with the USFS Lower Trinity Ranger District and PSW Research on studies regarding a sediment budget for the South Fork, at what rate the river bed in the lower portion of the river is clearing itself of sediments, and whether the channel actually is accumulating more gravel in places. SOUTH FORK COORDINATED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING

August 6, 1996

Burnt Ranch Elementary School

PARTICIPANTS: Barry Collins, Patrick Culver, Scott Eberly, Chuck Glasgow, Danny Hagans, Pat Higgins, Christina Johnson, Carol Joroski, Elizabeth McCray, Galen McCray, Dena Magdaleno, John Larson, Carla Miller, Kristen Peckham, Joyce Pickering, Julia Riber, Wade Sinnen, Tom Stokely, Patrick Truman, Violet Warren Meeting convened 10:15 AM.

AGENDA CHANGES/ADDITIONS

Addition of 1.1 PUBLIC COMMENTS Addition of 1.2 TRINITY RIVER RESOURCE INFORMATION CENTER GRANT

1.0 WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS - TRUMAN SFCRMP Coordinator Patrick Truman welcomed everyone and those present introduced themselves and the agency/entity they represented. 1 . 1 PURL 1 C COhlhlENTS - TRUMAN There was a long discussion/question and answer period on SFCRMP priorities, RCAA, the Watershed Center, fish, wildlife, water restoration, rezoning, the CERT process, Environmental Trinity e-mail subscriptions, newsletters, the RC&D and other related topics.

1..2 TRINITY RIVER RESOURCE INFORMATION CENTER GRANT - STOKELY Tom Stokely stated the Grant Review Subcommittee of the Technical Coordinating Committee reviewed the Trinity River Resource Information Center Grant from the Western Trinity Cert and found it unrelated to river restoration. The $200,000 a year funding for the grant program is for restoration purposes only. Dena and others expressed disappointment that a small portion of the millions being spent on restoration is not going to their down river comnluni ties for economic development. Stokely explained there was still an opportunity to revise the proposal to meet funding guidelines. 2.0 PRESENTATION ON GEOMORPHIC PROCESSES OF THE LOWER SOUTH FORK i?i MAINSTEM TRINITY RIVER - PWA - HAGANS Danny Hagans gave an explanation of the SFCRMP Plan and a history of the geomorphic processes of the Lower South Fork and Mainstem from 4,000,000 years ago to the present, including: low land rclief areas; river deposits; gold mining; land slides; rapid uplift; gravel; woody debris; fish habitats; modification of the river; natural balance of the processes; refugia streams; wide spread timber harvesting; changing of the dominate process; land use related landslides; the Dam; dams on small creeks; frequency of slides; the change in the rivers; and the effects on stream systems and possibilities for restoration/recovery due to the lower management levels in the last two decades. Hagans explained the South Fork is divided into six separate sub-basins in the SFCRMP Plan. The Lower South Fork is the lowest sixth of watershed. What goes on in the upper five sub-basins in terms of sediment distribution and diversions affects the Lower South Fork sub-basin. Hagans stated the Lower Mainstem was not the place to begin a fisheries recovery program. However, there are a number of beneficial projects which could be implemented in the Lower Mainstem tributaries.

3.0 PRESENTATION ON MONITORING OF' FISH STOCKS IN THE LOWER SOUTH FORK & MAINSTEM TRINITY RIVER - CDF&G - COLLINS/SINNEN Barry Collins stated that very few juvenile coho were seen in traps in the Hyampom area. Two years ago they performed limited snorkel surveys in the South Fork Basin. They observed 392 juvenile coho in Madden Creek. In the '~ctionPlan, Madden Creek was identified as a refuge stream which should be protected. Erosion control was stressed as well as sediment control methods. Collins stressed the need to identify the refugia areas and protect fisheries resources and track the status of the population. There was further discussion on culverts, private landowners, Butter Creek, water flows, instream structures, prioritization strategy, stream diversion, cattle, water quality, physical quality of the upland area, technical assistance, and financial assistance. Collins reported on the spring/fall chinook population estimates: winter/fall run steelhead stock averaged 3,004 between 1990 to 1993 and considered stable; spring chinook count for 1990 to 1994 ranged from 66 to 284 fish (last year's count was 579); fall chinook salmon population estimate in - 1985 & 1986 averaged 2,010 while 1987 to 1990 averaged 446, in 1993 it was 1,100 fish. The continued monitoring in the South Fork is a research assessment approach to track the populations and periodically return to reassess their status. Wade Sinnen gave a report of the Restoration and Temperature Monitoring in the Lower South Fork. For a copy of this 1994 - 1995 CDF&G Report, contact Wade Sinnen @ CDFhG, Arcata, 707-822-5876. There was not time for a slide show presentation. 4.0 PRESENTATION OF RESTORATION AND TEMPERATURE MONITORING PROJECTS - LOWER TRINITY RANGER DISTRICT - GLASGOW Chuck Glasgow distributed a ten-page document which included: South Fork road decommissioning; water temperature data; and culvert sizing. Glasgow gave a brief overview on this report. There was a question and answer/comment period.

5.0 PRESENTATION OF THE HAYFORK AMA' IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES- SOUTH FORK MANAGEMENT UNIT - RIBER Julia Riber distributed copies of the AhlA Draft Guidelines, a flyer for the Second Annual Forest Products Workshops taking place August 16-18 @ Camp Kimtu in Willow Creek, a brochure describing the AMA area and a report from the Pacific Southwest Research Station. Riber gave an update on the Draft Hayfork AMA Plan.

6.0 DISCUSSION ON TRINITY RIVER FLOW DECISION & EIS/EIR - TRINITY COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT - STOKELY

Tom Stokely distributed a 1952 Trinity Journal news clipping and information from a prior meeting on the Mainstem Trinity River Environmental Impact Statement and Report. Stokely gave an historic summary including: the 1955 Trinity River Act to "Preserve and Propagate" Trinity River Fish and Wildlife; 1980 & 1981 EIS & "Andrus Decision" on Trinity River Flows; 1983 EIS on Trinity River Fish and Wildlife Management Program; 1984, Trinity River Restoration Program, Restore Fish and Wildlife to Pre-dam Levels; 1992 Central Valley Project Improvement Act; 1996 Trinity River Flow Study (for the Secretary of the Interior, September 1996): Trinity River Flow Decision (December 1996 or later); Final EIS/EIR, (summer 1997); the Record of Decision (fall 1997). The four lead agencies are the USF&V, BOR, Trinity County and Hoopa Valley Tribe. This is the first time in the Nation that two major Federal agencies partnered with a recognized tribe and a County to look at a local natural resource problem. There was a question and answer period.

7.0 REFLECTIONS, NEXT MEETINGS,

October 15, 1996, 10:OO AM, Hayfork Fairgrounds, Hayfork November 19, 1996, 6:30 PM To Be Announced, Burnt Ranch

Meeting adjourned 1:20 PM. SOUTH FORK COORDINATED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING June 11, 1996 - 10:OO AM Fairgrounds - Hayfork

PARTICIPANTS: Joyce Anderson, Bernie Bush, Barry Collins, Noreen Doyas, Scott Eberly, Danny Hagans, Carol ~oroski,Carla Miller, Julia Riber, Jim Spear, Mary Lee Steffensen, Tom Stokely, Patrick Truman, Tim Vie1 Meeting convened 10:20 AM. AGENDA CHANGES/ADDITIONS Addition: 4.1 - PL566 UPDATE

1.0 WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS - TRUMAN SFCRMP Coordinator Patrick Truman welcomed us, and those present introduced themselves and stated the agency/entity they represented. 2.0 UPDATE ON NEAP SIMPSON ROAD MAPPING - HAGANS Danny Hagans stated the final reports had been submitted to the Humboldt County Resource Conservation District (HCRCD) outlining the accomplishments with ten commercial salmon fishermen on properties with three different ownerships. Hagans went over the restoration project in detail. 3.0 TRINITY RIVER RESTORATION PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION - STOKELY Tom Stokely stated the Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) Reauthorization Bill was signed by President Clinton May 15, 1996. It passed unanimously through both the House and Senate, extending the program until October 1, 1998, and provides for expenditure of $5,000,000 to $7,000,000 per year through the next two federal fiscal years, with capped overhead charges of 20%. It extends the membership of the Trinity River Task Force (TRTF) to include the timber industry, Yurok Tribe, Karuk Tribe, commercial fishermen, and sport fishermen. It clarifies the role of the Trinity River Hatchery to mitigate for the loss of habitat upstream of the dam, but the hatchery is not to interfere with natural fish production below Lewiston Dam. After discussion it was the consensus of the SFCRMP to recommend Tharon Odell of Simpson Timber Company as the TRTF timber industry representative by directing the Coordinator to write a letter of support to Secretary of Interior Bruce Babbitt and Agricultural Secretary Dan Glickman. There was a long discussion on Fish Farm and Forestry Committees (FFFC).

4.0 1996 & 1997 CONSERVATION PROJECTS UPDATE - DOYAS UPPER SOUTH FORK INVENTORY Noreen Doyas stated TCRCD currently has a crew of eight people doing erosion control projects with the United States Forest Service (USFS) on the South Fork Trail. The crew is installing water bars and removing root wads to lessen the erosion on the trail. There will be a riparian inventory conducted to target problem areas on the riparian corridors on upper Salt, Carr, Big, Barker, Tule, Hayfork and upper Hayfork Creeks. After the aerial photos are reviewed there will be ground treatment in areas of concern, and the landowners will be directly targeted for facilitation of planting, fencing, and erosion control measures. Planned/budgeted projects based on the inventory will continue in monitoring efforts of water quality flow and temperature. NRCS and TCRCD installed 15 hobotemps to monitor the high stream temperatures in the Hayfork Basin through the summer. Next month a permanent flow station will be installed at the base of Hayfork Valley. There will also be an inventory on roads, with possible decommissioning along the upper South Fork, with the USFS and Pacific Watershed Associates (PWA). Simpson Timber land is another possibility for road closure work, as well as a fencing project on Big Creek. A recent mailing to the Trinity Pines (Post Mountain) area produced 50 responses. The primary concern is fuels' reduction and road erosion. Post Mountain PUD applied for Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) funds as they have significant road problems from past storms. They have requested technical assistance from the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) and Trinity County Resource Conservation District (TCRCD) to help facilitate their efforts. The SFCRMP could have a forester draft a stewardship plan as a model that may produce additional funding through the NRCS for the fuels' reduction along areas which are juxtaposed to USFS land. 4.1 PL566 PROGRAM UPDATE - JOROSKI Carol Joroski stated a five-year, cost-sharing contract had been entered into with a rancher owning 800 acres. The contract is to develop a planned grazing system of cattle rotation, cross fencing, larger pastures to smaller pastures, range/pasture seeding and spring development. They have also been working with landowners with type conversion, clearing dense manzanita which will be seeded with grass. 5.0 AMA COORDINATORS REPORT/LOWER HAYFORK WA - RIBER Joyce Anderson stated that the MOU was signed by the Forest Supervisor between the Shasta-Trinity National Forest and the SFCRMP. The lower Hayfork WA final document is finished and copies are available through Anna Arnold. The next WA is in the Beegum watershed and includes range allotments as part of this WA, which will be finished in late September. Julia Riber stated the Second Annual Forest Products Workshops will take place August 16-18 @ Camp Kimtu in Willow Creek. The AMA Guide is being assessed as to when they distribute the '96 version in response to the edit. They are working on strategies as to how to respond to the opportunities in the Guide. Riber stated they hoped to have a letter out regarding these strategies within the next month. 6.0 REPORT ON ROAD DECOMMISSIONING WORKSHOP - WILSON Mary Lee Steffensen and Danny Hagans reported on the Road Decommissioning Workshop which took place May 8, 1996, in Hoopa. 7.0 UPDATE ON FUELS' REDUCTION PROJECTS - AREY Noreen Doyas stated eight people have signed up on Farmer Ranch and Hyampom Roads for fuels' reduction demonstration projects. This is a model to show other landowners what can be achieved. This is a cost-sharing program through the Farm Service Agency (FSA) and there is up to $3,500 available per single ownership on private land. The work will start the last two weeks of August on 42 treatable acres, and, in some cases, will tie into other fuelbreaks being developed in the area. 8.0 CDF&G SOUTH FORK MONITORING PLAN - COLLINS Barry Collins distributed copies of the California Fish and Game 1996 Field Schedule for the South Fork Trinity River Basin. Collins gave a detailed report on the CDF&G plan for '96 which includes using: staging gates; water temperature monitoring; snorkeling to identify holding areas that spring chinook and steelhead are using; a summer snorkel survey to identify fish tagged for population count of spring chinook; juvenile augmented out-migration trapping. This year they are planning to estimate population for the fall chinook/salmon, as they have done this estimate every five years. It was agreed CDF&G, TCRCD and NRCS would coordinate temperature monitoring efforts to avoid overlap. 9.0 REFLECTIONS, NEXT MEETING, AGENDA

August 6, 1996, 10:OO AM, Burnt Ranch School, Burnt Ranch October 15, 1996, 10:OO AM, Hayfork Fairgrounds, Hayfork Scott Eberly distributed a handout on the Hardwood Milling Demonstration taking place June 29, 10:OO AM - 4:00 PM, at the Trinity River Conservation Camp. 1 Meeting adjourned 12:20 PM. SOUTH FORK COORDINATED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING

April 23, 1996

10:OO AM Community Hall - Hyampom

PARTICIPANTS: Don Allen, Mary Arey, John Bradley, Noreen Doyas, Sungnome Madrone, Carla Miller, John Rapf, Julia Riber, Jim Spear, Patrick Truman, Maryls Smith

Meeting convened 10:03 AM. AGENDA CHANGES/ADDITIONS

5.0 to 2.0; ADDITION OF 10. PUBLIC COMMENTS

1.0 WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS - TRUMAN SFCRMP Coordinator Patrick Truman welcomed us, and those present introduced themselves and stated the agency/entity they represented. 2.0 AMA COORDINATORS REPORT - RIBER Julia Riber (USFS) reported the MOU between the CRMP and the USFS was being reviewed, and that she would have further information at the next SFCRMP meeting. Riber stated the Draft AMA Guide was moving forward with strategies for implementing the Draft Guide. Riber asked the SFCRMP for assistance with research, monitoring questions and testing the assumptions for the standards and guidelines for the AMA. There was a comment/input/question/answer period. 3.0 ,UPDATE ON TRRP REAUTHORIZATION - STOKELY Patrick Truman (SFCRMP) stated the TRRP Program was reauthorized for this year and there is a bill to extend it for two more years. The bill has passed the House of Representatives unanimously as well as the Senate Natural Resources Committee, also unanimously, and is due to come before the Senate within the next two weeks. 4.0 1996 CONSERVATION PROJECTS UPDATE - DOYAS Noreen Doyas (TCRCD) reported they have a crew working in the East Fork of the South Fork, which is a cooperative arrangement with the USFS to plant 15,000 riparian plants on decommissioned roads. Later this month another project with the USFS will implement erosion control (water bars) on the South Fork Trail. to date the SFCRMP has received 36 responses to the Trinity Pines mailer. Requests are for road erosion and fuel reduction work. The next step will be to contact the landowners and see what work can be accomplished. Doyas distributed a copy of her draft proposal with the USFS to do a IVA on the upper South Fork, which would possibly open up new areas for more restoration work. A riparian exclusion fence is planned for installation on Big Creek Ranch next month; Butter Creek roads work is continuing; potential water conservation measures on Tule Creek to install a pipe where an irrigation ditch has been leaking; a small road erosion project on Barker Creek Road; on-going monitoring of water quality flows and temperatures; a contract is being signed witn the Klamath Resource Information System (KRIS); a riparian assessment looking over the new aerial photos the USFS had taken to locate other areas that need a more focused approach in implementing riparian work in the Hayfork Basin. 5.0 UPDATE ON NEAP S IMPSON LAND MAPPING - HAGANS Tabled. 6.0 UPDATE OH ROAD DECOMMISSIONING WORKSHOP - WILSON The Road Decommissioning Workshop took place May 8, 1996, in Hoopa. Karen Wilson will report at the June 13, 1996 meeting. 7.0 UPDATE ON FUELS REDUCTION PROJECT - AREY Mary Arey gave an overview on the new Fuels Reduction Project partially funded through Pacific South West Experimental Station (PSW) and the Farm Service Agency (FSA). The SFCRMP requested these funds in two areas: riparian fencing and fuels reduction. They allocated $28,000 for Trinity County. Up to $3,500 can be spent on single ownerships with a $3,500 match from either the District or inkind labor on the part of the landowner. The partnership is between the Watershed Training Center, Watershed training crews, RCD crews, landowners, and the USFS where it fits into the USFS Tom project EA. The fuelbreaks purpose is to reduce fuels along road sides and identified areas along USFS 1 and. The project is a hands-on implementation as we1 1 as a research integrated project. Part of the PSW funding is to obtain the public input on the fire management in the Hayfork Valley. There are eight landowners signed up who own 150 acres. There are 17 to 42 treatable acres in the Hyamponi Road area and Varnier Ranch Road area, the owners of which are concerned about the buffer between their land and the public land. There are planting and reseeding projects planned. This is a demonstration project so people can see the need, as well as how well this type of program can work. 8.0 CDFhG SOUTH FORK MONITORING PLAN - COLLINS Tab1 ed. 9.0 REFLECTIONS, NEXT MEETINGS, June 11, 1996, 10:OO AM, Hayfork Fairgrounds, Hayfork August 6, 1996, 6:30 PM, Burnt Ranch Indian Hall, Burnt Ranch October 15, 1996, 10:OO AM, Hayfork Fairgrounds, Hayfork 10. PUBLIC COMMENTS Patrick Truman reported Steve Dunlap (CDF) is moving to Sacramento at the end of the month. John Rapf stated the work done by Sungnome Madrone and Don Allen (RCAA) on St. John's Loop Road was spectacular. There was a discussion on contracting and licenses.

Meeting adjourned 12:34 PM. Following the meeting a tour was held to review the St. Johns Loop Road work performed by RCAA. South Fork Coordinated Resource Management

Steering Committee

August 28,1996

Dear Trinity Pines Homeowner/Landowner:

Thank you for returning the postcard we sent you this spring that identified your concerns in the categories of roads, fisheries, soil erosion, or forestrylfuels.

After reviewing your responses and talking with many of the owners, a decision was made to perform a road inventory identifying past and potential soil erosion problems. The CRMP is working in conjunction with the Post Mountain Public Utility District in order to achieve the maximum possible benefit. The inventory is expected to be completed this fall. At that time we will contact you with additional information regarding the results, identified projects, the funding available, technical assistance and opportunities for voluntary conservation efforts.

This road erosion inventory will provide data to identify projects to improve the road networks for erosion prevention, culvert upgrades to prevent future drainage problems, roadside fuel reduction, and assistance with long-range management plans.

The goal of the South Fork Coordinated Resource Management Planning Committee is to extend this voluntary conservation program to landowners of the Trinity Pines area, as well as to help restore the fisheries and economies of the South Fork Trinity River.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call our office.

Patrick Truman SFCRMP Coordinator

SOLTI1 FORK TRlSrrY RIVER CR\IP COORDIYATOR - POSTOFFICE BOX SI - \\OAYERVII.LC. CA - 9I6.62J.SIOI - .. ... South Fork Coordinated Resource Management

Steering Committee

Honorable Bruce Babbitt United States Interior Secretary 1849 C Street NW Washington, DC 20240

RE: Trinity River Task Force Menibersliip Reco~nmendation

Dear Mr. Babbitt: As you are probably aware, HR 2243, tlie Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Reauthorization Act, was signed into law by President Clinton 011 May 15, 1996. The Restoration program is now reauthorized until October 1, 1998, witli several new provisions. Section 3, (a), (3), increases the membership on the Trinity River Task Force to include one individual to be appointed by the Secretary of Interior, in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture, to represent the timber industry. The Soutli Fork Trinity River Coordinated Resource Management Planning Committee (CRMP) has been involved with restoration of the anadromous fishery of the Trinity River Basin for over three years. Our working relationship witli the Trinity River Task Force and its Technical Coordinating Committee provides a unique opportunity in making a recomlnendation for membership on the Task Force. One of our partners in tlie Soutli Fork CRMP from the beginning has been Simpson Timber Company of Arcata, California. Simpson has been a leader in California on developing partnerships witli diverse interest groups, suc11 as tlie Yurok Tribe in tlie lower Klarnatli Watershed, for the mutual benefit of the resources, fish and wildlife. It is witli great pleasure that we recommend Tharon Odell, Simpson Timber Company Resource Manager for California. Mr. Odell has worked for Sinipson the past 12 years and is a 4 year member of the California State Board of Forestry. In this position Mr. Odell was appointed by the Governor to oversee formulation of policies and procedures governing forest management on private timberlands in California. Thank you for -unity to be of assistance.

Patrick Truman SFCRMP Coordinator

CC: Roger Patterson Task Force Chairman

SOUTI! FORK TRISITY RI\'ER CR51P COORDISATOR - POST OFFICE BOX I! - \\'EAVER\'ILLE. CA - 916.623.5101 South Fork Coordinated Resource Management

Steering Committee

June 17, 1996

Honorable Dan Glickman United States Agriculture Secretary 14th Street & Independence Avenue SW Washington, DC 20250

RE: Trinity River Task Force Membership Recommendation

Dear Mr. Glickman As you are probably aware, HR 2243, the Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Reauthorization Act, was signed into law by President Clinton on May 15, 1996. The Restoration program is now reauthorized until October I, 1998, with several new provisions. Section 3, (a), (3), increases the membership on the Trinity River Task Force to include one individual to be appointed by the Secretary of Interior, in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture, to represent the timber industry. The South Fork Trinity River Coordinated Resource Management Planning Committee (CRMP) has been involved with restoration of the anadromous fishery of the Trinity River Basin for over three years. Our working relationship with the Trinity River Task Force and its Technical Coordinating Committee provides a unique opportunity in making a recommendation for membership on the Task Force. One of our partners in the South Fork CRMP from the beginning has been Simpson Timber Company of Arcata, California. Simpson has been a leader in California on developing partnerships with diverse interest groups, such as the Yurok Tribe in the lower Klamath Watershed, for the mutual benefit of the resources, fish and wildlife. It is with great pleasure that we recommend Tharon Odell, Simpson Timber Company Resource Manager for California. Mr. Odell has worked for Simpson the past 12 years and is a 4 year member of the California State Board of Forestry. In this position Mr. Odell was appointed by the Governor to oversee formulation of policies and procedures governing forest management on private timberlands in California. Thank you for the opportunity to be of assistance. Sincerely,

Patrick Truman SFCRMP Coordinator cc: Roger Patterson Task Force Chairman

SOUTH FORK TRINITY RlVER CRMP COORDINATOR - POST OFFICE BOX 81 - WEAVERVILLE. CA - 916.623.5101 Coordinated Resource Management and Planning CRMP Annual Conference Brainstorming Summary 24 May 1996

The brainstorming session of the CRMP Annual Conference consisted of an hour-long, open microphone exchange between all interested participants, both agency and non-agency. No limitations were placed on the discussion, although the theme presented was, "What Do You Need from the CRMP Council?" The goals was to allow people to air their personal concerns to guide future action by the CRMP Council; describe a problem and ask for help from others who have handled similar issues, ask questions, make recommendations, etc. Please excuse any slight adjustments of the comments due to transcription error. Following is a summary of comments made: Speaker Comment ? Wants agencies to come to the field to help define problems and make recommendations. Diana 1. "Serving the people" is important but other agency "regulatorsN are serving a different Jacobs "people" than others. 2. Hook up the agency people directly with the landowners so they agencies can see the problems. Plan meetings in an informal atmosphere to get to know each other.

Lynda 1. 1 .Get landowners onto the task forces. Carinalli 2. Show the positive side of immigrant workers to emphasize how they are helping our economy and acting as a resource. Get this information to congress and state leaders. 3. Concerned about private property loss of rights. Through the vernal pool task force, it shows that they can't do what the regulators want. 4. Hold night meetings for public outreach. Many landowners cannot attend during the day. 5. Enjoyed the casual dinner at the CRMP Conference. It's an example of how to get people together. 6. Private landowners need funding, too, in order to keep up land improvemenu.

Bill 1. Happy to see farming and environmental awareness coming together. lohnson 2. Having a new agency person go out and be critical of private landowners is offensive. 3. Landowners aren't sure where they will end up-they need help with fencing, storm restoration, ecc.

Nettie 1. Wants to see more CRMP people at these conferences (vs. Agency people) Drake 2. If landowners came to this conference, they would see that agencies care. (They don't see that now.) 3. Agency people and others should bring landowners wirhyou to get them involved. 4. Needs help with her CRMP-How do you get landowners involved and prevent them from feeling threatened? 5. Landowners refuse to meet with her because "CRMP" is attached to her name.

Tom 1. Held a meeting and kicked all the agency people out of the room to allow the landowners Schott to discuss their needs among themselves. They need to be able to speak freely. 2. Note that agencies were not left out of the "process," but this gave the landowners to get their ideas heard and utilized.

Rich Casale 1. Working with 6 CRMPs in the last 2 years. 2. They set ground rules for agency involvement at meetings: no badges, no uniforms, not even suiu. Each person comes in as an individual. 3. Don't hold meetings in government centers-use parks, schools, people's homes, community centers-to emphasize the unbiased nature of the meeting. - 4. Have the landowners and residents set the agenda (even if the agency types it up and copies it) so it is developed with their ideas. 5. Tours and field trips to the resource sites are well attended. Try to do this with each new project to acquaint people with the area and issues. 6. Set up a simple activity, like a creek clean up, that can get people active and involved right away. 7. The CRMP newsletter is a forum that can be used to share ideas throughout the state. 8. The CRMP Memorandum of Understanding must filter down to the field staff level, otherwise field staff may not attend meetings or participate in the CRMP. They need to understand their agencies support the activity. .

Karen 1. When they hold public meetings, people can air their concerns, and more importantly, Purtell there is follow up to those concerns. 2. Listen to the problem, then do a quick small project. 3. They are struggling with trying to address concerns of strapped government agencies when they have so many CRMP groups in one area. How to give each group attention and time for meetings when there are so many pulling on the same staff resources?

Peter Otis 1. If anyone is interested in getting a Web page together, he'd like to create one.

Greg Bates 1. They're trying to create a watershed management process and hears that CRMP could work well. 2. How to get people together-not just large land owners and agriculture-but also people sitting on land waiting to develop it (who may not be interested in resource protection.)

Rich 1. It is important to involve local county supervisors and city council in the process. Gresham Lisa 1. CRMP Handbook and CRMP Connection newsletter will be on line soon, along with other Taricco information useful to groups. The CRMP Council will have a homepage on the Internet. It's planned for this summer.

Peter Otis I. Local agency involvement is critical, specifically for planning. 2. You want to foster communication and cooperation.

Bob 1. Outreach is important to reach landowners and reduce ignorance, calm concerns. Gilbraith Kristen 1. They're struggling with a number of watersheds. Schroeder 2. Is it better to do many small CRMPs or to join them together into a larger group?

Jack 1. There are 9 regional water control boards in the state. Hodges 2. They have mainly been regulatory in the past, but policies are changing to improve involvement. 3. "Watershed Quality Management lnitiative" shows that they are changing and want to work cooperatively to help satisfy needs. 4. bkfor a copy of the lnitiative and show them that you're interested. (Not in final draft form yet.)

Ann 1. Concerned about biomass in the Berkeley hills. What is being done to handle this? Maxwell Marc 1. A good networking tool is already available in the California Watershed Projects Inventory. Hoshovsky It includes 300 projects on line (including CRMP group information). E-mail address: hnp://ice.ucdavis.edu

Lisa Woo 1. Concerned about spring development-water to keep livestock out of the creeks. Shanks 2. There are too many regulations for the landowners working on this! '3. There are permit costs, forms, multiple agency requirements ... 4. Can Environmental Protection Agency help facilitate making this process easier? 1 lovita 1. Spent much time over the past year in the Los Angeles basin. Pajarillo 2. San Diego and Los Angeles are interested in CRMP but don't know how to do it. 3. Can Northern California help Southern California get going and share information?

If you have comments or concerns about the above summary, please contact Lisa Taricco, CRMP Coordinator, at 9 1 6-447-7237. I -.CRMP Califomia Coordinated Resource Management and Planning 801 K Sueet Suite 13 18 S~crarnenro California 958 14-3500 9141447-7237 Fax 916/447-2532 Resolutions of the 1996 Executive Council Meeting The Coordinated Resource Management and Planning (CRMP) Technical Advisory Council (TAC) offered five proposals to the Executive Council at the CRMP Annual Conference on May 24, 1996. The Executive Council's recommendations are noted below.

Executive Council in attendance: (Acting Chair) Al Wright, for Ed Hastey, Diana Jacobs, for Robert Hight, State Lands Commission US Bureau of Land Management Susan Cochrane, for Jacqueline Schafer, Pat Meehan, for Elin Miller, Dept. of Conservation Dept. of Fish and Game James A. Lawrence. for Lynn Sprague, US Forest Service Joel Medlin, for Wayne White, US Fish and Wildlife Service Dell Tucker, for Roger Patterson. US Bureau of Reclamation Robert Peyton, for W. R. Gomes, Karl Winkler, for David Kennedy, Dept. of Water Resources University of California Cooperative Extension Rich Casale, for Hershel Read, Julie Spezia, for David Vertin, Natural Resources Conservation Service California Association of Resource Conservation Districts Alisa Greene, for Felicia Marcus, ; US Environmental Protection Agency

CRMP Re!$stw The CRMP TAC proposed to change the CRMP Registry to a CRMP Inventory and utilize the California Watershed Projects Inventory, a collaborative effort led by the University of California at Davis, Division of Environmental Sciences, for tracking the data. The CRMP Inventory will continue to collect specific information from the watershed moups. There would, however, no longer be a unique CRMP registry number assigned to each group. b Unanimous acceptance of the proposal. Southern California Conference The CkWTAC proposed to produce a one- or two-day conference to be held in the Southern California region. The -0nference would highlight CRMP and increase the use of the process in that region. Discussion emphasized the involvement of other sponsors for the activity, and contact and coordination with other groups who may be holding similar informational conferences in the region. Unanimous acceptance of the proposal. One Year Extension of CRMP Chair Position The CRMP TAC proposed to extend the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection's (CDF) Chair position. The Chair position of the CRMP TAC and Executive Council would be extended for an additional year before transferring the lead position to another signatory agency. The transfer was proposed to occur at the annual conference in the spring of 1997. Discussion included verification that the CA Dept. of Forestry was committed to accepting this extension. Unanimous acceptance of the proposal. Revised CRMP Handbook The CRMP TAC proposed ratification of the California CRMF Handbook, revised May 1996. (Note: the frnal printed revision carries the date of June 1996.) Unanimous acceptance of the proposal. CRMP Simatories to the Memorandum of Understandinq The CRMP TAC proposed that the Executive Council allow other organizations to become signatory to the January 11, 1990, Memorandum of Understanding for CRMP in California. It was also recommended that an Executive Council Member be appointed to head such a task group. i)iscussion included a listing of potential groups to approach. The list would be completed more fully. A letter from Richard Wilson,CA Dept. of Forestry, would be sent to agencies after a review and revision of the list. Unanimous acceptance of the proposal. MEMORANDUM

DATE: May21, 1996

TO: Barry Collins - CDFkG Arcata Office

FROM: Jim Spear 1 Patrick Truman Soutli Fork CRMP Tech~iicalCommittee (SFCRMP) Trinity County Resource Conservation District (TCRCD)

RE: South Fork Fisheries Monitoring Proposal

CC: Russell Smith, Mike Orcutt, Eric Johnson, Ar~ioldWhitridge

Tlie SFCRMP Technical Comniittee and the TCRCD would like to offer their assistance to CDF&G1sArcata office (Inland Fisheries Division) regarding their 1996 South Fork Trinity River Monitoring Proposal submitted to the Bureau of Reclamation and the Trinity River Restoration Program. Since there is an immediate need to begin field work in order to acco~nplishproposed tasks and collect meaningful data, the SFCRMP and TCRCD are offering the needed personnel to assist the CDF&G project biologists with implementation of their proposed study to assess current salmon and steelhead populations in the Soutli Fork Trinity River.

Tlie TCRCD could allocate funds to provide the technicians necessary to assist CDF&G in the following tasks: 1) deployment and operation of outmigrant traps in Hayfork Creek and the mainstem South Fork; 2) deployment and operation of immigrant weir at Gates Road; 3) surveys and tag recovery efforts. The SFCRMP has the commitment of resource professionals from NRCS, USFS, and TCRCD willing to assist CDF&G with specific tasks to facilitate project success. This could include evaluation of field conditions for timely initiation of data collection as well as providing assistance with other field operations and quality control.

We view this offer as a contingency plan for CDF&G1sSouth Fork Project in light of continued difficulties between CDF&G and BOR with finalizing the cooperative, signed agreement needed before funds are released and your office can move forward with the proposed work plan.

SOUTH FORK TRlSlN IU\'ER CRtlP COORDIXATOR - POST OFFICE BOX #I - WUVERVILLE. CA - 916.623.5IOI South Fork Coordinated Resource Management

Steering Committee

May 7, 1996

J Joyce Anderson, District Ranger South Fork Management Unit Shasta-Trinity National Forest Post Office Box 159 Hayfork, California 9604 1

Dear Joyce:

Please find enclosed the SFCRMP's proposal to conduct a Watershed Analysis in Upper South Fork Trinity River.

I trust that you mill find the approach in concert with Forest Service protocols for conducting a Watershed Analysis. We will be providing an estimate for 1997 construction costs at an upcoming budget subcommittee of the Trinity River Task Force Technical Coordinating Committee.

We look forward to a fruitful and positive partnership with your agency. For questions and comments or any siig,ested changes or modifications to this proposal please contact Jim Spear, NRCS at 623-3991 or Koreen Eoyas. RCD at 623-6004. Thank you for the opportunity to submit this proposal.

Sincerely, \\k Patrick Truman SFCRMP Coordinator

SOUTI1 PORliTRlNlrY RIVER CRSIP COORDIXATOR - POST OFFICE BOX It-\VEAVERVILLE. CA - 916.6U.5101 PROPOSAL TO THE SHASTA-TRZNITY NATIONAL FOREST TO COOPERATIVELY COMPLETE WATERSHED ANALYSIS ON TEIE UPPER SOUTH FORK TRIMiTY RIVER KEY WATERSHED AREA TRINITY RNER RESTORATION PROGRAM AND SOUTH FORK CRMP MAY 7,1996

This is a proposal from the Trinity River Restoration Program (TRRP) and the South Fork Trinity River Coordinated Resource Management Plan (SFCRMP) to the Shasta-Trinity National Forest (STNF) to conduct an interim watershed analysis (WA) in the Upper South Fork Trinity River (SFIT) Basin Key Watershed to identify watershed restoration opportunities. This proposal represents the culmination of several years of ongoing discussions between the TRRP and STNF staff in an attempt to reach consensus on the most exwtious approach to complete on-the-ground restoration activities that would benefit the South Fork Trinity River ecosystem. The proposal includes the rationale for this cooperative effort, standards and procedures that would be followed in the preparation of a WA, a timeline, and a listing of responsibilities for completing a WA in 1996.

A Cooperative Approach to Watershed Analysis Overtures made by the STNF to partner with the TRRP and SFTR CRMP in completing WA are entirely consistent with the Presidents' Forest Plan, which calls for a new approach to land management on public lands, with interagency cooperation as the keystone. This proposal commits the SFCRMP to a partnership that will meet the needs of the STNF for funding and significant staff assistance in completing an interim WA on the Upper South Fork Trinity River key watershed.

Watershed Analysis Prioritization The ongoing Klamath River Basin Analysis, spearheaded by the Region 5 Office of the USFS, has determined that anadromous salmonid fish stocks are at risk and Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS) issues are of paramount importance at the river basin scale. Reid et al. (dated April, 1994) suggests that prioritization of work (for the 1994-1996 period, in particular), should be based on the needs of many agencies and the public, thus it cannot be done effectively by any single agency alone. Direction from the Regional Ecosystem Office states that interagency prioritization of watersheds has three principle features: 1) Consideration of larger scale river basin issues; 2) Consideration for watershed analysis priorities; 3) Interagency coordination at the Provincial level. The Regional Ecosystem OKce (REO) memo instructs participating agencies to identify the manner in which they expect to be involved in WA within the Klamath Province. The RE0 goes on to state that these participating agencies should identify their priority watersheds where they would wish to focus their involvement in watershed analysis. This proposal meets the REO's directive. Specfically outlined in this directive are nine considerations for prioritizing watershed analysis. Among the considerations is that prioritizing of watersheds for analysis is expected to favor those watersheds where completed analysis will lead to opportunities resulting in restoration projects, employment, and recovery of at-risk or Threatened and Endangered Species. Proactive ecosystem restoration has been the guiding principle of the SFTR Coordinated Resource Management Planning effort, a consortium of private landowners, groups, and agencies. A second key consideration is that prioritization should focus on Key watersheds, where ACS objectives outlined in the ROD are of principal interest. A final significant consideration identified by the RE0 is that prioritization of watersheds is expected to emphasize watersheds that meet immediate program needs, watersheds where there is ongoing or high potential for public and private cooperation, and with multiple ownerships that provide for ecosystem strategies supported by a variety of sources. The TRRP assisted the STNF in implementing the 1994 Preliminary Watershed Restoration Assessments in Canyon Creek and the Upper South Fork Trinity River Key Watersheds. The TRRP has also fully participated and supported the Pilot WA completed for the Butter Creek Ecosystem Management area, including funding of many of the important information resources used in the Analysis. Finally, the SFTR CRMP has identified fisheries recovery and protection and economic development as its' principal goals within the SFTR Basin, goals that are entirely consistent with the ecosystem management strategies outlined under the ROD. We believe the past history and the present position of the TRRP, STNF, and CRMP leaves us in an ideal situation to collaborate in reaching the common goals so well defrned by the CRMP group. Guidelines for an Upper SFTR Watershed Analysis The TRRP and SFTR CRMP proposal outlined here would intend to use the August 1995 Version 2.2 Federal Guide for Watershed Analysis as the framework for completion of an Upper South Fork Trinity River Watershed Analysis in FY96. The WA team will be responsible for conducting the level of analysis necessary to support informed decision-making by Land Managers, in full conformance with the Presidents' Forest Plan, as outlined in the ROD. That responsibility includes conducting analyses not yet addressed as modules in the Federal Watershed Analysis Guide As we move forward through this process it will be incumbent that WA teams and Land Managers achieve consensus on a scientifically credible product that satisfies the ROD, yet accepts that WA will be a process that evolves as information gathering and analysis techniques are refrned It is our intention to complete this WA working closely with a few key designated STNF staff, while following explicit guidance provided by the Federal Watershed Analysis Guide referred to above, with particular emphasis on the following guidelines: 1) Use sldlled, htqencyhterdisciplinary teams; 2) This will be a focused WA, targeting restoration opportunities 3) Priorities based on issues and limiting factors; 4) WA will support project development; 5) WA will not be a decision document but will provide the framework for NEPA decisions; 6) WA will be scientifically credible and defensible; 7) WA will be peer reviewed; 8) WA team will support public participation within the guidelines of USFS policy and FACA; 9) WA product will be acknowledged as iterative in nature. Geographic Area for Analysis

We propose to conduct WA on a 170 square mile area of the Upper South Fork Trinity River. The area encompasses the headwaters down to Highway 36 and Forest Glen, excluding Rattlesnake Creek watershed. This amwas selected based on the biological and physical factors which indicate that this portion of the SFTR is in a state of advancing recovery following the 1964 flood. This selection is consistent with the refugia concept outlined by the FEMAT report (1993) and documentation from the RE0 (September 1994 directives). A watershed analysis of this magnitude is strategic for many reasons. Analyses of this scale keeps the analysis relevant to the type of problems it is intended to address. Analysis watersheds need to be large if the COM~~~O~Sbetween land use activities and impacts are to be explained. Disturbance patterns to terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem components are often easier to recognize in large areas rather than smaller areas (Reid et al, Apnl, 1994). The South Fork Trinity River is one of only two Klamath Basin watersheds with historically large populations of Spring chinook salmon. A larger WA facilitates full consideration of over 20 miles of mainstem habitat critical to the success or recovery of this species. Finally, this area is strategic because most of the area is located within overlapping Key Watershed and Late Successional Reserves. The benefits of this proposed WA are many and diverse. Broad-scale watershed analyses facilitate maximum management flexibility for STNF and TRRP ecosystem management goals. Funding to support ecosystem management and restoration objectives is more readily obtained and more effectively utilized when a diversity of projects over a broad geo,pphic area are available. Larger scale WA's, in turn, facilitate greater and more immediate economic benefits to the local economy than WA's completed on a sub-basin by sub-basin approach, and the public can play a greater role in prioritizing projects of particular interest when a larger area is considered. Private land management interests and restoration strategies can most readily be addressed when a variety of ownerships are available to be considered. Finally, the WA proposed here would presumably lead to a significant reduction in costs to STNF over time, ensuring that the future funding of WA's in Key Watersheds would not be an issue of concern to the STNF, TRRP or SFTR CRMP. We recognize that there are four Key Watersheds on the Trinity side of the STNF that are in need of a WA; however, we believe that there is an overwhelming amount of available information collected by the STNF, other state and federal agencies, as well as the private sector, that support identifying the SFl"R as the number one priority Key Watershed on the STNF.

Proposed Scope of Upper South Fork Trinity River WA The proposed WA for the upper South Fork Trinity River will focus on evaluating variables affecting the health and productivity of aquatic and wildlife habitats, as well as determining where restoration opportunities exist which can benefit aquatic and wildlife habitats. The scope of analysis for implementing ecosystem management and the standards and guidelines will address the following issues: 1) Hydrologic and stream channel processes and condition, 2) Riparian reserve processes, function and condition, 3) Upland erosional processes in relation to past management (disturbance) activities, with an emphasis on roads; timber harvest plans and fire histories, 4) Status and carrying capacity of streams in relation to anadromous fisheries populations, as well as spawning and rearing habitat availability, and 5) Status, function and condition of upland forest habitats in relation to ESA terrestrial species. We intend to address the Federal Clean Water Act as well as the Threatened and Endangered Species issues and objectives in conducting the upper South Fork Trinity River WkThe above listed topics for the WA (items 1 through 5) include all the relevant ecological and land disturbance parameters which must be evaluated to determine the potential range of restoration and protection needs for the upper South Fork Trinity River. We propose that prior to completing the draft WA document, but after draft restoration opportunities and protection needs have been identified, USFS personnel should review the list of potential projects for any conflicts with long terrn transportation planning and fuels management issues.

Proposed Responsibilities for a WA The following table lists recommended disciplines necessary to fully integrate the perspectives of all core and secondary support disciplines to conduct a WA that meets the ROD,as outlined by the Federal Guide for Watershed Analysis Version 2.2. The process will identify processes, functions and dysfunctions within the ecosystem, frame issues and key questions, and meet the mandates of NFblA, NEPA, ESA, and CWA as required by the ROD. Core Disci~lines Wildlife Biologist TCRCD Aquatic (Fish) Biologist NRCS 1 USFWS Botanist TCRCD Archaeologist TCRCD Geologist PWA Soil Scientist PWA / NRCS H ydrologist~Geomorphologist PWA Transportation planner STNF

Support Disciplines GIs TCRCD Forester STNF / TCRCD Editor TCRCD Timeline for Completion of WA ']?aflI'~y ~c:~-JI.TIY .JJs~I*L??V W1,'JTT \'IT. T ,F r? It is anticipated that the Team would convene in late July 1996. Team leadership would be provided by PWA and NRCS professionals experienced in Watershed Analysis, working in conjunction with the designated STNF Line Officer.The WA process would begin in June, 1996, and would be completed for peer review by August 31, 1996.

Funding Completion of the WA is viewed by the TRRP and SFCRMP as meeting not only the objectives of the Presidents Forest Plan, but also the long term objectives of the TRRP and SFCRMP. It is proposed that funding for the WA in this portion of a Key Watershed will largely be accomplished by the SFTR CRMP as a cooperative effort to rapidly perrnit the implementation of ecosystem management in this area The CRMP recognizes the multiple priorities the STNF has with regard to Ecosystem Management This proposal intends to extend and compliment the STNF mandates of ecosystem management, with particular focus on the mandates of the Aquatic Conservation Strategy and management in Late Successional Reserves found within the Upper South Fork Trinity River. It is important to emphasize that the completion of the WA will enhance our ability to fund restoration opportunities through the TRRP over the next two years. Without the WA, we would not be able to take advantage of TRRP funds to implement projects deemed necessary.