Cow Creek Watershed Management Plan

Cow Creek Watershed Management Plan
Prepared By:
Western Shasta Resource Conservation District and the Cow Creek Watershed Management Group March 2005
Funded through a grant from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Central Valley Project Restoration Funds
Table of Contents
A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H.
Executive Summary Introduction Water Quality and Quantity Fisheries Botanical and Wildlife Resources Fire Prevention and Fuels Management Education and Outreach Plan Participants
1 4 6 9 11 13 17 19
KEY CONTACT INFORMATION Cow Creek Watershed Management Group Bob Harris, President (530) 472-1436 P. O. Box 158, Whitmore, CA 96096 [email protected] Western Shasta Resource Conservation District 6270 Parallel Road, Anderson, CA 96007 (530) 365-7332 Fax 365-7271 [email protected]
COW CREEK WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN

A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Watersheds contain vast resources important for wildlife, regional economies, and local communities. As a result, the concept of watershed management should be to evaluate, prioritize and carry out actions that result in beneficial outcomes for the entire watershed. The goal of watershed management planning should be to ensure that decisions and actions are guided through the integration and coordination of science, the needs of the local communities and the overall health of the watershed. The integration of science and management can be best achieved through the use of adaptive management. The process of adaptive management strengthens long-term management actions through the addition of science integrated into actions taken within the watershed. Adaptive management provides a structured analysis of actions, which provides managers with the ability to modify actions to obtain the desired outcomes. A watershed approach to management acknowledges that there is a direct relationship between different resources within a watershed, and the overall health of the watershed. An example of this are practices to increase water quality and quantity, which can have a direct positive benefit to fisheries as well. Increased water quality and quantify can be achieved by modifying vegetation, encouraging restoration activities, modifying water use practices and education of landowners. The Cow Creek Watershed Management Group (CCWMG) works within the 275,000-acre Cow Creek Watershed, a tributary of the Sacramento River in Shasta County, which contains 6 major tributaries with a combined length of 164.4 river miles. The CCWMG is focused on improving the watershed while maintaining viable timber and agricultural industries. The CCWMG mission is To use the resources in the Cow Creek Watershed in a way to meet the needs of today without infringing on the needs of future generations. The desired outcomes of actions taken by the CCWMG are to promote a healthy, diverse, resource based local economy, education of the community about the value of wise watershed management, promotion of a safer watershed, and to maintain and enhance the water quality, fisheries, wildlife and wildlife habitat of the watershed, promote the removal of invasive exotic vegetation, and to preserve the rural characteristic of the watershed. To obtain desired outcomes, the CCWMG works in partnership with the Western Shasta Resource Conservation District to fund continuing watershed management activities by obtaining grants, commitments from long-term funding sources, cost sharing and individual initiatives. A key component of this is the encouragement of the community to understand, support, and become more involved in the goals and activities of the CCWMG. This Management Plan gives guidance on future watershed management through defined actions to be taken that meets the CCWMG mission statement and desired outcomes. Direction given in this document was derived through the formation of a Technical Advisory Committee with participation from the CCWMG, local landowners and businesses, state and federal agencies, and through a public review process that allowed stakeholder input and direction. This management plan outlines specific steps to be taken in five categories water quality and quantity, fisheries, botanical and wildlife resources, fire prevention and fuels management, and education and outreach to enhance the Cow Creek Watershed.
WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY Water quality and quantity are cornerstones of watershed health. Fecal coliform bacteria and temperature are the primary concerns within the watershed as a result of the important implications for communities and anadromous fish populations. Currently Little Cow Creek, Oak Run Creek, Clover Creek, and South Cow Creek are 303(d) listed as not meeting water quality standards. The current level of water quality and quantity information for the Cow Creek watershed is not adequate to characterize system wide conditions and is insufficient to document long-term trends. By supporting good watershed stewardship, implementation of best management practices and long term monitoring there is expected to be an increase in water quantity and quality. The implementation of focused long-term monitoring for bacteria and temperature that coordinates with other watershed monitoring, is properly analyzed, and is publicly available is a key step that will feed back valuable evaluation of the best management activities to increase water quality and quantity in the Cow Creek Watershed. FISHERIES The Cow Creek Watershed provides habitat for several species of fish, including Chinook salmon and steelhead. Several key factors have been identified that may be limiting the possible improvement of current fish populations, including flow and temperature, and a lack of ladders and screens on diversions for irrigation and power generation use. To enhance native fish populations in the Cow Creek Watershed this plan suggests conducting an inventory of anadromous fish abundance for baseline information and adaptive management feedback, working with willing landowners to install screens and/or ladders on diversions, and investigating ways to increase water flows to provide potential cooler temperatures and to facilitate fish passage. BOTANICAL AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES The vegetation in the Cow Creek watershed has had changes in species composition, diversity and density over time. These changes are primarily the result of intensive grazing, habitat conversion, disruption of the natural fire regime, non-native invasive plant substitution and land management. Wildlife has also been affected by changes in the vegetation component of the watershed, as well as land development, the introduction of nonnative species, and statewide policy decisions. To better understand and enhance existing wildlife resources and preserve the rural open space of the Cow Creek Watershed, inventories are recommended to document existing conditions. Inventories will allow for the development of management/eradication/control strategies for detrimental non-native invasive plant and animal species and the identification and prioritization of habitat enhancement and preservation projects. FIRE PREVENTION AND FUELS MANAGEMENT Fire exclusion and suppression in the Cow Creek Watershed have resulted in a significant increase in fuel loading and potential for catastrophic wildfire. Although it is widely known that current fuel loading is unacceptably high, no detailed local fuel inventories have been completed. This management plan expands strategic fuel reduction planning for the watershed to include the latest CDF Fire Prevention strategy at a community-based level. Actions are identified to minimize damage to property and resources resulting from wildfires, which includes conducting fuel inventories, developing strategic plan maps, increased public support for projects and community education about the importance of fuels reduction, establishing shaded fuel break and creation of community fire safe zones. EDUCATION AND OUTREACH Education and watershed stewardship play a critical role in every aspect of watershed health; objectives to increase watershed awareness are geared to address the other four components of this Watershed Management Plan. Through education and the promotion of good watershed stewardship, and awareness and participation in the activities of the CCWMG there will be an increase in community understanding and awareness of important watershed issues.
CONCLUSIONS The CCWMG, the TAC, and residents and landowners came to agreement on the goals and objectives of the Cow Creek Watershed Management Plan during a series of seven TAC meetings and two community meetings. The Watershed Management Plan is a living document that should be reviewed and updated about every five years. The document contains 25 major objectives that are found in the following sections: OBJECTIVES 6 4 6 6 3 SECTION Water Quality and Quantity Fisheries Resources Botanicals and Wildlife Resources Fire Prevention and Fuels Management Education and Outreach
A total of 93 project goals were identified and of this total, many were detailed with cost estimates and can be found in the appendix of this document. The CCWMG is already implementing focused monitoring activities for water quality and quantity on the main tributaries of the Cow Creek Watershed. Projects that work to decrease the risk of wildfire including a 20-mile long defensive fuel profile zone on the watersheds eastern boundary and increased agriculture and water use efficiency projects are underway. The CCWMG Board of Directors meets monthly in an open forum monthly and holds quarterly community meetings within the watershed to increase the awareness of important issues throughout the watershed.
B.
INTRODUCTION
The 275,000-acre Cow Creek Watershed is a large, generally uncontrolled tributary to the Sacramento River, located in Shasta County on the eastern side of the Sacramento River, downstream of Shasta Lake. The watershed is unique in that land ownership is almost evenly divided between commercial forestland, commercial agriculture, and small rural property owners, with minimum government ownership. The Cow Creek Watershed Management Group (CCWMG) was formed in 1999 with the assistance of the Western Shasta Resource Conservation District (WSRCD). The CCWMG is a non-governmental group of residents, landowners and businesses in the watershed focused on improving the watershed while maintaining viable timber and agricultural industries. Using grant funding, a Cow Creek Watershed Assessment was completed in 2001, which detailed Action Options ranging from water quality improvement and fisheries rehabilitation to land use guidelines. Rehabilitation as used herein includes protection, enhancement, and restoration as appropriate to each situation. In 2003, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service provided a grant through the Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA) Anadromous Fisheries Restoration Program for the completion of a Cow Creek Watershed Management Plan. This plan provides CCWMG Board of Directors guidance for rehabilitation activities and education efforts to address concerns and enhance watershed health. CCWMG has focused the plan on water quality and quantity, fisheries, botanical and wildlife resources, fire prevention and fuel management, and education. A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was formed, consisting of landowners, businesses, CCWMG members and key agencies including US Fish and Wildlife Service, US Natural Resource Conservation Service, Ca. Dept. of Fish and Game, Ca. Dept. of Water Resources, Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board, Ca. Dept. of Forestry, WSRCD, and the Shasta County Fire Safe Council. The TAC developed the management plan and it has been reviewed by the CCWMG Board of Directors and the community at large. Many of the activities defined in this plan will require receipt of public and/or private grants won by the WSRCD, working as partners with the CCWMG. Details of the individual activities will be developed at the time of each specific grant opportunity by a team of CCWMG, WSRCD and necessary support groups. On-the ground activities will require the participation of willing landowners.
C.
WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY
1. Watershed Assessment Conclusions: Water quality parameters identified as being at levels of concern should be monitored to identify more specific problems and possible solutions that can be implemented to maintain the various beneficial uses identified for the watershed. Fecal coliform bacteria concentrations have been found at levels which exceed state standards for protection of water contact recreation. The tributaries that exceeded contact recreational standards are Little Cow Creek, Oak Run Creek, Clover Creek, and South Cow Creek. No data are available to determine the specific origins of the fecal coliform bacteria. High levels of weed and algae growth have been observed in the lower reaches of some Cow Creek tributaries, but it is not known if this is the result of natural factors or due to accelerated nutrient input. Water quality (temperature) and quantity (flow) have important implications for the health of Cow Creek Basin anadromous fish populations (See Fisheries Section). Chinook salmon and steelhead rainbow trout adults and juveniles have access to Cow Creek; however, the lower reaches of the tributaries within the Cow Creek Watershed may have an unsuitable temperature range during the months of May through October. A Shasta College study observed water temperature in the mainstem of Cow Creek exceeded preferred thresholds for salmon from May to October (Hannaford, 2000). The reaches above 2600 feet have lower summer temperatures; however, access to the higher reaches is limited to most salmon and steelhead adults and juveniles by a steep gradient change and geologic features. Water quality studies in the Cow Creek Watershed have not been adequate to accurately characterize water quality conditions throughout the watershed and differences between tributaries. Baseline data is also insufficient to evaluate long-term trends in watershed conditions that may result from future management practice changes and rehabilitation activities. Much of the available water quality data are for discrete locations and, in general, are greater than 20 years old and poorly documented. More recent studies by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board and Shasta College have added to our knowledge of existing water quality conditions. Mitigation efforts designed to remedy concerns should only be undertaken once specific water quality problems have been identified. To gather additional water quality data, the CCWMG embarked on a seventeen-month water monitoring program in June 2004. Twenty-two sampling sites in the Cow Creek Watershed were selected to characterize water temperature and fecal coliform levels in the upper, middle and lower reaches of the five tributaries and mainstem. Stream flow in Cow Creek and its tributaries is typically at very low levels during the summer season, particularly in the middle and lower reaches. This is a combination of natural hydrologic factors and the result of diversion and use for irrigation, recreation, and hydropower. Cow Creek is a fully adjudicated stream. Low flow conditions impact water quality (through concentration of chemical constituents), limit recreational use and aesthetics, and reduce available aquatic habitat. The timing and success of anadromous fish use is largely dependent on available stream flow during the fall for in-migration of adults and the spring for out-migration of juveniles. 2. Prescription: Support landowners in acting as good stewards of water resources within the Cow Creek Watershed through implementation of best management practices, efficient management and wise use of water. 3. Implementation Strategy: CCWMG has identified the following objectives to improve Water Quality and Quantity in the Cow Creek Watershed: Objective WQ-1: Implement focused monitoring on key water quality parameters to define baseline conditions and assess the need for improved management practices and/or rehabilitation.
a.
Implement fecal coliform bacteria (E. coli) monitoring aimed at defining existing bacteria concentrations both seasonally and spatially. (Project underway) Identify potential sources of elevated bacteria concentrations (i.e. Irrigation tailwater discharges, septic systems, urban/residential runoff, and rangeland runoff). Implement temperature monitoring aimed at defining the existing temperature regime both seasonally and spatially. (Project underway) Identify potential sources of temperature increase in the watershed.
b.
c.
d.
Objective WQ-.2: Develop and implement a continuing, long term watershed monitoring program to allow water quality/quantity decisions to be made on a data driven, scientific basis. a. Establish current water quality/quantity conditions, which can be compared against past and future information. (Project underway) Evaluate water quality/quantity stressors where existing conditions do not meet state and federal water quality objectives and are not protective of identified beneficial uses. Track long term changes and trends in water quality/quantity that are expected to result from improved management practices, stream improvement projects, and community education. Parameters to be tracked would include flow, temperature, bacteria, fish and macroinvertebrate populations, riparian and aquatic habitat conditions, and sediment/turbidity.
b.
c.
Objective WQ-3: Develop a Monitoring Coordination Strategy to coordinate CCWMG ambient water quality/quantity monitoring with other monitoring efforts in order to maximize overall knowledge of Cow Creek Watershed conditions. Opportunities for collaboration include: a. water quality and stream condition monitoring by private timber companies, Latour State Forest and power generation companies; b. studies by UC Cooperative Extension relating to water quality, fisheries, and range condition; monitoring of water quality done for the Regional Water Quality Control Boards Irrigated Land Waiver program (project underway); monitoring for various purposes by schools, individuals and local entities, and state/federal resource agencies (project underway).
c.
d.
Objective WQ-4: Establish a process and a center for data storage, data analysis, and public distribution of water quality and quantity and other watershed monitoring information.
Objective WQ-5: Assist in implementing Best Management Practice (BMP) projects in order to demonstrate and evaluate their effectiveness to improve water quality in the Cow Creek Watershed. The following are possible Best Management Practice (BMP) projects designed to improve water quality: a. Irrigation tail-water management. (Project awarded)
b. c. d. e. f.
Control of drainage and discharge from confined animal facilities. Road surface stabilization and drainage improvement. Proper use of home and garden pesticides and fertilizers. Improved irrigation efficiency. Instream flow augmentation/
g. Conservation easements protecting riparian corridors and large land holdings. (Project underway) h. Septic system rehabilitation. i. Improved livestock grazing management practices, including fencing to protect creeks and riparian zones and off-creek watering sources.
j. Stream channel improvements which reduce bank erosion and enhance floodplain k. access and function. Objective WQ-6: Assist in implementing Best Management Practice (BMP) projects in order to demonstrate and evaluate their effectiveness to increase water quantity within the Cow Creek Watershed. The following are possible BMP projects designed to enhance instream flow in Cow Creek Watershed: a. Improved irrigation efficiency. b. Ditch lining and piping. (Project awarded) c. Vegetation removal along ditches. d. Dedication of unwanted/unneeded water rights. e. Purchase of water by public and private entities from willing sellers. f. Use of ground water in lower reaches instead of creek water for irrigation.
g. Reduction of overstocked forest stands and excess vegetation. h. Removal of unused diversions. i. stream channel improvements leading to seasonal water storage in floodplains, wet meadows, and marshes
D.
FISHERIES
1. Watershed Assessment Conclusions: The Cow Creek Watershed provides habitat for several native fish species including fall-run and late-fall-run Chinook salmon, and steelhead. Salmon and steelhead have developed a life history strategy that allows them to spawn downstream of complete fish barriers and have their offspring leave the lower elevations before summer water temperatures become lethal. The native populations of trout and non-game fish above the barriers are augmented by the California Department of Fish and Game with planted trout. Lower elevation reaches support warm-water native and non-native fish species (i.e., sucker, bass, bluegill, etc.). Natural physical barriers limit access to the upper elevations in some of the tributaries. Key factors limiting the possible improvement of current fish populations are: low fall and summer stream flow for adult fish passage lack of ladders for passage over irrigation diversions during low flow conditions lack of screens to protect emigrating juveniles elevated temperatures in the mid to lower reaches of the tributaries for adult passage, spawning success, and juvenile emigration Significant portions of the flows of all tributaries are diverted for irrigation and power use. Few diversions are screened. Pumps in Old Cow Creek and the main stem divert significant additional flows; some pump intakes are also not screened. Few data are available on resident and anadromous fish populations in the Cow Creek Watershed. Available data are sporadic and anecdotal, and trend analysis is unreliable. In general, fish population studies are associated with permitted developments, such as hydropower plants or periodic DFG surveys. Additional studies are needed to develop baseline population data and to determine the benefit of any actions. Additional data is required on the bank stability and impact of sediment on fish habitat in Cow Creek. Limited data is available for spawning gravel quality and quantity. Comprehensive aquatic habitat analyses are also lacking. 2. Prescription: Improve native fish populations in the Cow Creek Watershed by conducting an inventory of anadromous fish abundance, work with willing landowners to install screens and/or ladders on diversions and investigate ways to increase water flows to provide the potential for cooler temperatures and to facilitate fish passage. 3. Implementation Strategy: CCWMG has the following objectives to improve fisheries in the Cow Creek Watershed: Objective F-1: Establish baseline data and a continuing comprehensive monitoring program for anadromous fish populations, enabling biologists to verify abundance/distribution of existing populations, evaluate stressors and track future population trends. a. Collect baseline data via rotary screw traps, snorkel and spawner surveys. Also monitor temperature and flow as they relate to fish abundance (also see water quality/quantity). Compile reports that include annual run size estimates and timing for fall and late fall Chinook salmon and steelhead. Map spatial and temporal distribution of each population relative to temperature and flow.
b.
Objective F-2: Rank diversions by impact on fisheries and develop a program to financially assist landowners to install screens and ladders.
a.
Conduct a diversion characteristics inventory. Data will include the capacity of diversion in cubic feet per second, location, need and presence/absence of screen and/or ladder. Rank unscreened diversions by impact. Conduct a screen and/or ladder demonstration project on a few diversions and monitor the results. (Project awarded)
b.
Objective F-3: Rank pumps by impact on fisheries and develop programs for screening pump intakes. a. b. Conduct a pump intake inventory similar to the strategy described for 3.2. Conduct a fish screen demonstration project on a few pumps and monitor the results. (Project awarded)
Objective F-4: Implement actions to increase instream flow, particularly during the fall and spring migration periods (see Water Quality/Quantity Section 3.6 for options to increasing stream flow).
10
E.
BOTANICAL AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES
1. Watershed Assessment Conclusions: Botanical and wildlife resources, a key component in watershed health and function, must be treated as an integral part of the overall management plan. Botanical: The vegetation in the Cow Creek Watershed has changed significantly in the last 100 years. These changes include changes in species composition, diversity and density. Changes have resulted primarily from; intensive grazing or conversion of habitat, disruption of natural fire regime, non-native plant substitution and land management. Vegetative structure becomes denser, both vertically and horizontally, at increased elevation. Although general vegetative mapping is available from many sources, the resolution is insufficient to address the needs for management input or to assess the success of inputs. Inventory and mapping is needed for; non-native invasive plants, riparian corridors, brush density in foothill grassland areas and brush and ladder fuel density in coniferous forests. Wildlife: Wildlife populations in the Cow Creek Watershed have been modified by changes in vegetation management and diversity, development, introduction of non-native species and statewide policy decisions. However, little watershed-specific information is available. No available reports, with the exception of deer data showing a declining population, are supported by infield monitoring. Several non-native species exist in the watershed including wild turkey, feral pig, and elk. 2. Prescription: Work to better understand existing wildlife resources, and to enhance native plant and animal resources to preserve the rural open space of the Cow Creek Watershed. Activities include; conduct inventories to document existing conditions, develop management/eradication strategies for detrimental non-native invasive plant and animal species, identify and prioritize habitat enhancement and preservation projects. 3. Implementation Strategy: CCWMG has the following objectives to promote the health of native plant and animal species in the Cow Creek Watershed: Objective BW-1: Conduct vegetation inventories to better understand existing conditions and trends. Inventory and trend data will include: a. b. c. Detrimental non-native plant species and noxious weeds . Brush and ladder fuel density and invasion into coniferous forests. Riparian vegetation.
Objective BW-2: Increase knowledge of the sensitive botanical and wildlife species in the watershed. a. Develop comprehensive monitoring programs for populations of sensitive plant and wildlife species to monitor trends over time. Objective BW-3: Protect existing riparian corridors and encourage the rehabilitation of degraded riparian corridors. a. Conduct a riparian health and habitat assessment inventory including a mapping and inventory program to identify riparian communities and areas where native communities could be reestablished. Conduct long-term monitoring to measure the improvements and changes over time as a result of management plan implementation.
b.
11
c.
Rehabilitate riparian habitat with projects that are adaptively integrated with other goals of the management plan. Develop a list of best management practices to increase riparian health and encourage landowner implementation. Encourage the use of conservation easements as a method of conserving valuable wildlife resources and critical habitats.
d.
e.
Objective BW-4: Quantify, locate and develop management strategies for non-native plant and animal species. a. Assess current levels of detrimental non-native plants and animals, including population assessments to establish locations and trends useful for management. Develop management strategies for either eradication or control of identified detrimental non-native species. Develop a strategic plan for preventing other detrimental nonnative species from entering or leaving the watershed. Develop a list of best management practices to reduce detrimental non-native species from entering and colonizing the watershed and encourage landowner implementation.
b.
c.
d.
Objective BW-5: Conserve existing oak woodlands and support projects that enhance oak woodland health. a. Develop a program to educate landowners in the lower watershed on oak woodland regeneration and conservation issues. (Project underway) Assist interested landowners in obtaining cost share opportunities for oak conservation on their property.
b.
Objective BW-6: Utilize fuel management to increase wildlife habitat quantity and quality. a. Educate landowners on the benefits of a prescribed fire program that will enhance forage, benefit wildlife by establishing early successional vegetation and reduce potential effects caused by wildfire. (Project underway)
12
F.
FIRE PREVENTION AND FUELS MANAGEMENT
1. Watershed Assessment Conclusions: The past 100 years of fire exclusion have resulted in significant fuel loading and potential for catastrophic fire. Although it is widely known that current fuel loading is unacceptably high, no detailed local fuel inventory is available. 2. Prescription: The plan for Fire Prevention and Fuels Management is based on the Cow Creek Watershed Strategic Fuel Reduction Plan (WSRCD, SHN Consulting, December 2002) and the Backbone Ridge Defensible Fuel Profile Zone Final Plan (WSRCD, SHN Consulting, December 2002), but has been expanded to include the latest CDF Fire Prevention strategy. The plan is to identify actions needed to minimize damage to property and resources resulting from wildfires, which includes conducting fuel inventories, developing strategic plan maps, increase public support for and community education about the importance of fuels reduction. To enhance the success of this plan, the CCWMG is also the Cow Creek Fire Safe Council and is an active participant on the Shasta County Fire Safe Council. Definition of Terms: A shaded fuelbreak is removal of understory and ladder fuels and breaking up continuous crowns in the overstory. A fuel reduction project is an extension of defensible space that encompasses large areas around improvements or communities. Fuel reduction projects are constructed using the same techniques as shaded fuelbreaks, but are done on a larger scale. A landscape level fuel reduction project refers to the treatment (reduction) of fuel in blocks of large acreages that results in the modification and reduction of heavy fuel load continuity.
3. Implementation Strategy: CCWMG will take the following steps to improve fire safety and reduce the existing fuel load within the Cow Creek Watershed: Objective FP-1: Develop a watershed fuels inventory. Map vegetation cover types and the distribution of these types within the watershed including vegetation relative to slope, aspect, elevation and land use. Objective FP-2: Implement shaded fuelbreak and community fuel reduction projects using a mixture of equipment and handwork, utilizing commercial timber harvest, biomass harvest, chippers, masticators, and other ground based equipment. Shaded fuelbreak projects include: S (a) Oak Run Road Fuelbreak an 18.0-mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the intersection of Highway 299 and Oak Run Road and running south to Palo Cedro. Note: portions of this fuelbreak are situated in grasslands, and will not require treatment. S (b) Oak Run to Fern to Whitmore Road Fuelbreak a 16.2 mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the intersection of Oak-Run-Road and Oak-Run-to-Fern-Road, looping around to Fern, then continuing on to Fern Road West to the intersection of Whitmore Road. This fuelbreak is located in an area where few fuel reduction activities have been implemented. Note: portions of this fuelbreak are situated in grasslands, and will not require treatment. S (c) Fern Road East Fuelbreak a 7.7-mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the intersection of Tamarack Road and Fern Road East, and ending at the intersection of Fern Road East and Oak-Runto-Fern-Road. This fuelbreak runs perpendicular to prevailing winds, and establishes a fuelbreak between the lower-lying grass and oak woodland areas and the timbered slopes above the road.
13
S (d) Phillips Road Fuelbreak a 7.3-mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the intersection of Buzzards Roost Road and running south to the intersection of Oak-Run-to-Fern Road. This provides another north to south fuelbreak that is situated predominantly within mixed conifer forests and runs perpendicular to prevailing winds. S (e) Buzzards Roost Road Fuelbreak a 6.0-mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the intersection of Highway 299 near Round Mountain running southwest to the intersection of Oak Run Road. S (f) Bateman Road Fuelbreak a 12.5-mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at its intersection with Tamarack Road and running to the eastern-most boundary of Latour State Demonstration Forest and the headwaters of the watershed. It provides an east to west fuelbreak through commercial timberlands that can have extremely active fire behavior and very high fire severity. The west end of the fuelbreak is the primary priority; the east half is of secondary priority as it is situated mid-slope in a canyon, which is not a advantageous location for a fuelbreak. S (g) Ponderosa Way Fuelbreak a 5.5-mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the intersection of Whitmore Road and Ponderosa Way and running south to the ridgeline between South Cow Creek and Bear Creek. This maintains an existing and effective fuelbreak on the southern end of the watershed and provides a connecting link in the cross-watershed fuelbreak system, which is perpendicular to prevailing winds. S (h) Tamarack Road Fuelbreak an 11.0-mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the intersection of Whitmore Road and Fern Road East and running northeast to the watershed boundary. This fuelbreak runs through the southeastern portion of the watershed, and provides protection to forest resources in the upper watershed. S (i) Whitmore Road Fuelbreak a 17.0-mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the community of Millville and running east to the intersection of Fern Road East and Tamarack Road, just east of the community of Whitmore. This fuelbreak provides a significant northeast to southwest fuelbreak from Millville to Whitmore, effectively bisecting the southern one-third of the watershed. The high priority portions of this fuelbreak include a short stretch near the Go Away Ranch and from the Old Cow Creek crossing at Whitmore Road, east to Whitmore. The lower half of this fuelbreak is a low priority, because fuel load conditions are low. Note: portions of this fuelbreak are situated in grasslands, and will not require treatment. S (j) Highway 299 Fuelbreak a 25.0-mile long northeast to southwest running shaded fuelbreak that cuts through the northern most portion of the watershed and provides a key location for fire suppression activities. S (k) Backbone Ridge Defensible Fuel Profile Zone (DFPZ) A 24.0-mile (DFPZ) along Backbone Ridge, which divides the Cow Creek and Pit River watersheds; using Backbone Ridge Road as the centerline. (Project underway) Community Fuel Reduction Projects include: C (a) Round Mountain Community Fuel Reduction Project The Cow Creek Fire Safe Council (CCFSC) will assist the Round Mountain Community with the planning and implementation of fuel reduction activities around the community to include Cedar Creek School, the Round Mountain Community Center and Halcomb Cemetery.
14
C (b) Oak Run Community Fuel Reduction Project The CCFSC will assist the Oak Run Community with the planning and implementation of fuel reduction activities around the community to include the post office, the shopping center and Oak Run Elementary School. C (c) Whitmore Community Fuel Reduction Project The CCFSC will assist the Whitmore Community with the planning and implementation of fuel reduction activities around the community to include Whitmore School, the post office, the store, the Volunteer Fire Department and the Community Center. C (d) Millville Community Fuel Reduction Project - The CCFSC will assist the Millville Community with the planning and implementation of fuel reduction activities around the community to include the Volunteer Fire Department, the Masonic Lodge, and Millville School. C (e) Bella Vista Community Fuel Reduction Project The CCFSC will assist the Bella Vista Community with the planning and implementation of fuel reduction activities around the community to include the post office and the Volunteer Fire Department. C (f) Jones Valley Community Fuel Reduction Project The CCFSC will assist the Jones Valley Community with the planning implementation of fuel reduction activities around the community to include the Hidden Valley Store and the Jones Valley Subdivision. Objective FP-3: Encourage the use of landscape level fuel reduction projects to modify fire behavior and intensity and make large fire events easier to control: a. Encourage the use of controlled burning and biomass as methods of reducing the fuel load throughout the watershed. (Project underway) Encourage landowner participation in programs including the CDF Vegetation Management Program for cost effective solutions to landscape level fuel reduction. (Project underway) Use landscape level projects to set priorities for fuelbreaks and community fuel reduction projects.
b.
c.
Objective FP-4: Continue educating the community on the importance of fuels reduction, the construction and maintenance of fuelbreaks, and landscape-level fuel treatment zones. a. See the Education section of this plan for details.
Objective FP-5: Facilitate community implementation discussions at local community locations. a. The need for public education and support for fire safe clearance around structures, for fuel reduction work in general, and for regulatory relief of smoke management and forest practice rules. (Project underway) The relative importance of fuel breaks, community fuel reduction projects and landscape level fuel treatment zones Fuel treatment methods, combinations, limitations for differing vegetation cover types, and the importance of maintenance following treatment Display and use the Fire Safe Trailer to stimulate conversation centering on Fire
b.
c.
d.
15
Prevention and Fuels Management. (Project underway) e. f. g. Fire history. Fire weather. Landowner awareness of fuel reduction methods including the use of thinning, grazing, and the proper use of herbicides by trained personnel, hand clearing, mechanical clearing, mastication, and prescribed fire.
Objective FP-6: Maintain existing fuelbreaks for long-term benefit and protection of investments. a. Educate and encourage private landowners with completed fuel reduction work on their property to continue with the necessary maintenance and upkeep, and improve neighborhood fuel reduction coordination and cooperation. Develop a maintenance schedule for implemented fuel reduction projects, including mapping of all existing fuel reduction projects and recent fires, compiling the dates each project was completed, and periodic visual surveys to check existing conditions of each fuelbreak project.
b.
16
G.
EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
Education plays a critical role in every aspect of watershed health, and as such, education objectives will be geared to address the other four components of this Watershed Management Plan: Water Quality and Quantity, Fisheries, Botanical and Wildlife Resources, and Fire Prevention and Fuels Management. 1. Watershed Assessment Conclusions: Education and Outreach was not included in the Cow Creek Watershed Assessment. 2. Prescription: Promote good watershed stewardship, in part through awareness of and participation in the activities of the CCWMG. Increase overall community understanding and awareness of important watershed issues. 3. Implementation Strategy: CCWMG will take the following steps to conduct education and outreach projects in the Cow Creek Watershed: Objective EO-1: Promote awareness of and increase participation in CCWMG by showing the relationship between CCWMG projects and the resulting benefits to Cow Creek watershed residents, businesses and industries. a. Develop public outreach programs to educate Cow Creek watershed residents about the efforts of the CCWMG to maintain and improve Cow Creek watershed health. (Project underway) Increase posting of Cow Creek watershed maps and signage throughout the watershed and particularly near CCWMG projects.
b.
Objective EO-2: Promote, provide and facilitate watershed management education and outreach opportunities. a. Facilitate classroom, field workshops and exhibits at community events, to educate Cow Creek Watershed landowners and residents about Best Management Practices (BMPs) in relation to common land use practices. Provide information and demonstrate BMPs for a variety of topics including: i. ii. iii. iv. v. Fire safety. (Project underway) Proper septic system design, use and testing. Noxious weed identification and control. (Project underway) Proper use of fertilizers and pesticides. Management of impervious surface runoff and other hazardous runoff to creeks. Water conservation. Fish passage needs. (Project underway)
vi. vii. b.
Connect landowners with WSRCD, NRCS and UC Extension Service, for assistance with project design and development, farm and ranch plans and grant writing.
17
c. d.
Assemble an agency data base. (Project underway) Develop an agency contact information directory with guidelines that inform landowners which practices require permits. Develop a library of information containing web site addresses, UC Extension Service brochures, classes, areas of expertise, and native plant recommendations. Provide Fire Prevention and Fuels Management educational exhibits of the Cow Creek Fire Safe Council and the Shasta County Fire Safe Council at local events. (Project underway)
e.
f.
Objective EO-3: Promote, provide and facilitate watershed management education and outreach opportunities for area school children. a. Promote, support and encourage watershed management educational activities in community schools within the Cow Creek Watershed. (Project underway) In partnership with willing landowners, WSRCD, and local schools, create a watershed management curriculum, which will encourage conservation of natural resources and preservation of the economic well-being of Cow Creek Watershed residents. Curriculum could include water monitoring, native plant propagation and importance of riparian areas.
b.
18
H. Plan Participants
The Cow Creek Watershed Management Plan was developed using a consensus approach in seven meetings of a formal Technical Advisory Committee and through feedback from two community meetings, with final approval by the Cow Creek Watershed Management Group and the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors for the Cow Creek Watershed Management Group represents a cross-section of landowners and residents in the watershed. The board members were: Representing Residential Landowners: Bruce Farrell Susan Goodwin, Vice President Brent Hathaway, Fiscal Officer Dennis Heiman Representing Agricultural Landowners: Virginia Strawn, Secretary Bruce Wendt Bob Harris, President Shannon Wooten Representing Forest Landowners: Jan Caster Len Lindstrand, Jr. Lois Kaufman Vacant Directors at Large: William Farrell William Saffell Bob Moller The Technical Advisory Committee members were: Bob Bailey Natural Resources Conservation Service Mike Berry CA Dept. of Fish and Game Bob Carey W. M. Beaty & Associates Beth Doolittle-Norby Regional Water Quality Control Board Gary Desselle - Western Shasta Resource Conservation District Bob Harris Cow Creek Watershed Management Group Mike Harris - Western Shasta Resource Conservation District Dennis Heiman Regional Water Quality Control Board and Cow Creek Watershed Management Group Aric Lester CA Dept. of Water Resources Len Lindstrand, Jr. W.M. Beaty & Assoc. Tricia Parker U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service Harry Rectenwald CA Dept. of Fish & Game Kathleen Schori CA Dept. of Forestry & Fire Protection Mary Schroeder Western Shasta Resource Conservation District Valerie Shaffer Western Shasta Resource Conservation District Fraser Sime CA Dept. of Water Resources Jack Williamson U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service
19
APPENDIX to the Cow Creek Watershed Management Plan
Prepared By:
Western Shasta Resource Conservation District and the Cow Creek Watershed Management Group March 2005
Funded through a grant from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Central Valley Project Restoration Funds
Table of Contents
I. II Introduction Background 1 1 1 6 7 9 10 11 13 15 19 28 53 59 61 64
III. Project Participants IV. Map of Projects Completed or in Process V. Priority Projects Water Quality and Quantity Fisheries Botanical and Wildlife Resources Fire Prevention and Fuels Management Education and Outreach
VI. Project Cost Estimates Water Quality and Quantity Fisheries Botanical and Wildlife Resources Fire Prevention and Fuels Management Education and Outreach VII. Potential Funding Sources VIII. Key Contacts
I.
Introduction
The Implementation Strategy sections in the body of this management plan define the selected activities to be implemented in the watershed as grant or other funds become available to the CCWMG. The Action Options shown in the Appendix are now of historical interest only, as they have served their purpose of providing a source of activity options for the planning process. Other activity sources used in the planning process include planning and assessments completed since the baseline assessment (December 2001) as well as studies, goals and objectives of county, state and federal agencies that participate in the watershed management of Cow Creek. This appendix contains the complete list of priority action options presented in the Cow Creek Watershed Assessment, November 2001. These options were developed during the assessment to provide a starting point for the development of the Cow Creek Watershed Management Plan and are included herein for better understanding of this plan.
II.
Background
The Cow Creek Watershed Management Group (CCWMG) is a nonprofit organization formed by citizens within the Cow Creek Watershed. The group began meeting in October 1999 under the guidance of an Interim Board of Directors. Initially, there were several organizational questions and concerns that needed to be addressed before the task of applying for grants and facilitating improvements within the watershed could be accomplished. After determining the major concerns for the watershed, the group made the decision to become a 5013C (nonprofit) organization. A key issue to many landowners who participate in watershed groups is to be aware of their property or water rights as changes are made within the watershed by government agencies. A watershed group such as the Cow Creek WMG allows for landowners to be involved at the local level and partner with agencies to carry out monitoring, on-the -ground activity and education.
III. Project Participants A. Cow Creek Watershed Management Group

Vision Statement
A healthy economy in a healthy ecosystem.
Mission Statement
The mission of the Cow Creek Watershed Management Group is to use the resources in the Cow Creek Watershed in a way to meet the needs of today without infringing on the needs of future generations.
APPENDIX: Cow Creek Watershed Management Plan
Desired Outcomes
Conservation: To maintain and enhance the water quality, fisheries, wildlife, and wildlife habitat of the watershed, and promote removal of undesirable invasive exotic vegetation. Safety: To promote a safer watershed, including flood management and fuel reduction for fire safety. Economy: To promote a healthy, diverse, resource-based local economy, including livestock and timber industries, beekeeping, and other agriculture activity, through encouragement of effective management of water, agricultural land, grazing land and timberland. Lifestyle: To preserve the rural character of the watershed by advocating local land use planning, encouraging retention of open space, and promoting good neighborly relations. Education: To educate the community about the value of wise watershed management through watershed assessment and management programs, community forums, watershed programs in the schools, and the creation of a Cow Creek Watershed Resource Center. Community: To encourage the community to understand, support, and become involved in the goals and activities of the Cow Creek Watershed Management Group. Resources: To fund continuing watershed management activities by obtaining grants, commitments from long tem funding sources, cost sharing and individual initiatives.
The Cow Creek Watershed Management Group Board of Directors

The Cow Creek Watershed Management Group is led by a 15-member Board of Directors, all who live within the watershed and bring a unique mix education and experience to the group. The 2004 Cow Creek Board of Directors are: Representing Residential Landowners Bruce Farrell Susan Goodwin, Vice President Brent Hathaway, Fiscal Officer Dennis Heiman Representing Agricultural Landowners Virginia Strawn, Secretary Bruce Wendt Bob Harris, President Shannon Wooten Representing Forest Landowners Jan Caster Len Lindstrand, Jr. Lois Kaufman Steve Henson Directors at Large Jim Rickert William Saffell Bob Moller
Cow Creek Watershed Management Group Membership

The Cow Creek Watershed Management Group is always looking for new members! If you live within the Cow Creek Watershed, you can become a voting member of the CCWMG with a $25 contribution. If you do not live in the watershed but would like to support the group's efforts, you can become an associate member with a contribution of $15. To be placed on a mailing list and receive meeting notices and updates on group activities, email the Cow Creek Watershed Coordinator, James Moller, at [email protected], or call him at 365-7332 ext. 209.
B. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)

Bob Bailey Mike Berry Bob Carey Beth Doolittle-Norby Gary Desselle Bob Harris Mike Harris Dennis Heiman Aric Lester Len Lindstrand, Jr. Tricia Parker Harry Rectenwald Kathleen Schori Mary Schroeder Valerie Shaffer Fraser Sime Jack Williamson NRCS DFG WM Beaty & Associates SWRCB WSRCD CCWMG WSRCD SWRCB / CCWMG DWR WM Beaty & Associates USFWS DFG CDF WSRCD WSRCD DWR USFWS
C. Cow Creek Watershed Management Plan Contributors

Dave Ault Jan Caster Barbara Davis Craig Dowling Eda Eggeman Bruce Farrell Larry Ferero Todd Golder Susan Goodwin Mike Grifantini Morgan Hannaford Rick Hartley Brent Hathaway Loni Henderson Jamie Holmes Lois Kaufman Bob Moller James Moller Mary Pfieffer Virginia Strawn Fred Tulley Paul Uncapher Bill Walker Bruce Wendt Doug Wenham Bob Williams Monte Wooden Shannon Wooten CDF SPI WSRCD / CCWMG DFG CCWMG UC Coop Extension NRCS CCWMG Roseburg Resources Shasta College CDF CCWMG Millville Elementary Millville Elementary CCWMG CCWMG WSRCD Shasta County Agriculture CCWMG CDF Enplan CCWMG CDF CCWMG CDF CCWMG
IV. Map of Projects Completed or In Process
V.
Priority Projects
Water Quality and Quantity

# WQ-1 OBJECTIVE Objective: Implement focused monitoring on key water quality parameters to define baseline conditions and assess the need for improved management practices and/or rehabilitation. Implement fecal coliform bacteria (E. coli) monitoring aimed at defining existing bacteria concentrations both seasonally and spatially. (Project underway) Identify potential sources of elevated bacteria concentrations (i.e. irrigation tailwater discharges, septic systems, urban/residential runoff, and rangeland runoff). Implement temperature monitoring aimed at defining the existing temperature regime both seasonally and spatially. (Project underway) Identify potential sources of temperature increases in the watershed.
a. b. c. d.
WQ-2
Develop and implement a continuing, long-term watershed monitoring program to allow water quality/quantity decisions to be made on a data driven, scientific basis.
a. b.
Establish current water quality/quantity conditions, which can be compared against past and future information. (Project underway) Evaluate water quality/quantity stressors where existing conditions do not meet state and federal water quality objectives and are not protective of identified beneficial uses. Track long term changes and trends in water quality/quantity that are expected to result from improved management practices, stream improvement projects, and community education. Parameters to be tracked would include flow, temperature, bacteria, fish and macroinvertebrate populations, riparian and aquatic habitat conditions, and sediment/turbidity. Develop a Monitoring Coordination Strategy to coordinate CCWMG ambient water quality/quantity monitoring with other monitoring efforts in order to maximize overall knowledge of Cow Creek Watershed conditions. Water quality and stream condition monitoring by private timber. Studies by UC Cooperative Extension relating to water quality. Monitoring of water quality done for the Regional Water Quality Control Boards Irrigated Land Waiver program. Monitoring for various purposes by schools, individuals and local.
c.
WQ-3
a. b. c. d.
WQ-4
Establish a process and a center for data storage, data storage, data analysis, and public distribution of water quality and quantity and other watershed monitoring information.
WQ-5
Assist in implementing Best Management Practice (BMP) projects in order to demonstrate and evaluate their effectiveness to improve water quality in the Cow Creek Watershed. Projects include: Irrigation tail-water management (project awarded) Control of drainage and discharge from confined animal facilities. Road surface stabilization and drainage improvement. Proper use of home and garden pesticides and fertilizers. Improved irrigation efficiency. Instream flow augmentation. Conservation easements protecting riparian corridors and large land holdings. Septic system rehabilitation. Improved livestock grazing management practices, including fencing to protect creeks and riparian zones and off-creek watering sources. Assist in implementing Best Management Practice (BMP) projects in order to demonstrate and evaluate their effectiveness to increase water quality within the Cow Creek Watershed. Improved irrigation efficiency. Ditch lining and piping (Project underway). Vegetation removal along ditches. Dedication of unwanted/unneeded water rights. Purchase of water by public and private entities from willing sellers. Use of ground water in lower reaches instead of creek water for irrigation. Reduction of overstocked forest stands and excess vegetation. Removal of unused diversions. Stream channel improvements leading to seasonal water storage in floodplains, wet meadows, and marshes.
a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i.
WQ-6
a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i.
Fisheries
# F-1 OBJECTIVE Establish baseline data and a continuing comprehensive monitoring program for anadromous fish populations, enabling biologists to verify abundance/distribution of existing populations, evaluate stressors and track future population trends.
a.
Collect baseline data via rotary screw traps, snorkel and spawner surveys. Also monitor temperature and flow as they relate to fish abundance (also see Water Quality and Quantity). Compile reports that include annual run size estimates and timing for fall and late-fall Chinook salmon and steelhead. Map spatial and temporal distribution of each population relative to temperature and flow. Rank diversions by impact on fisheries and develop a program to financially assist landowners to install screens and ladders. Conduct a diversion characteristics inventory. Data will include the capacity of diversions in cubic feet per second, location, need and presence/absence of screen and/or ladder. Rank unscreened diversions by impact. Conduct a screen and/or ladder demonstration project on a few diversions and monitor the results. (Project underway) Rank pumps by impact on fisheries and develop programs for screening pump intakes.
b.
F-2
a.
b.
F-3
a. b.
Conduct a pump intake inventory similar to the strategy described in 3.2. Conduct a fish screen demonstration project on a few pumps and monitor the results. (Project underway) Implement actions to increase instream flow, particularly during the fall and spring migration periods (see Water Quality and Quantity Section 3.6)
F-4
Botanical and Wildlife Resources

# BW-1 OBJECTIVE Conduct vegetation inventories to better understand existing conditions and trends.
a. b.
Inventory and trend data on detrimental non-native plant species and noxious weeds. Inventory and trend data on brush and ladder fuel density and invasion into coniferous forests. Increase knowledge of the sensitive botanical and wildlife species in the watershed.
BW-2
a.
Develop comprehensive monitoring programs for populations of sensitive plant and wildlife species to monitor trends over time.
BW-3
Protect existing riparian corridors and encourage the rehabilitation of degraded riparian corridors. Conduct a riparian health and habitat assessment inventory including a mapping and inventory program to identify riparian communities and areas where native communities could be re-established. Conduct long-term monitoring to measure the improvements and changes over time as a result of management plan implementation. Rehabilitate riparian habitat with projects that are adaptively integrated with other goals of the management plan. Develop a list of best management practices to increase riparian health and encourage landowner implementation. Encourage the use of conservation easements as a method of conserving valuable wildlife resources and critical habitats. Quantify, locate, and develop management strategies for non-native plant and animal species. Assess current levels of detrimental non-native plants and animals, including population assessments to establish locations and trends useful for management. Develop management strategies for either eradication or control of identified detrimental non-native species. Develop a strategic plan for preventing other detrimental non-native species from entering or leaving the watershed.
a.
b. c. d. e.
BW-4 a. b. c.
10
d.
Develop a list of best management practices to reduce detrimental non-native species from entering and colonizing the watershed and encourage landowner implementation.
BW-5 a. b.
Conserve existing oak woodlands and support projects that enhance oak woodland health. Develop a program to educate landowners in the lower watershed on oak woodland regeneration and conservation issues. (Project underway) Assist interested landowners in obtaining cost share opportunities for oak conservation on their property. Utilize fuel management to increase wildlife habitat quantity and quality. Educate landowners on the benefits of a prescribed fire program that will enhance forage, benefit wildlife by establishing early successional vegetation and reduce potential effects caused by wildlife. (Project underway)
BW-6 a.
Fire Prevention & Fuels Management

# FP-1 OBJECTIVE Develop a watershed fuels inventory, map vegetation cover types and the distribution of these types within the watershed, including vegetation relative to slope, aspect, elevation and land use. Implement shaded fuelbreak and community fuel reduction projects using a mixture of equipment and handwork, utilizing commercial timber harvest, biomass harvest, chippers, masticators, and other ground-based equipment. Shaded Fuelbreak Projects: Oak Run Road Fuelbreak Oak Run to Fern to Whitmore Road Fuelbreak Fern Road East Fuelbreak Phillips Road Fuelbreak Buzzards Roost Road Fuelbreak Bateman Road Fuelbreak Ponderosa Way Fuelbreak Tamarack Road Fuelbreak Whitmore Road Fuelbreak Highway 299 Fuelbreak 11
FP-2
S a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j.
k. C a. b. c. d. e. f.
Backbone Ridge Defensible Fuel Profile Zone Community Fuel Reduction Projects: Round Mountain Community Fuel Reduction Project Oak Run Community Fuel Reduction Project Whitmore Community Fuel Reduction Project Millville Community Fuel Reduction Project Bella Vista Community Fuel Reduction Project Jones Valley Community Fuel Reduction Project
FP-3
Encourage the use of landscape level fuel reduction projects to modify fire behavior and intensity and make large fire events easier to control. Encourage the use of controlled burning and biomass as methods of reducing the fuel load throughout the watershed. (Project underway) Encourage landowner participation in programs such as the CDF Vegetation Management Program for cost-effective solutions to landscape level fuel reduction. (Project underway.) Use landscape-level projects to set priorities for fuelbreaks and community fuel reduction projects. Continue educating the community on the importance of fuels reduction, the construction and maintenance of fuelbreaks, and landscape-level fuel treatment zones.
a. b.
c.
FP-4
a.
See the Education section of this plan for details.
FP-5
Facilitate community implementation discussions at local community locations.
a.
b. c.
The need for public education and support for fire safe clearance around structures, for fuel reduction work in general, and for regulatory relief of smoke management and forest practice rules. (Project underway) The relative importance of fuelbreaks, community fuel reduction projects, and landscape level fuel treatment zones. Fuel treatment methods, combinations, limitations for differing vegetation cover types, and the importance of maintenance following treatment.
12
d. e. f. g.
Display and use the Fire Safe Trailer to stimulate conversation centering on Fire Prevention and Fuels Management. (Project underway) Fire history. Fire weather. Landowner awareness of fuel reduction methods, including the use of thinning, grazing, and the proper use of herbicides by trained personnel, hand clearing, mechanical clearing, mastication, and prescribed fire. Maintain existing fuelbreaks for long-term benefit and protection of investments.
FP-6
a.
b.
Educate and encourage private landowners with completed fuel reduction work on their property to continue with the necessary maintenance and upkeep, and improve neighborhood fuel reduction coordination and cooperation. Develop a maintenance schedule for implemented fuel reduction projects, including mapping of all existing fuel reduction projects and recent fires, compiling the dates each project was completed, and periodic visual surveys to check existing conditions of each fuelbreak project.
Education and Outreach

# EO-1 Objective Promote awareness of and increase participation in CCWMG by showing the relationship between CCWMG projects and the resulting benefits to Cow Creek watershed residents, businesses and industries. Develop public outreach programs to educate Cow Creek watershed residents about the efforts of the CCWMG to maintain and improve Cow Creek watershed health. (Project underway) Increase posting of Cow Creek watershed maps and signage throughout the watershed and particularly near CCWMG projects.
a.
b.
EO-2
Promote, provide and facilitate watershed management education and outreach opportunities.
a.
Facilitate classroom, field workshops and exhibits at community events to educate Cow Creek watershed landowners and residents about Best Management Practices in relation to common land use practices, including: Fire safety (Project underway)
13
b.
Proper septic system design, use and testing Noxious weed identification and control (Project underway) Proper use of fertilizers and pesticides Management of impervious surface runoff and other hazardous runoff to creeks. Water conservation. Fish passage needs (Project underway) Connect landowners with WSRCD, NRCS and UC Extension Service for assistance with project design and development, farm and ranch plans and grant writing. Assemble an agency database. (Project underway) Develop an agency contact information directory with guidelines that inform landowners which practices require permits. Develop a library of information containing web site addresses, UC Extension Service brochures, classes, areas of expertise, and native plant recommendations. Provide Fire Prevention and Fuels Management educational exhibits of the Cow Creek Fire Safe council and the Shasta County Fire Safe council at local events. (Project underway)
c. d. e. f.
EO-3
Promote, provide, and facilitate watershed management education and outreach opportunities for area school children. Promote, support, and encourage watershed management educational activities in community schools within the Cow Creek watershed. (Project underway) In partnership with willing landowners, WSRCD, and local schools, create a watershed management curriculum which will encourage conservation of natural resources and preservation of the economic well-being of Cow Creek watershed residents. Curriculum could include water monitoring, native plant propagation, and the importance of riparian areas.
a. b.
14
VI. Project Costs Estimates Water Quality and Quantity

Objective WQ-1: Implement focused monitoring on key water quality parameters to define baseline conditions and assess the need for improved management practices and/or rehabilitation. a. Implement fecal coliform bacteria (E. coli) monitoring aimed at defining existing bacteria concentrations both seasonally and spatially. (Project underway) b. Identify potential sources of elevated bacteria concentrations (i.e. Irrigation tailwater discharges, septic systems, urban/residential runoff, and rangeland runoff). c. Implement temperature monitoring aimed at defining the existing temperature regime both seasonally and spatially (project underway). d. Identify potential sources of temperature increase in the watershed. Objective WQ-.2: Develop and implement a continuing, long term watershed monitoring program to allow water quality/quantity decisions to be made on a data driven, scientific basis. a. Establish current water quality/quantity conditions, which can be compared against past and future information (project underway). b. Evaluate water quality/quantity stressors where existing conditions do not meet state and federal water quality objectives and are not protective of identified beneficial uses. c. Track long term changes and trends in water quality/quantity that are expected to result from improved management practices, stream improvement projects, and community education. Parameters to be tracked would include flow, temperature, bacteria, fish and macroinvertebrate populations, riparian and aquatic habitat conditions, and sediment/turbidity. Objective WQ-3: Develop a Monitoring Coordination Strategy to coordinate CCWMG ambient water quality/quantity monitoring with other monitoring efforts in order to maximize overall knowledge of Cow Creek Watershed conditions. Opportunities for collaboration include: 1. water quality and stream condition monitoring by private timber companies, Latour State Forest and power generation companies; 2. studies by UC Cooperative Extension relating to water quality, fisheries, and range condition; 3. monitoring of water quality done for the Regional Water Quality Control Boards Irrigated Land Waiver program (project underway);
15
4. monitoring for various purposes by schools, individuals and local entities, and state/federal resource agencies (project underway) Objective WQ-4: Establish a process and a center for data storage, data analysis, and public distribution of water quality and quantity and other watershed monitoring information.
Objective WQ-5: Assist in implementing Best Management Practice (BMP) projects in order to demonstrate and evaluate their effectiveness to improve water quality in the Cow Creek Watershed. The following are possible Best Management Practice (BMP) projects designed to improve water quality: 1. irrigation tail-water management (project awarded); 2. control of drainage and discharge from confined animal facilities 3. road surface stabilization and drainage improvement 4. proper use of home and garden pesticides and fertilizers 5. improved irrigation efficiency 6. instream flow augmentation 7. conservation easements protecting riparian corridors and large land holdings (project underway) 8. septic system rehabilitation 9. improved livestock grazing management practices, including fencing to protect creeks and riparian zones and off-creek watering sources. 10. stream channel improvements which reduce bank erosion and enhance floodplain access and function Objective WQ-6: Assist in implementing Best Management Practice (BMP) projects in order to demonstrate and evaluate their effectiveness to increase water quantity within the Cow Creek Watershed. The following are possible BMP projects designed to enhance instream flow in Cow Creek Watershed: 1. improved irrigation efficiency 2. ditch lining and piping (project awarded) 3. vegetation removal along ditches 4. dedication of unwanted/unneeded water rights 5. purchase of water by public and private entities from willing sellers 6. use of ground water in lower reaches instead of creek water for irrigation 7. reduction of overstocked forest stands and excess vegetation 8. removal of unused diversions 9. stream channel improvements leading to seasonal water storage in floodplains, wet meadows, and marshes
16
SUMMARY OF PROJECTS Assist in implementing Best Management Practices projects, education and pilot projects. Pilot projects include one educational seminar per project. Type of Project Low End Cost Ditch Lining, Rock $ 37,003 Ditch Lining, Concrete 182,203 Road Rehabilitation 59,269 Piping/Drainage Control 36,003 Septic Tank/Leachfield/Waste25,220 Water Disposal Total $339,698 1. Education (per seminar) Project Manager Project Coordinator Two Agency Speakers Consultant Speaker Mileage Brochures Flyers/mailings, postage Refreshments Rent hall High End Cost $ 70,505 302,825 76,418 46,325 35,625 $531,698 Low 400 720 320 640 25 150 1,005 250 400 $4,230 High 500 900 480 800 25 200 2,010 350 480 $6,225
8 hrs $50-62/hr 24 hrs @ $30-37.50/hr 8 hrs $40-60/hr 8 hrs $80-100/hr 50 mi @$.50/mi 100 ea $1.50-$2.00 ea 1500 ea $.67-$1.34 ea 8 hrs $50-$60/hr Total
2. Pilot Projects Ditch Lining, Rock, one mile ditch, 4 wide Rock lining 5,280 lf $5-$10/lf Erosion control 2 ea side .5 acres $2,500-$6,000/acre Engineering Project coordinator 40 hrs $30-$37.50/hr Watershed coordinator 24 hrs $50-$62.50/hr Total
25,400 1,212 2,761 1,200 1,200 $32,773
52,800 2,909 5,571 1,500 1,500 $64,280
Ditch Lining, Concrete, one mile ditch, 4 wide Concrete lining 5,280 lf $30-$50/lf $158,400 Erosion control 2 ea side .5 acres $2,500-$6,000/acre 1,212 Engineering 15,961 Project coordinator 40 hrs $30-$37.50/hr 1,200 Watershed coordinator 24 hrs $50-$62.50/hr 1,200 Total $177,973
$264,000 2,909 26,691 1,500 1,500 $296,600
17
Road Rehabilitation, one mile unpaved road to improve, 12 wide Grader rental 2 days$150-$187.50/day 2,400 Subgrade prep.base rock 63,360 sq.ft. $.70-$.88/sq.ft. 44,352 Erosion control 2 ea side .5 acres $2,500-$6,000/acre 1,212 Engineering 4,675 Project coordinator 40 hrs $30-$37.50/hr 1,200 Watershed coordinator 24 hrs $50-$62.50/hr 1,200 Total $55,039
3,000 55,440 2,909 5,844 1,500 1,500 $70,193
Piping/Drainage Control, .25 miles piping to install, 4 PVC 4 PVC installed 1,320 lf $20-$25/lf 26,400 Erosion control 2 ea side .1 acres $2,500-$6,000/acre 303 Engineering 2,670 Project coordinator 40 hrs $30-$37.50/hr 1,200 Watershed coordinator 24 hrs $50-$62.50/hr 1,200 Total Septic Tank/Leachfield/Wastewater Disposal Septic tank, 5,000 gallon installed Piping, 3 PVC installed 500 lf $10-$12.50/lf Distribution box installed 1 $1,500-$1,875 Engineered disposal area 100 lf $12.50-$15.63/lf Erosion control 1 acre $2,500-$6,000/acre Engineering Project coordinator 40 hrs $30-$37.50/hr Watershed coordinator 24 hrs $50-$62.50/hr Total $31,773
33,000 727 3,373 1,500 1,500 $40,100
6,650 5,000 1,500 1,250 2,500 1,690 1,200 1,200 $20,990
8,313 6,250 1,875 1,563 6,000 2,400 1,500 1,500 $29,400
18
Fisheries
Objective 3.1: Establish baseline data and a continuing comprehensive monitoring program for anadromous fish populations, enabling biologists to verify stressors and trends.
a.
Collect baseline data via rotary screw traps, snorkel and spawner surveys. Also monitor temperature and flow as they relate to fish abundance (also see water quality/quantity).
Rotary Screw Traps E.G. Solutions located in Corvallis, Oregon is the only licensed manufacturer of rotary screw traps in the United States. According to company representatives, orders may take several months to fill, since trapping devices are constructed on demand. Operating cost will vary depending upon such factors as the number of traps used, sampling protocol and weather conditions. Fisheries Biologist Dave Vogel (Natural Resources Scientist, Inc., Red Bluff, CA) stated that operating costs can run as high as $20,000/month; this assumes two field technicians working the traps 6 hours a day at a rate of $50/hour, seven days a week. In addition to equipment and personnel costs, the District would be required to obtain an Endangered Species Act Section 10(a)(1)(A) Research Permit from NOAA Fisheries (Attachment A).
Manufacturer
E.G. Solutions P.O. Box 2437 Corvallis, OR 97339 (541) 752-7810 Sales (541) 913-4477 Parts [email protected] www.screwtraps.com
Screw Traps and Trailers Option 1 5ft. Diameter Screw Trap Custom Trailer for 5ft. trap Option2 8ft. Diameter Screw Trap Custom Trailer for 8ft. trap Tethering cable & hardware
Individual Unit Cost $14,000* $2,200*
$17,100* $2,500* $200

*2004 pricing. Estimate an additional 5% for each year after.
19
Snorkel Surveys Until such time that the District identifies specific survey objectives and develops a detailed snorkel survey protocol, the exact costs cannot be determined. However, ENPLAN contacted two firms (see contact information listed below) that specialize in conducting fisheries related research. Both firms indicated that snorkel surveys generally cost $1,000/day; this assumes two field technicians working 10 hour days at a rate of $50/hour. Doug Demko (S.P. Cramer) stated that under ideal circumstances (i.e., adequate flow and convenient access), two snorkelers can survey approximately 8 miles of stream per day. Mr. Demko also stated that depending upon stream conditions and available funds, carcass and redd surveys can be conducted equally as effective on foot or by kayak.
Natural Resource Scientist, Inc. Attn: Dave Vogel P.O. Box 1210 Red Bluff, CA 96080-1210 (530) 527-9587 ext.11 (530) 527-6181 Fax [email protected] www.resourcescientists.com S.P. Cramer and Associates, Inc. Attn: Doug Demko 3188 Wood Creek Drive Chico, CA 95928 (530) 342-9262 (530) 898-9582 Fax [email protected] www.spcramer.com
Temperature Monitoring Although there are many different types of electronic devices available to monitor underwater stream temperatures, ENPLAN selected two systems that were recommended by several fisheries biologists: the StowAway TidbiT and the HOBO Water Temp Pro (Attachment B). Both of these devices are sufficient for collecting water temperature data; however, each has slightly different capabilities, which may be better suited for the Districts needs. Basic component of each system include: 1) Temperature data logger. 2) BoxCar Pro software for processing and analyzing data. 3) Base station used to communicate between the host computer and either the data logger or optic shuttle. 4) Optic shuttle used to retrieve data and re-launch data loggers in the field.
20
Temperature Data Loggers Manufacturer
Data Logger Systems
Individual Unit Cost $119 $80 $14 $199 $412 Total $110 $95 $60 $15 $280 Total*
*Cost does not include the price of notebook computer or Palm PDA device.
Onset Computer Corporation P.O. Box 3450 Pocasset, MA 02559-3450 1-800-564-4377 (508) 759-9100 [email protected] www.onsetcomp.com
Option 1
StowAway TidbiT Temp Logger Optic Base Station BoxCar Pro 3.7 Software Optic Shuttle
Option2
HOBO Water Temp Pro* BoxCar Pro 4.3 Software Infrared Base Station Protective Boot (optional)
* No shuttles available for this model, requires a notebook computer or a Palm PDA device to retrieve data in the field.
Flow Monitoring Stream flow data can be collected from any of existing USGS stations located within the watershed. Should the district decide that any of these stations is inadequate or additional stations are needed, engineering and construction costs can be determined at that time.
b.
Compile reports that include annual run size estimates and timing for fall and late fall Chinook salmon and steelhead. Map spatial and temporal distribution of each population relative to temperature and flow.
Costs associated with compiling reports and mapping the salmonid population distribution cannot be determined at this time; these tasks would likely be included within the overall sampling program developed by the District.
Objective 3.2:
Rank by impact, and develop a program to financially assist landowners to install screens and ladders on existing diversions.
a.
Conduct a diversion characteristics inventory. Data will include the capacity of diversion in cubic feet per second, location and presence/ absence of screen and/or ladder. Rank unscreened diversions by impact of diversion.
Due to the similar nature of Objectives 3.2a and 3.3a, ENPLAN prepared a combined estimate based on the following assumptions: 1) Approximately 281 diversions, pump intakes and reservoirs are present in the Cow Creek watershed according to the Cow Creek Watershed Assessment. 2) Inventory will require advance notification and coordination of landowners.
21
3) One field technician can inventory an average of 5 diversions/ pumps per 8 hour day; therefore, all diversions could be inventoried in 56 days (approximately 450 hours). 4) Mileage reimbursements are estimated at $0.375/mile. Average daily travel is estimated to be 60 miles (round trip from WSRCD office to Oak Run Elementary School) and assumes 56 field days to complete inventory. 5) Office Administrator can enter inventory data into spread sheet at the rate of 10 diversions per hour; therefore requiring 28 hours to enter all diversion data.
22
Diversion and Pump Inventory Task
Hourly Rate
Total Hours
Total
Prepare and distribute letter requesting landowner permission to inventory diversion/intake. Coordination with landowners Develop diversion inventory criteria Conduct inventory Data entry
Materials
35 35 50 50 35 ----
16 56 16 450 95 ----
$560 $1,960 $800 $22,500 $980 $1,260 $104 $40 $28,204
Mileage/Travel Postage for letters Stationery and envelopes for letters

TOTAL COST
b.
Conduct a screen and/or ladder demonstration project on a few diversions and monitor the results.
By conducting an inventory of existing diversions and pumps within the watershed, the District will be able to identify property owners who are willing to participate in screen and ladder demonstration projects (Objectives 3.2b and 3.3b). Until such time, engineering, construction and monitoring costs cannot be determined. However, ENPLAN has identified an organization experienced with assisting landowners in developing such a project; contact information is presented below.
Family Water Alliance Attn: Susan Sutton P.O. Box 365 Maxwell, CA 95955 (530) 438-2026 [email protected] www.familywateralliance.com
Objective 3.3:
Rank by impact and develop programs for screening pump intakes.
a.
Conduct a pump intake inventory. Develop a similar strategy to the strategy described for 3.2 (above) and tailor it to pump intakes.
Refer to discussion for Objective 3.2a.
23
b.
Conduct a fish screen demonstration project on a few unscreened pumps and monitor the results.
Refer to discussion for Objective 3.2b.
Objective 3.4: Investigate measures to increase flows. a. Investigate opportunities to increase irrigation efficiency (also see Water Quality and Quantity 3.6). This objective can be combined with 3.4j. b. Manage vegetation to improve water supply and timing (also see Water Quality and Quantity 3.6). This objective can be combined with 3.4j. Purchase water or water rights from willing sellers. According to Ken Emanuel, Environmental Scientist with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), water rights cannot be sold to an entity unless that entity purchases the land to which the rights are connected. For example, if the Cow Creek Watershed Management Group (CCWMG) wants to acquire the riparian water rights from a property owner whose land abuts Cow Creek, the CCWMG would need to purchase the land as well. However, the CCWMG could participate in a water transfer program with a local water district. In this situation, the water district would need to provide documentation to the SWRCB stating that they have excess water available for transfer. Once that documentation is verified, the water district could sell the excess water to the CCWMG. However, this process would need to be repeated annually in order to sell the excess water. d. Remove diversions. The costs associated with this objective will need to be analyzed on a case-bycase basis once the District has identified the diversions to be removed. e. Provide alternate water sources during important periods (also see Water Quality and Quantity 3.6). The costs associated with this objective will depend upon the scope of the program.
c.
24
f.
Implement a conjunctive use (a combination of ground water and stream water) program. The costs associated with this objective will depend upon the scope of the program.
g.
Monitor ground water using ground water monitoring wells. The costs associated with this objective will depend upon a variety of factors including, but not limited to, the scope of the monitoring program, local geology, depth of well and the type of monitoring equipment used.
h.
Meet with representatives of the California Bay Delta Authority (CBDA), Environmental Water Program (EWP) to develop an understanding of the steps necessary for a EWP for Cow Creek. CALFED agencies are currently developing the EWP framework and the associated Pilot Water Acquisition Program. The pilot water acquisitions are targeted for the following streams: Butte Creek, Clear Creek, Deer Creek, Mill Creek and the Tuolumne River. The District will need to inquire with the EWP Program Manager, Campbell Ingram, as to how Cow Creek can be included in the program.
California Bay Delta Authority Contact Campbell Ingram EWP Program Manager (916) 414-6727 [email protected]
i.
Provide information to water rights holders on water sales to public and private entities. The following estimate is for costs associated with the District organizing and hosting a one-day workshop on water rights. The following assumptions were incorporated into the estimate: 1) 450 notices are mailed out to land owners and/or water right holders in watershed. 2) Attendance of two guest speakers with expertise in water rights issues. 3) Mileage reimbursements are estimated at $0.375/mile. Travel is estimated to be 90 miles for one District vehicle and two guest speakers; round trip distance from WSRCD office to Millville Grange Hall is 30 miles. 4) The rental fees and security deposit for the Millville Grange Hall in Palo Cedro are $275 and $300 respectively; however, the
25
owners have made the venue available free of charge in the past. 5)
Task Hourly Rate Total Hours Total
Prepare and distribute a letter notifying landowners of the workshop. Develop, organize and staff workshop (Assuming 2 WSRCD staff) Guest Speaker #1 Guest Speaker #2
Materials
35 35 50 50 -----
16 50 6 6 -----
$560 $1750 $300 $300 $170 $40 $575 $35 $300 $4,030
Postage for letters Stationery and envelopes for letters Millville Grange Hall Mileage/Travel Refreshments
TOTAL COST j.
Conduct workshops on irrigation efficiency for potential to increase water quantity.
See objective 3.4i; costs associated with holding a one-day workshop are assumed to be relatively the same. k. Test irrigation efficiency using the Irrigation Mobile Lab. The Tehama County Resource Conservation District (TCRCD) currently has an Irrigation Mobile Lab (IML) available to evaluate irrigation systems for growers in Tehama, Shasta, Glenn, Lassen and Butte Counties. IML services are provided free of charge to the grower; however, each evaluation costs the TCRCD approximately $1500 in labor and materials. According to Scott Spinner, IML Project Manager for the TCRCD, depending upon the demand for this service, the TCRCD should be able to accommodate the landowners in the Cow Creek watershed. However, ENPLAN has provided the equipment list and estimated costs (Attachment B) should the WSRCD want to initiate its own IML program to supplement the services offered by the TCRCD. The information included in Attachment C was provided by the TCRCD and reflects 2002 pricing. l. Educate landowners in water conservation technology.
This objective can be combined with 3.4j.
26
m.
Conduct minimum flow studies for upstream and downstream fish passage.
The costs associated with this objective will depend upon the scope of the study. n. Coordinate the distribution and sharing of information on the results of water quality and quantity studies.
The costs associated with this objective will depend upon the scope of the water quality and quantity studies and the manner in which the information is distributed. The most cost effective way of achieving this objective may be to make the information available on the Districts Watershed Information Model (WIM) website, thereby reducing the amount of time and materials needed to duplicate and distribute the studies. o. Coordinate the distribution and sharing of information on the results of biological studies.
Refer to discussion for objective 3.4n.
27
Botanical and Wildlife Resources

BOTANICAL AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES BW-A Detrimental Non-native Plant & Noxious Weed Inventory - A 10-acre noxious weed rehab project in a riparian area. Includes planting riparian vegetation, installing an irrigation system, with no significant earthwork. Includes the purchase of a set of stereo-paired color infrared photos of the entire Cow Creek Watershed with one set of 9"x 9" contact prints and scanned digital images. A survey will be sent to 1,500 landowners along the riparian corridor to help define the most degraded and high priority project. Budget includes conducting riparian rehabilitation site assessment, design the project and prepare bid documents, acquire environmental permits, implementing project, maintaining irrigation, weeding, etc. for 3 years. Staff time includes a botanist, photo interpreter, GIS technician, watershed coordinator, project coordinator, clerical, office supplies, postage, and consultant time. COST ESTIMATE $110,324
BW-B
Brush Density Inventory in Foothill Grasslands - Tasks include conducting an Inventory of foothill grasslands and survey landowners to calculate the known locations of detrimental non-native plants and noxious weeds in the grasslands, purchasing a set of stereo-paired color infrared photos of the entire watershed with one set of 9" x 9" contact prints and scanned digital images(if not purchased through another grant, conducting a one-on-one survey by the coordinator with individual landowners, field reconnaissance, drafting a survey of species located, meeting with a Technical Advisory Committee, arranging for Temporary Entry Permits, inventorying the plants, mapping identifiable noxious plants from aerial photos, compiling data into a GIS database, preparing a draft report and printing 100 copies of a final report. Brush and Ladder Fuel Density Inventory in Coniferous Forests - Through the use of aerial photography, tasks include conducting an inventory the brush and ladder fuel density in the coniferous forests in the watershed, purchasing a set of stereopaired color infrared photos of the entire watershed with one set of 9" x 9" contact prints and scanned digital images (if not purchased through another grant), field reconnaissance, creating maps, arranging Temporary Entry Permits, ground truthing, compiling data into a GIS database, preparing a draft report and 100 copies of a final report with maps. (The $57,000 cost of aerial photos can be reduced by ~50% by eliminating non-conifer forest areas.) Riparian Vegetation Inventory - Through the use of aerial photography, tasks include conducting an inventory of the riparian vegetation in the watershed, purchasing a set of stereo-paired color infrared photos of the entire watershed with one set of 9" x 9" contact prints and scanned digital images (if not purchased through another grant), field reconnaissance, creating maps, arranging Temporary Entry Permits, ground truthing, compiling data into a GIS database, preparing a draft report and 100 copies of a final report with maps.
$112,883
BW-C
$112,240
BW-D
$118,023
28
BW-E
Riparian Health Habitat Assessment - Through the use of aerial photography followed by on-the-ground confirmations, determine the health of the riparian vegetation in the watershed. This includes purchasing a set of stereo-paired color infrared photos of the entire watershed with one set of 9" x 9" contact prints and scanned digital images (if not purchased through another grant), field reconnaissance, creating maps, arranging Temporary Entry Permits, ground truthing, compiling data into a GIS database, preparing a draft report and 100 copies of a final report with maps. Long-term Riparian Habitat Monitoring - Tasks include developing a draft ranking system to evaluate riparian habitat potential and existing riparian health, meeting with a Technical Advisory Committee to revise and finalize the ranking system, mapping potential riparian habitat restoration areas using aerial photos, arranging access to private lands, signing Temporary Entry Permits, ground truthing the potential riparian habitat restoration areas identified, accessing the health of accessible existing riparian areas, compiling the data into a GIS database, preparing a draft report and 100 copies of the final report with maps. Riparian Habitat Rehabilitation Projects - Tasks include site assessments to locate the site for a 10-acre riparian rehabilitation project ($100,000), designing the project, creating a bid document, obtaining environmental permits, developing a draft riparian watershed monitoring plan, meeting with a Technical Advisory Committee to revise the monitoring plan, arranging access to private land and signing of Temporary Entry Permits, maintaining the project site, collecting annual vegetation monitoring data following implementation of the rehabilitation project, analyzing data and producing a baseline report and annual report.
$115,634
BW-F
Initially $15,240 Annual $60,443
BW-G
$213,054
BW-H
Riparian Health Best Management Practices Development - Tasks include $22,440 developing a draft list of riparian health impairments and a draft list of Best Management Practices (BMPs) to address each impairment, meeting with a Technical Advisory Committee to revise and finalize a list of impairments and BMPs, fully developing all BMPs and producing a draft landowner riparian health BMP brochure, meeting with the Technical Advisory Committee to revise the landowner riparian health BMP brochure, printing 1,000 copies of the brochure, reaching out to landowners to adopt the BMPs, and further publicize the document. Detrimental Non-Native Species Assessment - Tasks include developing a draft list of existing detrimental non-native plant and animal species to be assessed, meeting with a Technical Advisory Committee to revise and finalize the list of species, conducting surveys of landowners and managers about known locations and population estimates of the species, arranging access to private lands, signing Temporary Entry Permits, conducting the inventory on both private and public lands, mapping the locations and derive population estimates of species from the survey and inventory, compiling data into a GIS database, preparing a draft and final report. $44,269
BW-I
BW-J
Long-term Riparian Habitat Monitoring - Tasks include developing a draft riparian Initial $15,240 vegetation and avian monitoring plan on rehabilitated sites, meeting with a Annually $60,443 Technical Advisory Committee to revise and finalize the monitoring plan, arranging access to public and private lands, signing Temporary Entry Permits, collecting annual vegetation and avian monitoring data at riparian rehabilitation sites following implementation of the rehabilitation project, analyzing the data and producing baseline and then annual reports.
29
BW-K
Strategic Plan to Prevent Detrimental Non-native Species Entry - Tasks include developing a draft list of detrimental non-native plant and animal species to be included in the plan, meeting with a Technical Advisory Committee to revise and finalize the list of species, developing a draft long-term strategic plan, meeting with the Technical Advisory Committee to revise and finalize the plan.
$16,343
BW-L
Detrimental Non-native Species Eradication and Control Strategy Development $21,743 Tasks include developing draft management strategies to eradicate and/or control existing detrimental non-native species identified in BW-I, meeting with a Technical Advisory Committee to revise and finalize the management strategies, preparing a draft and final report.
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
Fire Prevention and Fuels Management

FP-1 Develop a watershed fuels inventory, map vegetation cover types and the Distribution of these types within the watershed, including vegetation Relative to slope, aspect, elevation, and land use. Implement shaded fuelbreak and community fuel reduction projects using a mixture of equipment and handwork, utilizing commercial timber harvest, biomass harvest, chippers, masticators, and other ground-based equipment. NOTE: The difference between the high cost and low cost estimates are the Maximum variations in using WSRCD crews vs. CDF crews vs. masticators. S(a) Oak Run Fuelbreak (611 acres) an 18-mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the intersection of Highway 299 to a point south of Palo Cedro, 300-feet wide using the centerline of Oak Run Road. This fuelbreak will provide the start of a northsouth fuelbreak that will begin to divide the Cow Creek watershed, helping to keep fire from spreading up the watershed into heavier fuels. This fuelbreak will be perpendicular to prevailing winds in most locations. Low Cost Estimate: $546,845 High Cost Estimate: $1,318,538 S(b) Oak Run to Fern Road Fuelbreak (550 acres) a 16.2 mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the intersection of Whitmore Road and running north and then west to the intersection of Oak Run Road, 300-feet wide from the centerline of Oak Run to Fern Road. This area is located in an area with little fuel reduction activities in the past and this will provide a critical first step in providing a strategic fuel reduction project and is perpendicular to prevailing winds. Low Cost Estimate: $492,250 High Cost Estimate: $1,186,900 S(c) Fern Road East Fuelbreak (261 acres) a 7.7-mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the intersection of Whitmore Road and running north and then west to the intersection of Oak Run to Fern Road, 300-feet wide using Fern Road East as the centerline. This project links to the Oak Run to Fern Road fuelbreak, providing a continuous fuelbreak from Highway 299 to Whitmore Road and is perpendicular to prevailing winds. Low Cost Estimate: $233,595 High Cost Estimate: $563,238 S(d) Phillips Road Fuelbreak (248 acres) a 7.3-mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the intersection of Buzzards Roost Road and running south to the intersection of Oak Run to Fern Road, 300-feet wide using Phillips Road as the centerline. This provides another north-south fuelbreak that is predominantly within mixed conifer forests and perpendicular to prevailing winds. Low Cost Estimate: $221,960 High Cost Estimate: $535,184 S(e) Buzzards Roost Road Fuelbreak (204 acres) a 6-mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the intersection of Highway 299 near Round Mountain and running
FP-2
53
west to the intersection of Oak Run Road, 300-feet wide using Buzzards Roost Road as the centerline. Low Cost Estimate: $182,580 High Cost Estimate: $440,232 S(f) Bateman Road Fuelbreak (424 acres) a 12.5-mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the intersection of Tamarack Road east of Whitmore and running east to the Latour State Demonstration Forest and the head of the watershed, 300-feet wide using Bateman Road as the centerline. It provides an east-west fuelbreak through commercial timberlands that can have extremely active fire behavior and very high fire severity. Low Cost Estimate: $379,480 High Cost Estimate: $914,992 S(g) Ponderosa Way Fuelbreak (187 acres) a 5.5-mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the intersection of Whitmore Road and running south the ridgeline between South Cow Creek and Bear Creek, 300-feet wide using Ponderosa Way as the centerline. This maintains an existing and effective fuelbreak on the southern end of the watershed and provides a connecting link in the cross-watershed fuelbreak system, which is perpendicular to prevailing winds. Low Cost Estimate: $167,365 High Cost Estimate: $403,546 S(h) Tamarack Road Fuelbreak (373 acres) an 11-mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the intersection of Whitmore Road and Fern Road East and runs east to the ridgeline, 300 wide using Tamarack Road as the centerline. It develops a fuelbreak through the southeastern portion of the watershed, and ties into other proposed fuelbreaks, providing protection to forest resources in the upper watershed. Low Cost Estimate: $333,835 High Cost Estimate: $804,934 S(i) Whitmore Road Fuelbreak (576 acres) a 17-mile long roadside shaded fuelbreak starting at the community of Millville and running east to the intersection of Fern Road East and Tamarack Road, just east of the community of Whitmore, 300-feet wide using Whitmore Road as the centerline. This provides a significant east-west fuelbreak from Millville to Whitmore, effectively bisecting the southern 1/3 of the watershed. Low Cost Estimate: $515,520 High Cost Estimate: $1,243,008 S(j) Highway 299 Fuelbreak (803 acres) (allows for a 35 foot road width) a 25-mile east-west highway through the northern most portion of the watershed, providing a key location for fire suppression activities. Low Cost Estimate: $718,685 High Cost Estimate: $1,732,874 C(a) Round Mountain Community Fuels Reduction Fuels reduction activities around the Cedar Creek School, Mountain Community Center and Halcomb Cemetery. 2 miles, 300 feet wide 5 miles, 300 feet wide Low Cost Estimate: $81,445 High Cost Estimate: $392,756
54
C(b) Oak Run Community Fuels Reduction Fuels reduction activities around the Post Office, shopping center and the Oak Run School. 2 miles, 300 feet wide 5 miles, 300 feet wide Low Cost Estimate: $81,445 High Cost Estimate: $392,756 C(c) Whitmore Community Fuels Reduction Fuels reduction activities around the Whitmore School, Post Office, store and volunteer fire department. 2 miles, 300 feet wide 5 miles, 300 feet wide Low Cost Estimate: $81,445 High Cost Estimate: $392,756 C(d) Millville Community Fuels Reduction - Fuels reduction activities around the volunteer fire department, Masonic Lodge, and Millville School. 2 miles, 300 feet wide 5 miles, 300 feet wide Low Cost Estimate: $81,445 High Cost Estimate: $392,756 C(e) Bella Vista Community Fuels Reduction Fuels reduction activities around the Post Office and volunteer fire department. 2 miles, 300 feet wide 5 miles, 300 feet wide Low Cost Estimate: $81,445 High Cost Estimate: $392,756 C(f) Jones Valley Community Fuel Reduction fuels reduction activities around the community of Jones Valley. 2 miles, 300 feet wide 5 miles, 300 feet wide Low Cost Estimate: $81,445 High Cost Estimate: $392,756
55
56
57
58

EO-1 Promote awareness of and increase participation in CCWMG by showing the relationship between CCWMG projects and the resulting benefits to Cow Creek watershed residents, businesses, and industries. a. Develop public outreach programs to educate Cow Creek watershed residents about the efforts of the CCWMG to maintain and improve Cow Creek watershed health. Watershed Coordinator writes weekly newspaper articles on watershed issues; annual reports written and printed on the CCWMG mailed to residents of the watershed; information booth set up at 4 community events/year; handouts written and printed for distribution at community events; quarterly newsletters about projects written, printed and mailed to residents (est. 1200). Expenses estimated: Watershed Coordinator $47,002 ($36,720 + taxes and benefits = $47,002) Mileage reimbursement 2,025 Supplies 8,000 Postage 3,500 Printing 6,000 Booth & Displays 1,200 Communication/phone 240 Indirect 12,234 Total $80,201/year b. Increase posting of Cow Creek Watershed maps and signage throughout the watershed and particularly near CCWMG projects. Labor $ 3,952 Semi-annual laminated maps for display 550 Metal creek signs on posts 5,500 Mileage Reimbursement 577 Indirect 1,904 Total $12,483/year EO-2 Promote, provide and facilitate watershed management education and outreach opportunities. a. Facilitate classroom, field workshops and exhibits at community events to educate Cow Creek Watershed landowners and residents about Best Management Practices in relation to common land use practices, including fire safety, proper septic system design, use and testing; noxious weed identification and control; proper use of fertilizers and pesticides; management of impervious surface runoff and other hazardous runoff to creeks; water conservation; fish passage needs. b. Connect landowners with WSRCD, NRCS, and UC Extension Service for assistance with project design and development, farm and ranch plans.
59
c. Assemble an agency database. d. Develop an agency contact information director with guidelines that inform landowners which practices require permits. e. Develop a library of information containing web site addresses, UC Extension Service brochures, classes, areas of expertise, and native plant recommendations. f. Provide fire prevention and fuels management educational exhibits of the Cow Creek Fire Safe Council and the Shasta County Fire Save council at local events. Expenses estimated: Watershed Coordinator Mileage reimbursement Supplies Postage Printing Booth & Displays Communication/phone Indirect Total
$47,002 ($36,720 + taxes and benefits = $47,002) 2,025 8,000 3,500 6,000 1,200 240 12,234 $80,201/year
EO-3 Promote, provide and facilitate watershed management education and outreach opportunities for area school children. a. Promote, support, and encourage watershed management educational activities in community schools within the Cow Creek Watershed. b. In partnership with willing landowners, WSRCD, and local schools, create a watershed management curriculum which will encourage conservation of natural resources and preservation of the economic well-being of Cow Creek Watershed residents. Curriculum could include water monitoring, native plant propagation, and the importance of riparian areas. Expenses estimated: Labor Mileage reimbursement Supplies Professional Services Printing Indirect Total
$ 3,952 577 550 8,160 18,000 5,623 $ 36,862/year
60
VII. Potential Funding Sources

Water Quality and Quantity
California Department of Water Resources, Proposition 50 for Water Use Efficiency Grants This program supports actions that improve in-stream flow and timing, water quantity and water quality that directly or indirectly provides benefits to the Bay-Delta. Funds are from the Water Security, Clean Drinking Water, Coastal and Beach Protection Act of 2002. California Department of Water Resources, Proposition 40 for Urban Stream Restoration Projects. This program supports actions that reduce property damage caused by flooding and bank erosion, projects that restore the natural value of streams, and promotes community stewardship. Funds are from the California Clean Water, Clean Air, Safe Neighborhood Parks, and Coastal Protection Act of 2002. State Water Resources Control Board Prop 13, Costa-Machado Water Act of 2000 and the California Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Board. The Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) Grant Program Funded by Proposition 50, Chapter 8, provides about $380 million for competitive grants for projects to protect communities from drought, protect and improve water quality, and improve local water security by reducing dependence on imported water USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service, Conservation Innovation Grants For the implementation of new technologies and/or approaches to maintain, restore, or enhance water quality and/or quantity in watersheds with predominantly agricultural land uses while sustaining productivity. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Assessment and Watershed Protection Program Grants. For projects that promote the coordination and acceleration of research, investigations, experiments, training, demonstrations, surveys, and studies relating to the causes, effects, extent, prevention, reduction, and elimination of water pollution.
Fisheries
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anadromous Fisheries Restoration Program Starting in FY 2001, the AFRP is functionally integrated with the CALFED Bay-Delta Program (CBDP) agencies (the California Department of Fish and Game, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries) through the California Bay-Delta Authority (CBDA) in the CALFED Ecosystem Restoration Program proposal solicitation processes (CALFED PSP).
61
NOAA Five-Star Challenge Grants Established by the EPA to work with partners for education through community-based wetlands restoration projects in watersheds across the U. S. Average project funding is $10,000 per project. Requires 100% match.
Wildlife Resources
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, North American Wetlands Conservation Act Provides funding assistance to promote conservation of wetlands and associated habitats for migratory birds and other wildlife. Requires 50% match. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Cooperative conservation Initiative Restoring natural resources and establishing or expanding wildlife habitat. Requires 50%match. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Fund Ensuring neotropical bird conservation by supporting programs. Requires 75% match.
Fire Prevention and Fuels Management

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Forest Stewardship Program Cost share up to $50,000 with a 100% match. Projects must address pre-fire fuels management, forest and woodland health or wildlife and fisheries habitat. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Vegetation Management Program Funding available up to 90%, cost share required. Development of a plan for the control of brush and other vegetation through the use of prescribed fire. 50-acre minimum project size is required and development of a vegetation management plan. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, California Forest Improvement Program Funding for 75% of project, up to $30,000 of project costs. Provides forestry, watershed and riparian protection and enhancement. Landowners must have a plan developed and the smallest acreage allowed is 20 acres. Natural Resources Conservation Service, Environmental Quality Incentives Program Funding up to 75% of the project costs with a maximum of $10,000/year. Provides assistance to agricultural producers having significant natural resource needs. Projects must have an approved conservation plan. USDA Forest Service, National Association of State Foresters, State Fire Assistance Program Amounts vary by project and available funding. Provides state agencies with assistance in delivering coordinated fire service as well as hazard assessments, fuel treatment projects and public education.
62
USDA Forest Service, Economic Action Programs Amounts vary by project and available funding. Provides funding work with local communities to identify, develop, and expand economic opportunities related to traditionally underutilized wood products and to expand the utilization of wood removed through hazardous fuel reduction treatments. USDA Forest Service, Community and Private Land Fire Assistance Program California Fire Safe Council Grants Clearinghouse Funds are from the National Fire Plan and Prop 40 grants, through the California Fire Alliance. Funds are for developing community fire plans, fuels reduction projects, development of fire safe councils, wildfire prevention education, demonstration projects, technology transfer, market assessments, small diameter utilization plans, and purchasing processing equipment U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Jobs-In-The-Woods Program USDA Forest Service, Secure Rural School and Community Self Determination Act of 2000 Title II and Title III programs handled by the Shasta County Board of Supervisors

Funding for education and outreach are made part of every grant application shown above.
63
VIII.
Key Contacts
Cow Creek Watershed Management Group Bob Harris, President P. O. Box 158, Whitmore, CA 96096 (530) 472-1436 [email protected] Western Shasta Resource Conservation District 6270 Parallel Road, Anderson, CA 96007 (530) 365-7332 Fax 365-7271 [email protected]
64

Cow Creek Watershed Management Plan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cow Creek Watershed Management Plan

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cow Creek Watershed Management Plan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cow Creek Watershed Management Plan